• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

War is not moral

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Since Citizen doesn't seem to be around to post this this year. I will.

One of the biggest humps to return this country to liberty, is not speaking out against the constant unconstitutional wars the politicians send our families of to die and suffer in.

Here's a great clip Citizen brought up before ......

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...&mid=5B905507E22E7E6FE2215B905507E22E7E6FE221

FUQ...James Garner line in a movie.
 

NosePicker

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2014
Messages
64
Location
San Diego

I tend to agree. However, I thought the president had the authority to use military force for a short amount of time without congressional approval ?

Personally I think the president should have gone to congress and received approval.
 

Rusty Young Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
1,548
Location
Árida Zona
I tend to agree. However, I thought the president had the authority to use military force for a short amount of time without congressional approval ?

Personally I think the president should have gone to congress and received approval.

At that point you start getting into how the "war powers" have been distorted to increase the power of the presidency.

But I generally agree that war should only be fought in defense, either in response to an attack, or as a reaction to imminent (and credible) assault; acting as a police nation is best left for movies starring wooden puppets.

BTW: Where is Citizen? I haven't seen him around for a month or two now.:confused: Hope he's alright.
 
Last edited:

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
Libya

Sent from an unspecified mobile phone using unspecified software.

1. do you have a cite for your guess?

2. i am of the belief US armed forces supported a UN military action in that country in 2011.

the term recent, within the last year is relative to your guess.

thanks for playing jeopardy.

ipse
 
Last edited:

hhofent

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
130
Location
Iowa

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc

SFCRetired

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
1,764
Location
Montgomery, Alabama, USA
All of them since WWII.

The only justified war was the War for independence.

The justification for Korea was simply this; If President Truman had not authorized General MacArthur to use U.S. forces to enforce the United Nations' declaration to North Korea, it would have resulted in the same situation (League of Nations) which led us into WWII. The only thing I fault President Truman on was that he refused to allow MacArthur to use sufficient force to push the Chinese back out of Korea when they entered on the side of North Korea.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
mor·al
adjective \ˈmȯr-əl, ˈmär-\

: concerning or relating to what is right and wrong in human behavior

: based on what you think is right and good

: considered right and good by most people : agreeing with a standard of right behavior

un·con·sti·tu·tion·al
adjective \ˌən-ˌkän(t)-stə-ˈtü-shnəl, -ˈtyü-, -shə-nəl\

: not allowed by the constitution of a country or government : not constitutional

Which is it we're posed ta be talkin bout? The title don't seem like it matches the op too much.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
The justification for Korea was simply this; If President Truman had not authorized General MacArthur to use U.S. forces to enforce the United Nations' declaration to North Korea, it would have resulted in the same situation (League of Nations) which led us into WWII. The only thing I fault President Truman on was that he refused to allow MacArthur to use sufficient force to push the Chinese back out of Korea when they entered on the side of North Korea.

IF IF IF...not a justification. Not justified any more than If I don't kill my neighbor who looks like he might attack me someday, or this "may" happen.

Also did congress declare the war?
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
What section in the constitution allowed it?
All war powers rest with congress, it's right in there.
To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;
Congress did not say no to any war.....so, they were all "authorized" by the constitution.

The issue is not whether the war is good/bad, right/wrong, moral/immoral. The issue is and always has been, once "in it" we must be in it to win it.

When the full might of the military is focused on winning, casualties are low. 91 Gulf war, what, 200+ killed, a third by friendly fire, and the war was over and done in ~100 hours.

Was that war moral? Was it just? What did matter to us if Kuwait remained in Iraqi hands? Especially now that we are exporting oil. Nope the war was not moral, it was not just, we should have let those folks over there fix their own problems. But we did go to war over there.

A general dislike for government waging war it understandable. I certainly don't like our country going to war. I did not know anyone, while I was in, that "wanted" to go to war whether it was "authorized" properly, or improperly. The propriety of the war was the last thing on my mind.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
All war powers rest with congress, it's right in there.Congress did not say no to any war.....so, they were all "authorized" by the constitution.

The issue is not whether the war is good/bad, right/wrong, moral/immoral. The issue is and always has been, once "in it" we must be in it to win it.

When the full might of the military is focused on winning, casualties are low. 91 Gulf war, what, 200+ killed, a third by friendly fire, and the war was over and done in ~100 hours.

Was that war moral? Was it just? What did matter to us if Kuwait remained in Iraqi hands? Especially now that we are exporting oil. Nope the war was not moral, it was not just, we should have let those folks over there fix their own problems. But we did go to war over there.

A general dislike for government waging war it understandable. I certainly don't like our country going to war. I did not know anyone, while I was in, that "wanted" to go to war whether it was "authorized" properly, or improperly. The propriety of the war was the last thing on my mind.

Actually it says the war must be declared by congress, it doesn't allow it just because they don't say anything.

There is a major question of right and wrong or good and bad, immoral or moral. If we are wrong get the F out, winning just because you are in it is a silly reason.

Foreign involvement isn't constitutional and actually warned against by the founders.
 

SFCRetired

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
1,764
Location
Montgomery, Alabama, USA
IF IF IF...not a justification. Not justified any more than If I don't kill my neighbor who looks like he might attack me someday, or this "may" happen.

Also did congress declare the war?

Since North Korea committed an act of aggression as defined by the United Nations' charter, since the United States was, ill-advisedly in my opinion, signatory to that charter, it was within the powers granted to the President to authorize the use of military force in support of the United Nations. In that particular case, Congress did not have to declare war.

I will say that the actions and words of American politicians led North Korea into believing they could commit aggression and get away with it.

The original statement was "War is not moral". Unprovoked aggression, whether by nations or by individuals, is not moral. Self-defense or defense of others, again whether by nations or by individuals, is quite possibly the very height of morality.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Since North Korea committed an act of aggression as defined by the United Nations' charter, since the United States was, ill-advisedly in my opinion, signatory to that charter, it was within the powers granted to the President to authorize the use of military force in support of the United Nations. In that particular case, Congress did not have to declare war.

I will say that the actions and words of American politicians led North Korea into believing they could commit aggression and get away with it.

The original statement was "War is not moral". Unprovoked aggression, whether by nations or by individuals, is not moral. Self-defense or defense of others, again whether by nations or by individuals, is quite possibly the very height of morality.

Other documents like being part of UN, does not trump the constitution. The constitution specifically spells out who declares war.

War is not moral was the title of the video.

Self defense is moral, involving ourselves in the disputes of foreigners is not.
 
Top