Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-20-2009, 05:39 PM
 
2,189 posts, read 7,703,105 times
Reputation: 1295

Advertisements

For discussion purposes...

Iran has threatened to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Israel said they will attack Iran in order to preserve it's existent even if it's against US's wishes.

North Korea has retracted it's treaty with South Korea and seems to be provoking the world to fight. They also seem to be "flaunting" their weapons, some theorize it's to advertise "nukes for sale to the highest bidder" with terrorist being the "target market". Furthermore, there's rumors that country is gravely struggling financially. I wonder if a war to be advantageous to them...Either they get more land, and/or suffer great losses, but ultimately less mouths to feed.

Also Pakistan, many experts believe that is where center of all terrorism stems from.

Obviously there's many other examples...

The question is would you choose to go to war with anyone else at this point and time? Or do you feel the economy and/or armed forces are too stressed?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-20-2009, 06:12 PM
 
Location: Sacramento
14,044 posts, read 27,224,933 times
Reputation: 7373
Sec of Defense isn't allowed to declare war, they just strategize and execute the battle plans.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2009, 06:12 PM
 
Location: London UK & Florida USA
7,923 posts, read 8,848,514 times
Reputation: 2059
Obama has it right....Talk!
If Talks fail and a Country threatens the peace and Existance of another Country then any sign of aggression should be met with a comparable or greater action, even if that action is outright War. The UK tried to appease Hitler but when he ignored our seriousness we went to war.
So YES......... Declaring a war should always be an option.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2009, 06:15 PM
 
Location: here.
1,359 posts, read 2,292,502 times
Reputation: 438
War is the last resort and not "hey they may have WMD's, so lets attack and start a pointless war to find out of they really have WMD's"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2009, 06:18 PM
 
4,586 posts, read 5,479,557 times
Reputation: 943
Do folks understand that real humans die in wars? War isn't a movie. You wont be seeing the dead in another movie. It must be the last resort not a general option.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2009, 06:19 PM
 
Location: Planet Eaarth
8,954 posts, read 20,685,976 times
Reputation: 7193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tank1906 View Post
Do folks understand that real humans die in wars? War isn't a movie. You wont be seeing the dead in another movie. It must be the last resort not a general option.
Some people don't get the idea of real death in war due to the video games of today that make war harmless.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2009, 06:23 PM
 
Location: Mountain Home, ID
1,956 posts, read 3,637,042 times
Reputation: 2435
Last time I checked, only a vote of Congress could declare war, though the President can ask Congress for a vote.

As far as if North Korea's current actions justify a declaration of war, I'd say no. Talk is cheap. Kidnapping American journalists and taking them prisoner is a low and odious action, but it doesn't justify an actual war. If they actually take an aggressive military action against the US ala Japan bombing Pearl Harbor, then that would be different. But Americans have been taken hostage in various countries the past and it didn't justify declaring war.

As much as I regret that these women were captured and are being used as political pawns, the best alternative at this point is to not give into NK's demands and try to handle the matter diplomatically. Giving into them only puts more people in danger because it encourages the taking of more hostages.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2009, 06:27 PM
 
Location: London UK & Florida USA
7,923 posts, read 8,848,514 times
Reputation: 2059
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthCity09 View Post
War is the last resort and not "hey they may have WMD's, so lets attack and start a pointless war to find out of they really have WMD's"
I hear too many people slamming Obama for wanting aggression to be the last resort. Aggression has not stopped the terrorist threat so Obama should be given a Chance to try something new. How many Iraqs do you want before people wake up and realise that NO terrorist has been defeated by war. The IRA were defeated with Talks not bloodshed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2009, 10:24 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,325 posts, read 44,956,928 times
Reputation: 7118
Quote:
If you were Sec of Defense...Would you declare war with another country?
The least you could do is get your facts straight on who has authority to declare war, and who doesn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2009, 01:12 AM
 
Location: North Las Vegas
1,125 posts, read 1,591,425 times
Reputation: 929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hesster View Post
As far as if North Korea's current actions justify a declaration of war, I'd say no. Talk is cheap. Kidnapping American journalists and taking them prisoner is a low and odious action, but it doesn't justify an actual war. If they actually take an aggressive military action against the US ala Japan bombing Pearl Harbor, then that would be different. But Americans have been taken hostage in various countries the past and it didn't justify declaring war.
We are still technically at war with North Korea, so the president could order attacks any time he wished, congress has no say one way or the other.

Link in case you want to read why we are still considered to be at war with N. Korea
BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | The Korean War armistice
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:29 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top