Change in America

[bhsmte]

Not really relevant, since air strikes can't win ground wars. How much collateral damage do you think is acceptable?

Collateral damage occurs with both air attacks and ground attacks.

It would not be up to me to determine how much collateral damage is acceptable, just saying what is acceptable appears to be getting less and less and makes fighting these wars, much longer and in some cases, basically useless.

 

[pakicetus]

80s and 90s

Well New Zealand's labor participation rate wasn't 33% during the 80s and 90s like you claimed. According to the New Zealand government, the lowest it ever got was 63% in 1993—and that's if you count the elderly. If you only count ages 15 to 64, it was 72%. Where are you getting your statistics from?

 

[Jan Volkes]

Our allies were fine with it when we were fire bombing Germany and Japan during WW2 and they were cheering us on.

"WE"? the US was bombing on it's own was it? who were the 15-20 other nationalities on the side of the allies then?
there were a lot more allies than there were Americans fighting in WW2.
The Americans did fire bomb Japan on it's own, their planes flew from the islands they captured, it's where John Wayne made his name.

 

[bhsmte]

"WE"? the US was bombing on it's own was it? who were the 15-20 other nationalities on the side of the allies then?
there were a lot more allies than there were Americans fighting in WW2.
The Americans did fire bomb Japan on it's own, their planes flew from the islands they captured, it's where John Wayne made his name.

Do you think the UK had a problem with us fire bombing Germany, during WW2?

 

[DaisyDay]

I am not talking about helping people down on their luck. I am talking about policies enacted that don't encourage those who should be and can be working to work. I don't believe in "safety nets" for the lazy and neither should you.

Our economy requires a certain amount of unemployment, so we either have designated losers (economically speaking) or we take turns.

 

[outsidethecamp]

Do you think the UK had a problem with us fire bombing Germany, during WW2?

Funny you should ask that. Greed knows no bounds. What a wicked web we weave.

Bank of England helped the Nazis to sell plundered gold

 

[JustOneWay]

Funny you should ask that. Greed knows no bounds. What a wicked web we weave.

Bank of England helped the Nazis to sell plundered gold

That doesn't quite answer his question, does it?

 

[outsidethecamp]

That doesn't quite answer his question, does it?

oh, of course they did not have a problem with us saving them.

 

[Jan Volkes]

Do you think the UK had a problem with us fire bombing Germany, during WW2?

No because they were right there with you and apart from that Britain had been bombing Germany long before the Americans had entered the war, Britain had been at war for more than 2 years before Pearl Harbour and had been buying goods from the US.

The Americans and the British knew the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbour and they allowed them to attack [not before sending the aircraft carriers to sea on an exercise] because both leaders wanted America to enter the war, Churchill because he wanted help and Roosevelt because he knew it was inevitable and there was money to be made, prior to that the President had told the people that the US would not go to war, of course after Pearl Harbour the Americans demanded they go to war both with Japan and Germany so everything turned out exactly as planned.

 

[Jan Volkes]

oh, of course they did not have a problem with us saving them.

I am not going to bite because I know you don't know any better.

 

[bhsmte]

No because they were right there with you and apart from that Britain had been bombing Germany long before the Americans had entered the war, Britain had been at war for more than 2 years before Pearl Harbour and had been buying goods from the US.

The Americans and the British knew the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbour and they allowed them to attack [not before sending the aircraft carriers to sea on an exercise] because both leaders wanted America to enter the war, Churchill because he wanted help and Roosevelt because he knew it was inevitable and there was money to be made, prior to that the President had told the people that the US would not go to war, of course after Pearl Harbour the Americans demanded they go to war both with Japan and Germany so everything turned out exactly as planned.

If Japan had not attacked, do you think the US should have refrained from entering the war?

 

[tulc]

You are more than free to believe that.

Well one side is supported by history (that would be bhsmte) and one side is a collection of conspiracy theories and conjecture.
tulc(wonders if anyone can guess which side that is?)

 

[ScottA]

So far your case seems to consist of telling minorities they should not vote for democrats because the democrats are only paying token respect to their issues.

Yes, seems to be a pattern in their campaign strategy: appease the people with programs and promises, get more votes, and give their buddies more $100k administration jobs while holding the average person down with more government regulations.

 

[Jan Volkes]

If Japan had not attacked, do you think the US should have refrained from entering the war?

Japan did attack and America went to war, why worry about something that didn't happen?

 

[bhsmte]

Japan did attack and America went to war, why worry about something that didn't happen?

Just curious.

So, do you think the US did the right thing by not entering the war until Japan attacked?

 

[Jan Volkes]

Yes, seems to be a pattern in their campaign strategy: appease the people with programs and promises, get more votes, and give their buddies more $100k administration jobs while holding the average person down with more government regulations.

That is the one good thing about the republican party, they never make an promises, vote them in and the average American can be sure they will get only what's left after the big players have had what they want.

Republicans seem to be the kind of people who if I conned them out of most of their money they would continue to vote for me just as long as I told them I was a believer.
How many atheists in the government? 1 or 2? that is statistically impossible, at least 10% of them should be atheists,
how many of them told lies just to get voted into office?

 

[Jan Volkes]

Just curious.

So, do you think the US did the right thing by not entering the war until Japan attacked?

Right or wrong after the first world war the American people did not want to fight in any more foreign wars,
when Japan attacked Pearl Harbour they changed their minds.

 

[bhsmte]

Right or wrong after the first world war the American people did not want to fight in any more foreign wars,
when Japan attacked Pearl Harbour they changed their minds.

Yes. Attacks on our soil, tend to have that effect.

 

[Jan Volkes]

Yes. Attacks on our soil, tend to have that effect.

It's strange that you would say that because when Obama was elected some people were trying to say that Hawaii was not a real state.

 

[bhsmte]

No because they were right there with you and apart from that Britain had been bombing Germany long before the Americans had entered the war, Britain had been at war for more than 2 years before Pearl Harbour and had been buying goods from the US.

The Americans and the British knew the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbour and they allowed them to attack [not before sending the aircraft carriers to sea on an exercise] because both leaders wanted America to enter the war, Churchill because he wanted help and Roosevelt because he knew it was inevitable and there was money to be made, prior to that the President had told the people that the US would not go to war, of course after Pearl Harbour the Americans demanded they go to war both with Japan and Germany so everything turned out exactly as planned.

If money was a driving force in America entering WW2, why then drop the atomic bombs? If they didn't drop those bombs, the war could have been extended much longer and more money made.