Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: x
Are you suggesting the quest for empire, whether it was Rome, Britain or the US, was based on patriotism, rather than a naked quest for power, wealth & control?

Both sides of the political spectrum have their useful idiots. The left can reliably count on their constituents who care not a whit about morality. The right has their own version, those who cannot quite conceive their leaders use them to satisfy their own selfish ends.

Here's a question for you: why the high suicide rates among former military? Could it be veterans found out the truth after they were used, abuse and discarded, much like a cheap whore? Next, I imagine you're going to assert that GW1 & 2 were *not* about blood for oil.

I don't have an issue with those who wish to entertain morality and other theological motivations; but, please, keep it to yourself. It's the height of foolishness to engage in the wider field abroad.

76 posted on 10/31/2017 3:32:34 PM PDT by semantic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies ]


To: semantic; x
semantic: "Are you suggesting the quest for empire, whether it was Rome, Britain or the US, was based on patriotism, rather than a naked quest for power, wealth & control?"

Nothing about the word "patriotism" excludes hopes for greater US "power, wealth & control" over global forces of chaos & tyranny.
But US patriotism is far more, including our moral sense of what's right & wrong.
US foreign & domestic policies have never been divorced from such higher concerns, and they never will be, your unlimited cynicism not withstanding.

79 posted on 10/31/2017 3:42:45 PM PDT by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies ]

To: semantic; BroJoeK; DoodleDawg
So your belief is that because a united America was going to be a great and wealthy power someday, that people in the 19th century were fighting for that?

Historically that's putting the cart before the horse. People -- ordinary soldiers and even military and political leaders -- were fighting for what they knew, not for what might someday be.

Arguments like yours demand far too much purity of people. The assumption seems to be that you can only pursue non-materialistic ends if you seek your own ruin.

Are you suggesting the quest for empire, whether it was Rome, Britain or the US, was based on patriotism, rather than a naked quest for power, wealth & control?

There is a difference between expansionism and attempts to preserve what one has. Arguably, we weren't fighting Mexico for idealistic ends, but it's harder to make such a statement about a country in civil war. Ideas and ideologies matter a lot more when it comes to civil wars than they do in reference to wars of territorial expansion.

Here's a question for you: why the high suicide rates among former military? Could it be veterans found out the truth after they were used, abuse and discarded, much like a cheap whore? Next, I imagine you're going to assert that GW1 & 2 were *not* about blood for oil.

Keep posting like that. See where it gets you.

I don't have an issue with those who wish to entertain morality and other theological motivations; but, please, keep it to yourself.

"I don't have an issue ... but please, keep it to yourself" means "I do have an issue."

It's the height of foolishness to engage in the wider field abroad.

I'm not sure what that means. The ACW wasn't a foreign war.

83 posted on 10/31/2017 3:59:58 PM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson