> From: Julia Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Starting a war against another > country isn't something > > that has happened in the US in recent times (Gulf of Tonkin, not > > withstanding). It was easy to tell the good guys from the > bad guys. The > > bad guys started the war; the good guys finished it (Vietnam not > > withstanding). I don't know, I'm not articulating very well. > > How recent is recent? I mean, Gulf of Tonkin happened before > I was born. I > don't consider that "recent". :) I was thinking a lot less recent than that. I started typing "in my lifetime" but changed it to recent because I'm not that old. I'm not a history major and am probably missing something but: WWI - US didn't start, but US finished it WWII - US didn't start, but US finished it Korea - US didn't start, but US responded if never actually finished it. Vietnam - US didn't start it, but US responded and lost. Gulf War I - US didn't start it, but US responded and finished it (depending on your point of view) I'll ignore things like the invasions of Dominican Republic, Panama, Haiti for now. Those probably disprove my point, actually. But I don't think any of them qualify for the definition of "war" in my book. Previous to WWI, the US definitely starts some wars for selfish reasons. I can think of examples of the Mexican American War (which was started because we wanted their land) and the Spanish American War. Definitely not started for the best of purposes... - jmh _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
