Which US Wars Were Justified?

[Hoek]

Hey Faded Glory, who the **** are you calling uneducated? Hmm...? You need to shut up.

Che and Chris: untrue about economics being the basis of all wars. What is the economic basis for the current war? World War I was about balance of power and nationalism, not economics.

Most armed conflict has not been over economic factors, despite what you may think. The Arab conquests in the 7th century was not an attempt to gain material wealth, it was Jihad. The crusades were religious, not economic conflicts. I am not denying that economics plays an important, even a crucial component of armed conflict, but it is not the only component, would you agree? By stripping away other factors that contribute to armed conflict, you ignore important contributing factors.

I would argue that survival is the most important cause of armed conflict, followed by economics, followed by identity conflicts (national, racial, ethnic, religious), followed by ideology (it's arguable that the communist/capitalist cold war was less over economics than it was about the labels used)

[Hoek]

Faded: it seems that you've only been coming here since January, while these have been my stomping grounds since December, 1969, apparently.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Hoek
Che and Chris: untrue about economics being the basis of all wars. What is the economic basis for the current war?

The economic basis of the current war is Middle Eastern oil. Because of this oil, the U.S. subsidizes Israel and turns a blind eye towards their depredeations against the Palestinian people. Because of this oil, the US has propped up evil, decrepit, corrupt regimes throughout the Middle East. Both of these things are the cause of bin Laden's war against us. At the same time, the US needs to crush al-Qaeda (and the Taleban) not just because of their evil attack on our people, but also to re-enforce American power, lest anyone think that the US is slipping and decides to go their own way.

World War I was about balance of power and nationalism, not economics.

WWI was about colonies. It was an attempt by Germany to get a bigger slice of Africa and Austria to get a bigger slice of the Balkans. Italy joined to get a chuck of the Ottoman Empire. Britain and France and Japan all wanted Germany's colonies (and got them).

The Arab conquests in the 7th century was not an attempt to gain material wealth, it was Jihad. The crusades were religious, not economic conflicts.

Both sets of wars were over control of vital trade routes from the East. They merely took religious form.

[faded glory]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


The economic basis of the current war is Middle Eastern oil. Because of this oil, the U.S. subsidizes Israel and turns a blind eye towards their depredeations against the Palestinian people. Because of this oil, the US has propped up evil, decrepit, corrupt regimes throughout the Middle East. Both of these things are the cause of bin Laden's war against us. At the same time, the US needs to crush al-Qaeda (and the Taleban) not just because of their evil attack on our people, but also to re-enforce American power, lest anyone think that the US is slipping and decides to go their own way.



WWI was about colonies. It was an attempt by Germany to get a bigger slice of Africa and Austria to get a bigger slice of the Balkans. Italy joined to get a chuck of the Ottoman Empire. Britain and France and Japan all wanted Germany's colonies (and got them).



Both sets of wars were over control of vital trade routes from the East. They merely took religious form.

All lies Che!

We dont just support Israel in the region. In fact.....Eygpt gets more Aid then Israel does!

The current war has 0 to do with oil. Afghan oil (if it exists) is undiscovered and will take decades to find! The war we fight in Afghanistan is to obvouisly find OBL, duh!:rolleyes (in case you havent been watching the news for the past 6 months)


HOEK, no that comment wasnt directed to you.

[DaleC76]

Survival is a reason for fighting, but nations rarely start wars to survive. They start wars to gain economic power.

Nationalism is an important factor in many wars, but the American Revolution and Civil War are poor examples. If the colonists or rebels were able to make more money by remaining in their current nations, they would have done so happily. Nationalism is often the great cause people claim to fight for when they don't want to admit (or don't realize) they're fighting for economic reasons.

The Balance of Power is an economic more than political balance. In WWI, the Great Powers were jockying for the economic leadership in Europe. Germany wanted to eclipse Britain's role in the world, but felt European territory was more important than the few far-flung colonies they had managed to acquire.

[faded glory]

For the average jo-blow foot soldier. He only fights the war for his buddys. Sometimes country (depending on how the war is going).

Unless of course the Revolutionary war and Civil war was an exception. Were everybody fought for a "Cause"

[DaleC76]

The United States did not start the current war. Those who did start it attacked because the US is the richest nation in the world. Religion plays a very small role. Latin America may be the most Christian area in the world, but Islamic terrorists don't fly into Mexican scyscrapers.

[Rex Little]

Because of this oil, the U.S. subsidizes Israel and turns a blind eye towards their depredeations against the Palestinian people.

Don't see this at all, che. Israel is the one country in the area with no oil. If we stood back and gave no aid to either side, our relations with the oil-producing countries would probably improve. There are obviously reasons why the U.S. government subsidizes Israel, but oil isn't one of them.

[David Floyd]

Rex, the US subsidizes Israel because of the powerful Jewish lobby in the US...it'd be bad politics to cut off Israel, especially after the Holocaust and all that...bunch of bull**** if you ask me but that's how it is...

I hope no one thinks the US subsidizes Israel because it's "the right thing to do" - even if it were the right thing to do that isn't why we do it.

The subsidization also probably has to do with having a powerful strategic partner in that region of the world.

[Felch]

I think we can all agree that any country that refuses to acknowledge the US as its supreme overlord is asking for trouble.

But in terms of this poll, I find the Mexican War, the Civil War, the Indian campaigns, the Spanish-American War, and World War I to be unjustified.

Of course, we should remember that it's not the individual soldiers who are responsible. I've got ancestors who were in the Civil War and in WWI.

[Joe R. Golowka]

Originally posted by Hoek
What is the economic basis for the current war?

Oil. Unocal wants to construct a pipeline through Afghanistan to transport oil from the Caspian sea to the Ocean.

[Hoek]

Bah, you never get the complete picture with economic reductivism. I know you communists think that nationalism is just a veiled attempt at supressing the working class, as is everything else , but your connecting our support of Israel to the war in Afghanistan is just wrong. Israel has no oil, and it does not serve our financial purposes anymore to subsidize them. How you connect fighting ass-backward Afghans to our supposed (yet nonexistent) financial interest in Israel is silly.

And while you're bringing it up, Israel is a perfect example of a country that engaged in armed conflict for survival. It was a country born in fire, and it never sought to engage in military action for financial gain.

As for World War I, you still ignore nationalist factors. And you fail to explain how nations are formed in the first place. They are not based on economics, they are quite unique in that their goal is either the establishment or maintainence of state institutions. How can you explain various ethnic conflicts, such as Yugoslavia? Land conflicts are not necessarily economic conflicts.

The civil war: there is considerable evidence that slavery was not actually economically beneficial at the time of the Civil War in some states, such as Virginia. Nobody can deny the ideological, particularly racial differences between the north and the south.

[Hoek]

Uh, what Ocean? the Indian ocean? and you think THAT is why we're doing this? You have got to be kidding me. If there was any country that we have no financial interest in, it's Afghanistan. This is a country that banned TV's and music! If you think that we did this to get a pipeline, you are sorely mistaken. What about Somolia? Why is it that the UN went into there? That wasn't economic.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Joe R. Golowka
Oil. Unocal wants to construct a pipeline through Afghanistan to transport oil from the Caspian sea to the Ocean.

We've already had a discussion on this "theory." I suggest that you do a search on it before you rehash a discussion that was painful to read due to the stupidity of one of the participants.

[faded glory]

Originally posted by Joe R. Golowka


Oil. Unocal wants to construct a pipeline through Afghanistan to transport oil from the Caspian sea to the Ocean.

Moron.....we dont fight wars over pipes.

The 'pipe under design' you speak of goes through Russia!