|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Posted on 10/11/2003 12:17:47 PM PDT by gg188
Very rare vanity of mine...How would my parents' generation handle the war on terrorism? ...Conversely, how would this generation's leaders have handled Summer, 1945...?
To the second question---in August of 45, we ended Japanese imperial agression in an act that cost no American soldiers' lives. Today, we seem to bend over backwards to do the opposite: we sacrifice OUR soldiers so that we don't hurt other people.
To the first question, I believe that if we had '45's leaders today, muslims in Iraq (and everywhere) would fear the U.S. so much that they would turn in their own brothers and fathers and sisters to spare themselves the awful wrath of America.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's gonna require instilling in towelheads and moonworshipping pagans worldwide a quaking fear and cowed respect.
The ones who are suicidal and not capable of fear, either we kill or their families will kill them so that they can live.
For the rest, we need to make them so afraid that the sight of an Amercian soldier makes them soil their pants.
They believed in the superiority of the USA and its citizens
Certain behaviors were not only frowned upon but the men of their respective communities took care of business...with the nodding approval of the authorities
Teachers took kids to the woodsheds and when they got home Dad took them to the woodshed for good measure
As far as attacking America and getting away with it...
I dont think anyone expressed it better than dagnabbit
Somehow I don't think FDR would have invited Tojo and Hirohito to a Crawford Texas BBQ, and then told us that Pearl Harbor was the work of "renegade pilots hijacking an Empire of Peace"
5 posted on 10/11/2003 2:26 PM CDT by dagnabbit (Stop the GOP-Dem Matricula Stealth )
Yes, that is the essence. But I have wondered, "What if Hitler and Stalin had been true allies with each other?" Both were socialist, one national and the other international. Both wanted conquest one for a nation and the other for the "wave of the future." They could have deferred their war until after all of Europe and more were theirs and Japan was defeated.
Japan threatened Russia. There still would have been war against Japan. But would the New York Times and Walter Durantys of that era wanted to war against Uncle Joe?
The Korea "police action" was shortly after W.W.II, then Vietnam ten years after that.
The Vietnam era "anti-war" movement that dominated the press and won for the press the "my best guerilla" praise from North Vietnam general Giap greatly affected the outcome of the Vietnam war. No war against Uncle Ho was their chant.
The point? It's mostly the mainstream media, et al. opinion making traitors IMO.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.