The Conservative Cave

Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on March 21, 2011, 10:17:02 AM

Title: Dear Lurkers, RE: asinine meme of "destroying villages to save them"
Post by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on March 21, 2011, 10:17:02 AM
WW2 devastated Germany (amongst other nations). See EXHIBIT A:

(http://www.warpictures.org.uk/warpictures/berlin-germany-1945.jpg)

Now, it could be readily argued, they had it comin' but with that being said if you could choose your moral fate in life would you rather be a German citizen living under the Reich or would you rather be a child of those Germans after they had been conquered and the terms of their new government dictated to them?
Title: Re: Dear Lurkers, RE: asinine meme of "destroying villages to save them"
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on March 21, 2011, 11:13:09 AM
Except in 1945 we were in a position to dictate the terms of the new government, after committing 'Boots on the ground' in vast numbers and at a very considerable cost for all concerned.  That ain't gonna be happening in Libya, it's basically a civil war in which we're trying to pick a winner but won't have Jack Shit to say about how they run the show if they do come out on top and the planes go away...a lot more like Kosovo than WWII, really.
Title: Re: Dear Lurkers, RE: asinine meme of "destroying villages to save them"
Post by: CplDunn on March 21, 2011, 01:20:36 PM
Yeah, best we can do in this situation is wait until the fighting's over and provide aid for the rebuilding, ala Greece and Turkey under the Marshall Plan.

No way we'll be able to commit boots on the ground after Iraq and Afghanistan.
Title: Re: Dear Lurkers, RE: asinine meme of "destroying villages to save them"
Post by: Vagabond on March 21, 2011, 05:49:28 PM
Except in 1945 we were in a position to dictate the terms of the new government, after committing 'Boots on the ground' in vast numbers and at a very considerable cost for all concerned.  That ain't gonna be happening in Libya, it's basically a civil war in which we're trying to pick a winner but won't have Jack Shit to say about how they run the show if they do come out on top and the planes go away...a lot more like Kosovo than WWII, really.

Not only that, whoever wins, and Qadaffi still might, they aren't going to have any love for us anyway.  Despite providing almost all of the hardware and almost all of the ordinance, we declare that we aren't the lead in this.  Qadaffi will be pissed that we attacked and hell we aren't trying (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) to eliminate Qadaffi, and the rebels are unlikely to be anything other than a pack of islamists.  No good thing can come from this US, excuse me UN, action.

It's a good thing that there wasn't a United States around during the American Civil War.
Title: Re: Dear Lurkers, RE: asinine meme of "destroying villages to save them"
Post by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on March 21, 2011, 06:36:50 PM
Except in 1945 we were in a position to dictate the terms of the new government, after committing 'Boots on the ground' in vast numbers and at a very considerable cost for all concerned.  That ain't gonna be happening in Libya, it's basically a civil war in which we're trying to pick a winner but won't have Jack Shit to say about how they run the show if they do come out on top and the planes go away...a lot more like Kosovo than WWII, really.
Sometimes you're too much of a lawyer.

I'm not addressing the practical realities but rather the moral implications. Whether or not the US, NATO, the UN or anybody has the power to occupy Libya is not the point.

When DUmbasses protest you cannot save a village by bombing it they are claiming there is no positive moral good to be had by those who are the objects of a military campaign. I simply ask if the Germans were better off being devastated as pictured above or left whole but under the grip of the Nazi regime. Certainly the Germans (and those they conquered) could not have been liberated from fascist tyranny except by way of that devastation.

That is my only point, good sir, and I challenge the pinheads from DU to answer it.
Title: Re: Dear Lurkers, RE: asinine meme of "destroying villages to save them"
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on March 22, 2011, 08:21:12 AM
Hey, somebody has to think about consequences.  Rabbits and and their squirrel buddies obviously aren't that good about it, judging by my mornning drive to work every day.
Title: Re: Dear Lurkers, RE: asinine meme of "destroying villages to save them"
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on March 22, 2011, 09:20:25 AM
Hey, somebody has to think about the actual consequences of things.  You damn rabbits and and your little squirrel buddies obviously aren't that good about it, judging by what I see on the highway on my morning drive to work every day.
Title: Re: Dear Lurkers, RE: asinine meme of "destroying villages to save them"
Post by: JohnnyReb on March 22, 2011, 10:48:46 AM
San Francisco: now there's a village we could save by destroying it.
Title: Re: Dear Lurkers, RE: asinine meme of "destroying villages to save them"
Post by: AllosaursRus on March 22, 2011, 11:46:08 AM
Not only that, whoever wins, and Qadaffi still might, they aren't going to have any love for us anyway.  Despite providing almost all of the hardware and almost all of the ordinance, we declare that we aren't the lead in this.  Qadaffi will be pissed that we attacked and hell we aren't trying (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) to eliminate Qadaffi, and the rebels are unlikely to be anything other than a pack of islamists.  No good thing can come from this US, excuse me UN, action.

It's a good thing that there wasn't a United States around during the American Civil War.

Exactly! We might even be helpin' out our enemies in this case!

I stick with the 'ol, "the only good cockroach, is a dead cockroach", meme!

Why waste our extremely expensive "smart" weapons on these fools?