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.
WAR was interesting...in the early 1970s they recorded a great album with Eric Burdon singing the vocals. The one hit from that LP was "Spill The Wine". Give that tune a listen, it's very good. The other tracks on the LP are great, especially if you do a reefer first.
Without Eric Burdon they flopped. 'Cisco Kid Was A Friend Of Mine' wasn't as good.
Crime is rampant in New York City. Should we occupy it--or blow it off the map?
First, crime is not rampany in NYC. It is one of the safest cities in the US.
Second, in cities where the crime really is a crisis (New Orleans after Katrina, Ciudad Juarez today)....the military and/or National Guard is called in to restore order under martial law. I fully support those decisions.
WAR was interesting...in the early 1970s they recorded a great album with Eric Burdon singing the vocals. The one hit from that LP was "Spill The Wine". Give that tune a listen, it's very good. The other tracks on the LP are great, especially if you do a reefer first.
Without Eric Burdon they flopped. 'Cisco Kid Was A Friend Of Mine' wasn't as good.
So I guess you weren't a fan of "Why Can't We Be Friends" or "Slipping Into Darkness"...
The real question should be, name the wars that American has fought in that were necessary?
There was only one, the barbary wars. All other wars were absolutely and totally unnecessary. Nothing but American imperialism and/or entangling alliances.
We were attacked in World War II. The government may have invited the attack, but we were still attacked by the military of a foreign power.
The government should've been impeached and a new non-threatening government should've come to terms. It's not as though the enemy was demanding our unconditional surrender--just to stay out of their business.
if americans are asked to fund these wars, they are certainly indirectly participating. if americans are asked to send their children to the wars, they are directly participating.
i don't think too many people are against a "necessary" war if brought on by a DIRECT attack to the united states, but i think there is strong disagreement about what is now constituting a necessary war. for many americans, fighting the taliban does not fall into the "necessary" war category, and certainly fighting a limited war operation with a "timed" pull out should not even fall into the category of "war". the fact that we are now bribing the taliban while attempting to fight them shows that we don't have a clue how to win this war or even why we are fighting it.
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.
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.
