Posted on 06/15/2011 2:01:20 PM PDT by ConservativeStatement
And, what about THE COLD WAR?
Well, applying the old school definition of “war” as I posted it above, how would you take the Cold War? Was it a WAR?
If its not a war, why is our military there shooting at things and people?
What was the point of the question other than to provide a legalistic cover for Obama that since the military conflict is not classified as a “war” then there is no need for the Pres__ent to seek Congressional approval?
This is merely a kinetic military action - no where near a war! I wonder if the term will appear in the legal briefs?
“Nothing sadder than a blogger with nothing to write about. And I mean “sadder” in an ironic way....”
***********************
Strange you should mention that—nothing to write about—unfortunately, that has been the case for many for many, many moons...But...is it just me or are things sorta...winding down lately...seems like pretty much all that can be said has been said, over and over, on and on—0’pinhead’s folks are satiated, and scared sh!tless too...otherwise, as Gen Valely points out today...why will not congress, the courts, etc, etc. act on all that we all know, aside from fear itself?????
Fear, but fear subsides if/when/now we all do nothing...it’s happening now...
Well, how can you argue with that? It IS a silly question. And if it looks like a war, it IS a war.
When they go in and shoot up troops, bomb buildings, kill several of Kaddafi's family, bomb schools and hospitals, and shell the coast, isn't that a war?
If a reporter acts like an idiot, she can't very well complain about being treated like one.
It’s a hard question, I know. I didn’t want to answer it. The Cuban Missile Crisis and a few things here and there were settled by resort to force. Albeit the use of force to impose a temporary embargo is likely NOT a war act, especially as long as most cargoes are allowed through once examined.
I’d have to say the Cold War was not a war, by the old school definition, as most things settled by diplomacy short of war acts.
Nice to watch them eat one another.
Oh I see...because he is against what Bambi is for all of a sudden he is wrong. It is a war dumb@$$ anytime you drop bombs it is a war.
If I might stick an oar in, the entire point of the Cold War was to execute state-sponsored acts of violence by proxy. The wars of “liberation” in Africa alone were and continue to be too numerous to count. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and our own covert efforts to oppose it are another example. Vietnam, although that was a case of overt warfare. Korea, same story. Jungle warfare in the Philippines by uniformed units of both sides. Grenada. Berlin. In all of these places there was violent, armed conflict as a direct result of the ideological clash between the United States and the Soviet Union. In my opinion that qualifies as war.
Okay, that’s a argument too. But I don’t accept the war by proxy, only national force versus national force (forces regular or irregular).
I’d say we at war, or too close to differentiate, with Mexico right now too. Because the drug cartels have to be considered as Mexican national forces, albeit irregular.
Isn't that the damnedest thing! Either she is a total Weirdo or Kucinich is the best equipped Elf in the Cracker Box.
Fair enough, although I would point out that there were blond-haired, Russian-speaking pilots in both Korea and Vietnam. Cuban advisors shooting at Portuguese troops in Angola. I’m just not comfortable with sharp lines of demarcation, that’s all.
<Actually, I like Kucinich better than most dems.
<He’s a nut, but he’s a principled nut.
Yup. I caught him earlier today. He was talking and I was agreeing, but not looking at the TV screen. When I looked up and realized it was Kucinich I had to smile to myself. He does get on the right side sometimes - but just sometimes!
There also were the post-civil war American Freebooters who operated in the Far East and south of the continental US Border for various national factions.
Let me explain “Hypergamy” got it.
Dennis K. was NOT sexist.
Devastating I'm sure, to not secure that bloggers high opinion.
Well, consider: his main tool, the way he casts his spells, is through his voice. I find it unbelieveably irritating and even nauseating, but many are spellbound. That was Saruman’s great strength, wasn’t it?
I’m very good with thinking our current WH resident is a Saruman for our times.
I agree: it is quite satisfactory to have someone hold an opinion clearly and unequivocably, even if it is an opinion one could never countenance, much less agree with. It is the mushy ones, so many on our side, who equivocate and shade meanings and seek nuance who are the real danger. I always vote against them, given the chance, because they manage never to truly commit themselves to any particular rule of law or course of action. You’ll find yourself all alone in no-man’s land with the machine guns zeroing in and them all out of sight in the trenches if you ally yourself with them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.