@gungasnake,
Quote:I mean, American wars are a mixed bag. Some have been altruistic like WW-II, others have been for the benefit of of banking and money interests and that includes WW-I, some like Nam have been attempts to clean up Euroweenie colonial messes, and the worst of the lot i.e. the recent phony wars including those in the Balkans and this present atrocity in libya are what I'd call libtard wars and/or NWO wars and those would not have occurred under Republican administrations.
Absolutely crap. Possibly even wrt WWII. The US saw a huge opportunity in WWII to replace the UK as the number one raper of the planet. It saw the opportunity to replace Germany, which it had figured to be a threat, not to peace, but to US economic interests around the world.
After WWII, the US didn't include the UK in discussions of the Far East. With Japan gone, a Japan that the US had no problem with before WWII, as long as Japan was willing to share China, there was nobody to stop the US from raping the whole damn area.
Vietnam was a war of aggression, the ultimate war crime, perpetrated upon a people [more than one actually - Laos & Cambodia] who wanted nothing more than to live and govern their own country. In total defiance of everything that the US pretends that it stands for, it bombed a tiny country into oblivion, it spread chemical weapons across its people and their lands, not to mention its own troops in concentrations that were a hundred times stronger than those used at home, for a chemical that it and its manufacturer knew was a highly carcinogenic.
The US specifically targeted Vietnamese civilians in order to try to scare them into supporting the US and its puppet "governments".
The historical record is all there, right in front of your eyes, Gsnake. 'libtard' wars, indeed. From a woefully ignorant piece of scum like you, that is a compliment of the highest order.