Last edited by Red_Dave; 08-14-12 at 04:32 PM.
As I'm not a statist, I don't support any of the "normal" wars (i.e. wars waged by governments). I would, however, support and (if effective) participate in armed action to secure basic needs (water, land, access to education and healthcare, etc.) if and when a government or private business made a move to block access to them. Blocking off needs is slow murder.
I've moved on to a better forum (scienceforums.net). Facts matter, and I don't have the time or energy for putting up with the pretense that they don't. PM me if you'd like me to get in touch with you when I'm done developing my own forum system, likely towards the end of 2013.
I would support an intervention in Syria with little to no boots on the ground. I think we should only go to war if attacked or to combat humanitarian crises.
Any of them where we have reason to believe it is in our national interest to intervene, and where there is reason to think we could alter the outcome in our favor, and that the outcome would be worth the effort.
Iran... yes. It would be in our interests that Iran not develop nukes.
Syria... meh. I can see where it might be in our interests to control who ends up running Syria, as they've been a constant ****-stirrer in the mideast a long time.
China... well, come the day that China invades Taiwan or otherwise attempts to infringe on US interests in the Asian region, yes. That will likely be a big one, if it happens.
And yes, when I say "will support" I do indeed mean "yes, I'd go fight personally if they'd let me." I tried to join for Gulf Round One but was disqual'd due to hearing problems, regrettably. I'm looking into treatments for that but they'd probably consider me too old to join now... but yeah I'd still go if they'd let me.
Fiddling While Rome Burns
Carthago Delenda Est
"I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."
Short of the US being invaded by a foreign country, no, I can't think of any wars I'd support.
If you build a man a fire, he'll be warm for a day.
If you set a man on fire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
I voted "maybe but unlikely" because the poll didn't have an "others" line, for places like the Balkans and Sudan, and various less-than-famous African regional wars. The best war however, that I guess everyone could support, would be to break up the nation states of Europe, and Russia, and maybe even china, so that those large lands can be reorganized regionally, with sensitivity to the interests of local people. This is truely in the interest of the greater good, not just another interventionist move. The united states has managed to become the world's greatest empire because of its sensitivity to its people in all of its 50 states, something other countries still fail to do even these days.
I would support a war to liberate North Korea, if it was executed at the right time.
"I mean, everybody should have access to medical care. And, you know, it shouldn't be such a big deal."
-Dr. Paul Farmer
Except... if NK invaded SK (again), then I would be willing to fight for SK, and would consider it almost mandatory to then liberate NK as a matter of eliminating future threats.
If we had the political wherewithal to actually go in and kick ass... which I'm not convinced that we do anymore.
If, when defending your support for Donald Trump, and your response is,
"But but but... HILLARY!!!", then you lost the argument before you even began.