How Long Will It Take For A Terrorist Attack?

[Deity Dude]

On a cynical note:

The next terrorist attack will occur when the next president wants to start a war.

[David Floyd]

Our government was more than aware that the embargo with Japan would likely lead to war. We went ahead.

Well, pardon me for thinking that sanctioning a country who condoned actions such as the Rape of Nanking is a good thing. Jesus, are you that ****ing stupid, that you want to blame WW2 on the US?? For Chrissakes, all we said was that as long as Japan wanted to wage aggressive war, we wouldn't sell them oil or scrap metal. Seems like the easy answer there is, avoid aggressive war. Duh. Unfortunately, the honor-bound dumbass ****-FOR-BRAINS that led Japan at the time didn't see it that way, and decided to attack Pearl Harbor. Whoops, their bad. Guess they realized their mistake.

Given that the Korean people revolted and overthrew the Japanese in the last days of the war, our occupation was unnecessary. In fact, once we got there, it turned out we needed the Japanese troops and Korean collaborators to help us take control away from the new Korean government. Since the new Korea government was largely led by commies, the U.S. has tended to ignore that they forced themselves upon the Koreans, not liberated them from the Japanese.

Umm, again, sorry. Absent US intervention, the Soviet Union would have dominated the Korean Peninsula. Period, end of story. Very few people in Korea wanted that. It's interested, though, to note that you consider those who took over North Korea to be communists, given that you vehemently insist that communism has never really been tried. Now let's be honest - either it has or it hasn't. If it has, as you attest in the Korean example, then surely you must admit that it failed miserably. If it hasn't, then you are simply defending a government led by dictatorial thugs. Which side would you rather take? Clearly, you won't take the American side, which is a bit disturbing, seeing as how you are campaigning to be a Congressman. I mean, on the off chance you win, you'd have to lie to take the oath of office anyway, right? But that's a minor concern - true communism will PREVAIL, right? Idiot.

So invading Southern Korea, overthrowing their government, and killing hundreds of thousands of people is okay.

Yes, invading South Korea was OK. Just the same as invading Germany was OK. Or Czechoslovakia. Or the Phillipines. Or Italy. We were fighting a war - the largest war ever fought in history. Contrary to your uninformed opinion, we were on the side of right. When we moved into South Korea, it was to supplant Japanese rule. The same Japanese rule that viewed Koreans as slaves, if you recall. If we hadn't done it, the whole peninsula would have been under the thumb of Kim Il-Sung, and if you want to defend HIM, just go right ahead and make yourself look like a ****head. Please. I'm waiting for your defense of his hypothetical reign over all of Korea.

Back to reality, the US didn't kill hundreds of thousands of South Koreans. We did, however, kill somewhere in the neighborhood of 2 MILLION North Koreans and ChiComs, at the cost of less than 37,000 Americans, when the COMMUNISTS, backed by the SOVIET UNION, invaded South Korea. Oops. Oh, my bad, did you want to justify the NK invasion of the South as a liberation movement? Go ahead, I'm waiting to hear this one

Because we hadn't invaded any countries at all, like China, the Philippines, Hawaii, nearly all of the Caribbean in the previous thirty years. It's rather a bit of hypocrisy for an empire to scold another country for trying to build an empire. Kinda like Rome chastising the Sassinids.

Is you serious? I mean, are you ****ing kidding? Are you really comparing the US to Imperial Japan? Tell you what, dumbass. Show me where American officers raped underage Nicaraguan women with their swords, and I might be inclined to see your point. Go ahead. And to quote an American ambassador to the UN, I'm prepared to wait for your evidence until HELL FREEZES OVER.

Back in reality-land, the Phillipines was taken from Spain as war bounty. We didn't originally invade, and let's face it - things got better once we took over. Unless you think Spain would have willingly granted independence As for Hawaii, yes, we annexed it, and again, the place is much better off for it. You see, we didn't enslave the inhabitants, unlike the Japanese.

The Carribean? That place is still a basket case, but our interventions, by and large, were to prevent outside intervention by the European monarchies, at least in the time frame we are talking about. The Monroe Doctrine was meant to keep imperialism OUT of the Western Hemisphere, and I can good and goddamn guarantee that US interference caused less problems than non-interference would have caused. Hell, look at the Dominican Republic, a country that was occupied by the USMC for decades. Compare it to Haiti, which was not. Now which country is better off?

[Zevico]

How Long Will It Take For A Terrorist Attack?

Tuesday.

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by GePap


If finalized, why the hell would they wait for January 2009?

To test the new prez. I thought that was made clear.

[David Floyd]

che,

I apologize for some of the content of my last post (although not the main points I made). It's what I get for posting drunk while playing poker at 4am. Sorry.

[Patroklos]

I am assuming you lost that hand.

[David Floyd]

No, I won about $800 last night.

[Patroklos]

If you can be drunk and posting on Poly while playing poker and still win, I don't want to play with you.