Re: Leading the People to War
If you want to take that parallel, how about this...
Germany didn't attack the US at all. Japan did. Should we have only defended ourselves from Japan, since Pearl Harbor was the straw that broke the camel's back on the US entering WWII?
No sovereign nation invaded us and we did not have to defend? Sir, I declare that response to be total, unadulterated BS. Is the new rule of defense that the world must recognize an aggressor as a "sovereign nation"? Hell, why don't we just let terrorist organizations all over the world run over our ass, I'm sure there's plenty that want a piece of us!
The fact of the matter is, in the world today, there are no solid, clear-cut rules of war and aggression, and while I would be the first to agree that war is a horrible situation, I am the first to say it is also still sadly necessary. The United States was attacked by a terrorist organization on 9/11/01, and if we weren't to defend ourselves, we would just be essentially encouraging more like them to take a shot, just to see how much they could get away with. Not to mention, as the unofficial "leader of the free world", if the United States doesn't retailate and defend herself and her people, that is additionally encouraging terrorists.
I wish terrorists could be reasoned with, but that's why they're TERRORISTS, not politicians.
-Edge
|