jhungary
MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2012
- Messages
- 19,295
- Reaction score
- 387
- Country
- Location
Actually I think America getting involved in the world wars caused the bloodshed, misery and destruction to be prolonged. In WW1 Britain was unable to continue and was about to accept German peace terms for status quo ante bellum (as things were before the war). But we got in and the war raged on.
In WW2 the Brits again rejected status quo ante bellum terms from Germany in 1941. They wouldn't have rejected these terms if there was no promise of America entering the war.
I'll concede the Japs were brutal, but then we later messed up by going into Vietnam. And all this was after the Phillipines invasion, so I'd say Asia is 50-50.
Then there's the Middle East. Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Egypt etc.
Oh I forgot South America...Panama, Nicaragua, Cuba, Grenada etc
There will be conflicts with or without the US, but I think US involvement overall makes things worse. European countries have always had wars among each other, but they always wound down relatively quickly without US involvement. France and England have been at war over 100 times for example. Every president from Washington to Teddy Roosevelt has presided while wars were raging in Europe and South America yet they resisted the urge to meddle, and low and behold these wars always came to a quick end without US involvement.
@libertad Thanks for being neutral.
I wonder how is what @libertad said neutral ?
It's like you have an accident on a bridge and you blame the bridge for being exist.....
In WW1, Germany and UK were ALREADY AT WAR before US involved. What he said only make sense if British Surrender before hostility. And when War are being Progress, then bloodshed HAD ALREADY started. Or you are not counting the people dead before US involvement is bloodshed?
Same thing in WW2. UK, France were already at war and China were already at war with japan before US involvement. Again, whatever peace there are, unless either party take it before hostility, it will not be bloodless.
US involvement changed the victors, NOT THE WAR.
and the fact to the matter is, US involvement speed things up (WW1 finish 1 and a half years after US involvement, while WW2 finished 3 years and 10 months after US involvement), I can argue this is the point to limit bloodshed if you want another 100 years war, or 30 years war in European Soil.
Absolutely correct! What would some of those sad hypocritical bashers do
lol, they will probably point the finger on someone else......
*** if blaming America would solve all their problem lol...