Disagreeable
Well-known member
This is crazy. If our leaders during the Cold War had subscribed to this "strategy", we'd probably all be dead or never born. Russia had the capability to nuke us; Iraq never did, nor does Iran.
I was there Reader. We didnt win the cold war with USSR by diplomacy or economic pressures unless you count the spending on weapons and such just breaking them.reader (the Second) said:Hi Silver - sorry, been offline. I had difficulties with the Iraq War because of "consistency". If we really believe ourselves the world's policemen, why Iraq and not Korea? Why abandon Rwanda? And so on. Personally I believe that we were able to bring down the USSR without war, we are to improve many situations in the world through diplomacy or economic pressure. I do not believe that invading Iraq was at that time done because it was a preemptive strike and would keep the terrorists fighting us over there. (Au contraire, it brought the terrorists to Iraq and strengthened them, at least temporarily.) I do think that there was an element of preemptive about it in that Saddam Hussain was funding Palestinian suicide bombers and had launched SCUDs against Israel, but the war in Iraq did not prevent a terrorist regime from being ELECTED democratically in the Palestine Authority so where does that leave us? It may have even accelerated Hamas' rise to power.
Similarly, I don't see that preemptive strikes against say China or Iran or N. Korea will be the best solution to ensuring our national security and combatting the risk these countries may pose the US and its allies.
Red Robin said:I was there Reader. We didnt win the cold war with USSR by diplomacy or economic pressures unless you count the spending on weapons and such just breaking them.reader (the Second) said:Hi Silver - sorry, been offline. I had difficulties with the Iraq War because of "consistency". If we really believe ourselves the world's policemen, why Iraq and not Korea? Why abandon Rwanda? And so on. Personally I believe that we were able to bring down the USSR without war, we are to improve many situations in the world through diplomacy or economic pressure. I do not believe that invading Iraq was at that time done because it was a preemptive strike and would keep the terrorists fighting us over there. (Au contraire, it brought the terrorists to Iraq and strengthened them, at least temporarily.) I do think that there was an element of preemptive about it in that Saddam Hussain was funding Palestinian suicide bombers and had launched SCUDs against Israel, but the war in Iraq did not prevent a terrorist regime from being ELECTED democratically in the Palestine Authority so where does that leave us? It may have even accelerated Hamas' rise to power.
Similarly, I don't see that preemptive strikes against say China or Iran or N. Korea will be the best solution to ensuring our national security and combatting the risk these countries may pose the US and its allies.
reader (the Second) said:Hi Silver - sorry, been offline. I had difficulties with the Iraq War because of "consistency". If we really believe ourselves the world's policemen, why Iraq and not Korea? Why abandon Rwanda? And so on. Personally I believe that we were able to bring down the USSR without war, we are to improve many situations in the world through diplomacy or economic pressure. I do not believe that invading Iraq was at that time done because it was a preemptive strike and would keep the terrorists fighting us over there. (Au contraire, it brought the terrorists to Iraq and strengthened them, at least temporarily.) I do think that there was an element of preemptive about it in that Saddam Hussain was funding Palestinian suicide bombers and had launched SCUDs against Israel, but the war in Iraq did not prevent a terrorist regime from being ELECTED democratically in the Palestine Authority so where does that leave us? It may have even accelerated Hamas' rise to power.
Similarly, I don't see that preemptive strikes against say China or Iran or N. Korea will be the best solution to ensuring our national security and combatting the risk these countries may pose the US and its allies.