JWR confessed:
I've got to stop this. It's killing me.
It would be a good idea to take a political break. It kills me too. I
just can't handle too much of it.
Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access
At 10:51 AM 11/14/2002, Gary wrote:
If it were just us against the North Koreans, I can see your point. But
as Jesus told us that the wise man counts his pennies before building the
house, we had to determine just what level of interdiction we were
willing to make in Korea. Given that the
No battle plan ever survives first contact with the enemy. We went into
Korea with a limited plan; do not allow the Communists to take over Korea.
John:
And that is the whole problem. Nations have no business going to war with
a limited plan. Do you think that either the North Koreans or
After much pondering, Gary Smith favored us with:
Actually, no. We had a treaty, signed by Congress, stating we would
defend Korea from any invasions. Congress also ratified our working with
the UN on fighting the war. So, it was done under the okay of our
Constitution.
Sorry, in the USA
After much pondering, Steven Montgomery favored us with:
Were it not for economic and technical assistance given to the Soviet
Union and Red China by the United States the North Koreans would never
have invaded the South. They wouldn't have been in a position to do so. In
fact, a good position
After much pondering, Dan R Allen favored us with:
The negative impacts were the complete loss of an entire generation of
young men vs. a relative handful, significant economic hardship for the
people that remained home, and the very real probability that Russia might
drop a nuke on American
After much pondering, Dan R Allen favored us with:
It was. The Korean war was basically a civil war. The North Koreans already
controlled part of Korean; hence their distinction as 'North' Koreans. Our
scope was limited to ensuring that they did not overthrow the government,
and thus control all
After much pondering, Marc A. Schindler favored us with:
You mean Congress isn't doing its duty if it isn't always declaring war on
someone? No wonder they want to invade Canuckistan now -- there are no
other rogue
states left.
Congress has no duty to declare war. It just has a constitutional
At 05:42 PM 11/14/2002, you wrote:
After much pondering, Steven Montgomery favored us with:
Were it not for economic and technical assistance given to the Soviet
Union and Red China by the United States the North Koreans would never
have invaded the South. They wouldn't have been in a position
John:
I don't know how to say this, but I'll try. In a fight, a combatant must
not be allowed sanctuary. If he can attack from sanctuary, there is no way
to defeat him. And he is free to kill at his convenience. In war, a
general must be allowed to pursue those who retreat to keep them
After much pondering, Dan R Allen favored us with:
A military officer who disobeys a superiors orders (unless they are
illegal) is not fit to be an officer.
Unless the order is illegal. And Truman's orders were clearly illegal by
any constitutional standards. The whole war was
After much pondering, Dan R Allen favored us with:
Define win John.
To me this is like asking me to define is. Obviously, win means to
defeat the enemy. Did we defeat the North Koreans? No. Did we defeat the
Chinese? No.
No battle plan ever survives first contact with the enemy. We went
If it isn't, then it is a traitor and betrayer. Which just
about sums up what I feel about Truman. He betrayed our armed forced,
and
deserves to be remembered as one of the blackest villains of our
national
history.
I wonder if his temple ordinances have been performed yet? Hmmm.
;-)
13 matches
Mail list logo
