EPTOn June 22 2009 22:29 JudgeMathis wrote:
I think the United States should have just went on N. Korea a long time ago. Does anyone remember WW2? When Germany did whatever it felt liked? Yeah, it feels like that, but with nukes. Before someone takes me out of context and tries to do a history lesson with me. All I'm saying is when countries are acting up you should stop them in their tracks, and make them examples.
I think the United States should have just went on N. Korea a long time ago. Does anyone remember WW2? When Germany did whatever it felt liked? Yeah, it feels like that, but with nukes. Before someone takes me out of context and tries to do a history lesson with me. All I'm saying is when countries are acting up you should stop them in their tracks, and make them examples.
A doctrinal approach to foreign policy is very dangerous. That is why people need to read history very carefully, to see that most situations are complex and ambiguous, and that no two situations are exactly the same.
In particular, taking isolated examples are moral paradigms are hazardous by your own example: By the 1930s, the leadership of the West, particularly in Britain and America, began to reinterpret the origins of the First of War not as the consequence of unique German malevolence, but as a series of misunderstandings and misconceptions held by all erratic parties. The wasteful slaughter of 1914-1918 could have been avoided had calmer heads prevailed in July-August 1914 and political moderation exercised. This view was decisive to the psychology of British foreign policy between 1934 and 1939.
