Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They attacked South Korea and we came in to repel the invasion. We succeeded in that goal, but then China came in to North Korea's aid and we got pushed back again. We regrouped and counter-attacked and pushed China and NK back up to the 38th parallel and that's how things have been ever since.
You don't have to attack our country directly for us to be "attacked". Just merely pissing us off, messing with our economy or trying to make weapons (real or not WMD) is enough to justify us going in and smashing your skulls, kill your kids and take over your country. And if you dare try to fight back by using IEDs and snipers we will.... well we will be even more mad!
The US forces in South Korea were attacked (along with South Korean forces) in the initial thrust in the Korean War. By attacking US troops in force, North Korea had essentially declared war on the US.
Actually, I was referring to the fact that democrats now use that as a requirement in order to go to war.
Truman was a democrat. So, my question is this....why did we go to war without being attacked at home first?
Which of our allies did Iraq attack precipitating Bush, Jr's Iraq invasion?
Which of our allies did Afghanistan attack precipitating Bush, Jr's invasion?
In fact, both of those invasions were unprovoked.
In all of your other examples, our allies were attacked; there was clear provocation.
Surely you can understand the difference.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.