Printable View
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: raider13</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So we should cut the aid to other countries to help pay for the death of our soliders and others in another? </div></div>
Sure. Whats wrong with that? Your the one saying we don't take care of our own enough. So, you shouldn't have a problem with that.
Ive never said that we should be JUST be taking care of our own, you wont find that post. There are plenty of people over here that need our help and yes absolutely they should be first, but I am not going to complain if we help another country also. I am just failing completely to get how it is better to fund a war which is pointless then to help some other country. You dont lose over 4,000 of our own helping another country whether it be with food or money. Or how about use the money for the war in Afghanistan? Or take the troops in Iraq and move them there? I dont know the exact number, id have to look it up but I think that the # of troops in Iraq outweigh the # in Afghanistan by a lot! and to me that makes absolutely no sense what-so-ever.
I didn't say you said we should just help those here, but as you said above, that should be the first priority in your mind. Of course, I am sure that Iraq is of absolutely no help to those that live there either. Sure seems to be a lot of double talk.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> You dont lose over 4,000 of our own helping another country whether it be with food or money. </div></div>
Did you ever pay attention in history class. We only lost 405399 in WWII which we were brought into as a direct result of helping another country with food and money. The reason we were attacked by the japs was as a result of our giving aid to Europe.
Where is all your uproar over this senseless war. It isn't that much different from this one.
...the japs got to us because we refused to heed warnings...and they wanted the Phillapines. But our current war is senseless.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TheBeast</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> You dont lose over 4,000 of our own helping another country whether it be with food or money. </div></div>
Did you ever pay attention in history class. We only lost 405399 in WWII which we were brought into as a direct result of helping another country with food and money. The reason we were attacked by the japs was as a result of our giving aid to Europe.
Where is all your uproar over this senseless war. It isn't that much different from this one.
</div></div>
Gee, your history is diffenent from the real stuff. Japan started way to soon. Germany didn't even want to consider the US till the navy was done in 45. The Japs wanted the natural resources and a free hand in their ocean.
I am just relaying what I was taught by Prof. Costa at UVAwise. That the germans and japanese both were upset with the US for giving aid to the Europeans and nothing to them while maintaining a neutral stance. They saw it as not being neutral.
I guess I shouldn't have made it sound like that was the only reason we were attacked but it was part of it.
Since WWI, even if the USA proclaimed to be neutral, they were still funding and helping the Brits...and threatening to enter conflicts if the opposition tried to put an end to the aid.
WWII isnt much different than Iraq? Thats a good one.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: raider13</div><div class="ubbcode-body">WWII isnt much different than Iraq? Thats a good one. </div></div>
By your reasoning it isn't. Our participation in oth were a result of an attack on us on our soil and for some of the same reasons