General Discussion

ronnie624

(5,764 posts)

19. But usually it's just blatant, self-serving aggression and violence,

Thu Aug 11, 2016, 09:52 AM

Aug 2016

as in the cases of Iraq, Panama, Grenada, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Haiti, Philippines and many others.

And then there are all those covert/proxy wars that cause so many problems for so many people.

An examination of the historical record, strongly suggests that war is rarely "valid", and usually serves the interests of wealth and power.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

20 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Should the Democratic Party be the "anti-war" Party ? [View all] kentuck Aug 2016 OP

If we are anti war in all cases, what happens during a genocide? La Lioness Priyanka Aug 2016 #1

in the case of Rwanda, nothing nt Angel Martin Aug 2016 #2

Yes, and what did we learn from not interfering ? La Lioness Priyanka Aug 2016 #3

I do not know your age... kentuck Aug 2016 #4

let's ask these guys: Gabi Hayes Aug 2016 #5

That is too much of an absolute position upaloopa Aug 2016 #6

+1 Proud Liberal Dem Aug 2016 #20

Are you suggesting that the Democratic Party is "pro-war"? brooklynite Aug 2016 #7

YES!!! gopiscrap Aug 2016 #8

+1 CobaltBlue Aug 2016 #11

It should be, but too many neocon war hawks smell profits. n/t That Guy 888 Aug 2016 #9

Sometimes war is necessary. auntpurl Aug 2016 #10

Ouch. LWolf Aug 2016 #12

Right on! SalviaBlue Aug 2016 #15

Sometimes Military action is valid FLPanhandle Aug 2016 #13

But usually it's just blatant, self-serving aggression and violence, ronnie624 Aug 2016 #19

3,2,1, "The Pansey Party?" No, I don't think that will fly. lindysalsagal Aug 2016 #14

Yes. Iggo Aug 2016 #16

Of course! cpwm17 Aug 2016 #17

Of course we should, say some of the cats, heading off to do just that librechik Aug 2016 #18