Do we not understand the definition of RETALIATION?

[60Shock]

Do we not understand the definition of RETALIATION?

Simply put it is defined as: to make a personal attack or assault in return for a similar personal attack on yourself.

As a country, we Americans have lived generally by the principle of retaliation since our beginning. You attack us and we are going to retaliate in spades and make you wish you had never done so.

Strength is what is understood throughout the world by virtually all nations. Show weakness and you are in a world of hurt. But just because we are the most powerful nation on Earth, does not mean we always have to butt into all situations whereby we, nor our allies are attacked, or even threatened.

Were we attacked? Were any Americans killed or injured? Were any of our allies killed? Did the incident happen in a country which by any stretch of the imagination could be considered a friend of the United States? If not, then why in the blazes are we getting involved other than to save our Emperor’s reputation and face?

So. lets take a look at our relative recent past in which we have done absolutely little to nothing to protect even our fellow Americans. In 1979, our Embassy in Iran was overthrown and fifty-two Americans were held hostage, imprisoned and some tortured, for 444 days. Add to that the capturing and the recent shameful Benghazi action when we again made no attempt to protect our Ambassador and the rest of the Americans within our Consulate.

So it appears that our policy, under liberal leadership, is to do nothing to protect Americans when they are captured or killed in US foreign Embassies or Consulates, but to retaliate in force when an enemy country kills its own citizens, who for the most part, hate our guts as well.

This is not the country I grew up in and served in its Armed Forces. But it sure looks like the country into which we have been transitioned into.

And it sucks!

[pinstripers]

exactly

[Kung Wu]

Were we attacked? Were any Americans killed or injured? Were any of our allies killed? Did the incident happen in a country which by any stretch of the imagination could be considered a friend of the United States? If not, then why in the blazes are we getting involved other than to save our Emperor’s reputation and face?

The Syrians are fighting on the 37th parallel north. The United States (and Kansas!) sits on the 37th parallel north. We MUST defend the 37th parallel north! Onward to victory!!

[RoyalShock]

I should know my history better, but unfortunately I hated it in high school. Can someone refresh my memory on how we were pulled into WWI and the European front of WWII?

[Kung Wu]

I should know my history better, but unfortunately I hated it in high school. Can someone refresh my memory on how we were pulled into WWI and the European front of WWII?

In both cases, it was Bush's fault.

[jocoshock]

I should know my history better, but unfortunately I hated it in high school. Can someone refresh my memory on how we were pulled into WWI and the European front of WWII?

As far as WWII is concerned, Germany declared war on us after we declared war on Japan...

WWI...
America maintained a nuetral position throughout most of the war (1914-1917) until (according to Wikipedia)..

In January 1917, Germany resumed unrestricted submarine warfare, realizing it would mean American entry. The German Foreign Minister, in the Zimmermann Telegram, invited Mexico to join the war as Germany's ally against the United States. In return, the Germans would finance Mexico's war and help it recover the territories of Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona.[109] Britain intercepted the message and presented it to the US embassy in Britain. From there it made its way to President Wilson who released the Zimmerman note to the public, and Americans saw it as casus belli—a cause for war. Wilson called on antiwar elements to end all wars, by winning this one and eliminating militarism from the globe. He argued that the war was so important that the U.S. had to have a voice in the peace conference.[110] After the sinking of seven U.S. merchant ships by submarines and the publication of the Zimmerman telegram, Wilson called for war on Germany,[111] which the U.S. Congress declared on 6 April 1917.

[jocoshock]

Do we not understand the definition of RETALIATION?

Simply put it is defined as: to make a personal attack or assault in return for a similar personal attack on yourself.

As a country, we Americans have lived generally by the principle of retaliation since our beginning. You attack us and we are going to retaliate in spades and make you wish you had never done so.

Strength is what is understood throughout the world by virtually all nations. Show weakness and you are in a world of hurt. But just because we are the most powerful nation on Earth, does not mean we always have to butt into all situations whereby we, nor our allies are attacked, or even threatened.

Were we attacked? Were any Americans killed or injured? Were any of our allies killed? Did the incident happen in a country which by any stretch of the imagination could be considered a friend of the United States? If not, then why in the blazes are we getting involved other than to save our Emperor’s reputation and face?

So. lets take a look at our relative recent past in which we have done absolutely little to nothing to protect even our fellow Americans. In 1979, our Embassy in Iran was overthrown and fifty-two Americans were held hostage, imprisoned and some tortured, for 444 days. Add to that the capturing and the recent shameful Benghazi action when we again made no attempt to protect our Ambassador and the rest of the Americans within our Consulate.

So it appears that our policy, under liberal leadership, is to do nothing to protect Americans when they are captured or killed in US foreign Embassies or Consulates, but to retaliate in force when an enemy country kills its own citizens, who for the most part, hate our guts as well.

This is not the country I grew up in and served in its Armed Forces. But it sure looks like the country into which we have been transitioned into.

And it sucks!

I don't know when you grew up in America. I assume you are at least a few years older than me...but you might want to bone up on the history of military intervention since WWII.

Marine Barracks bombing in Lebanon: 1983In the attack on the building serving as a barracks for the 1st Battalion 8th Marines (Battalion Landing Team - BLT 1/8), the death toll was 241 American servicemen: 220 Marines, 18 sailors and threesoldiers, along with 60 Americans injured, representing the deadliest single-day death toll for the United States Marine Corps since World War II'sBattle of Iwo Jima, the deadliest single-day death toll for the United States military since the first day of theVietnam War's Tet Offensive, and the deadliest single attack on Americans overseas since World War II

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_barracks_bombing

After the attack, the US and the UN pulled out of Lebanon. Had a Liberal president been in office this would have been called cutting and running... It's not my intention to get into a pissing contest about liberals vs. conservatives. Merely to make a point that armed conflict is a messy business and presidents from both parties have made decisions that are both wise and foolish...

VietNam was a messy war, and Lyndon Johnson owns the decisions that led to our involvement, and the hangover the country felt for years to come. Now the Iraq and Afghanistan wars have created a similar hangover, with similar consequences. So I think think this is exactly the country you grew up in whether you remember it or not.

[Kung Wu]

Rut roh.

[pinstripers]

Ike and JFK had "boots on the ground".

[jocoshock]

Ike and JFK had "boots on the ground".

the official term was "advisors"...

[pinstripers]

the official term was "advisors"...

and were they barefoot?

[jocoshock]

and were they barefoot?

only on Saturday night in downtown Saigon... :pirate:

[pinstripers]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSqj-sF-vKs

[kcshocker11]

This should explain it,

[60Shock]

I don't know when you grew up in America. I assume you are at least a few years older than me...but you might want to bone up on the history of military intervention since WWII.


After the attack, the US and the UN pulled out of Lebanon. Had a Liberal president been in office this would have been called cutting and running... It's not my intention to get into a pissing contest about liberals vs. conservatives. Merely to make a point that armed conflict is a messy business and presidents from both parties have made decisions that are both wise and foolish...

VietNam was a messy war, and Lyndon Johnson owns the decisions that led to our involvement, and the hangover the country felt for years to come. Now the Iraq and Afghanistan wars have created a similar hangover, with similar consequences. So I think think this is exactly the country you grew up in whether you remember it or not.

Perhaps you need to also bone up on what I said, and not what you interpreted what I said. Lebanon and Vietnam, which you mentioned, are totally different from what we are facing today. In Lebanon and Vietnam the enemy attacked positioned, deployed American Military forces, fully capable of defending themselves. In Lebanson, unfortunately they attacked a barracks in which our forces were caught, literally, sleeping. Not an American Embassy or Consulate. In Vietnam, our forces were fully engaged and had been for years. And what's the bit of you attempting to imply that all we had there were advisors. Yes, initially in the early 1960s, but not in 1968. If if want to discuss apples, stick to apples and get your facts straight.

Source - www.historylearningsite.co.uk/tet - "However, in military terms, the US could claim victory in the Tet Offensive. The North Vietnamese could not afford major losses in terms of manpower. During the Tet Offensive the NLF lost 37,000 soldiers while the US lost 2,500 men. Yet the Tet Offensive was a major blow to US military pride."

For six months after the North's terrific loses, they were unable to mount any significant offensive whatsoever. TET was a complete military victory. Our forces decimated the NVA and VC. And check it out, our US Forces never lost a major battle in VN.

Let me refresh my point, which perhaps I did not make clear enough. We sit back and allow our Islamic enemies to attack virtually defenseless American embassies/consulates and do nothing. Yet we over react in attempting to interfer in a multi-facit civil war in a country, which is clearly an enemy of ours in every way possible. And each one of the three, and now possibly four, factions, hate America and everything we stand for. And lets not forget Libya. We again got involved in another country's internal affairs and bombed the crap out of them. And years later, they get their payback and attack our consulate and murder our Ambassador while our SecState and President do nothing.

Perhaps, we need to think about protecting America and Americans and stay out of conflicts we have no business in, whatsoever.