I am not for war, but is it sometimes necessary? Ask Americans why we are at war and you will get different answers.
We provide healthcare for other countries when thousands of Americans can't afford insurance. We put our troops in danger for another country's "freedom". We have alliances that make enemies of other countries. We supply and support Israel. All for what? How exactly does this benefit America?
Should we continue doing what we have been doing or should we just stay over here and mind our own business? I am eager to see how other atheists view this.
@Paul ... "Faith" being the key word, only a nation of religious sheople could believe such fabrications.
Actually, I had to read that beautiful statement once again:
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
Please show me scholarly acceptance of that claim.
Either we are discussing history or politics here, or else we are discussing conspiracy theories and unfounded claims. I do not hope this is an alternative site, but rather where people take the facts established by experts as the best available truth.
@arcus...Victors tend to have a skewed vision of history and this affects their writings. History books can lie. There have been dozens of history books removed from scholarly curriculae through the years. The same grain of salt should be applied to reading modern victor history books as needs to be applied to writings from Romans and Greeks. History is a subjective discipline, entirely tainted by interpretation and misinterpretations. In the game of recounting history, books are hardly more effective than oral history. A historical narrative is only as objective as the subjective human who contributed to it.
You've gone off on a tangent. Perhaps I haven't been clear. You have not demonstrated that the German declaration of war on the United states of America, officially or unofficially, was unprovoked.
When Roosevelt addresses congress regarding a declaration of war on Japan, he specifically mentions an unprovoked attack. The formal declaration of war against Japan specifically mentions 'unprovoked acts of war'.
Compare this to the declaration against Germany:
My contention is that characterizing Germany's formal declaration of war against the United States of America as 'unprovoked' belies the nature of the conflict. It was the culmination of actions on the parts of both the United States and Germany. I make no statement as to whether or not one side had greater, or more universally recognized justification than the other.
Paul, it is a political message it reads something like the following:
We fucked up and started a war with Germany. From now on, you better fall in line otherwise you will be labeled an evil traitor.
We've tried to get others to fight with our guns, but now we actually have to done some fighting ourselves.
We hope we can do it, otherwise we'll be invaded and they'll kill us all.
If you don't fucking vote yes for anything i put forth, you're in deep shit. Latin America, Sweden, anyone not involved, please join us, and we will ally with you and trade with you, even share some of our wealth if we win.
Edit: Fyi, of less threat, but another problem. (my BS replaced by more accurate meaning)
Therefore, please yadda yadda, se above if you don't do it.
There are of course much more information in there, both what's written and what's not written. I'm no expert, but picking apart a political speech is not impossible for a layman.
Heather, your emotions are talking, not your brain. Several of your statements here are just not true. Arcus points some of them out below.
The American Revolution was provoked by George III's arrogance. The War of 1812 was also provoked, at least in part, by British intransigence and imperialism. Unlike Arcus, I don't think the Mexican-American was can be defended very well. As for your statements about Pearl Harbour, well, they're just false. The Japanese decided to attack after America cut off its access to natural resources that it was using to supply its horrific imperial wars in Asia. America was well within its rights to refuse to do business with bad guys. Weren't you the one complaining earlier about the fact that America didn't do the same with the Nazis until after war was declared?
Justice is entirely relative, what is just to one may not be just to another.
This USA world vision DOES NOT protect our worldly bodies, the USA has the highest rate of incarceration in the world, one of highest obesity rates in the world, one of the largest income gaps in the world, more homeless people than any other rich country, no real universal health care. NO, the USA is not a model for what planetary politics should be. Every country is a social experiment, not one single country can lay claim to having the ideal solution for all humans to live by, not one. Therefore, we must exercise some degree of intellectual humility and recognise that since we don't have absolute answers, the only just solution is to let other countries find their own path to happiness. For one country to impose is pompous point of view onto the entire planet is utterly ridiculous. We humans are no where near being socially ready for any degree of globalisation.