The reasons for war are whatever people believe to be valid and beneficial reasons. Their misunderstanding comes in their thinking. If you communicate the correct understanding, you will change their thinking, and thus influence their actions.

If Britain/France communicated the correct understanding to Hitler that no violations of any treaty or sovereignty would be tolerated, Hitler would have backed off when he crossed the Rhineland. The De-Mil Zone part of the treaty.

You may think aggressors are insane, but they’re really not.

The truth is, however, that there are at the very least as many causes of war as there have been wars. There is no universal necessary condition that we can mitigate and by doing so avoid all war. There will always be aggressors and maniacs and maniac aggressors that will manage to find a reason to war.

On the other hand, there is an historically validated cause of peace, and that constant is victory.

I’m very glad I found your blog.

yours/
peter.

Tequila has Five posts in succession… Maybe brevity isn’t so much wit, as it requires a wit to quote

If Tequila was actually paying attention, he would have noticed that it wasn’t Wafa Sultan that did the article. Sometimes you lose your head, if you go too fast.

Tequila, Jacksonianism boils down to one thing. How many people are you willing to kill to protect this here little 5 year old American child?

Canadian mouses say zero. American eagles say 1,000 for 1.

Most Jacksonians wouldn’t really have a problem with the United States sending a Seal team backed by a Marine MEU to Aruba, and finding justice for an American citizen. Zero problems.

Tequila, you got to go find and google Jacksonianism and actually read about it. Because American political spectrums are not like Canadian ones.

The reason why we invaded Iraq is because Saddam wouldn’t return the American POW he held, the pilot that crashed.

Since Saddam didn’t show us his body or the person alive and speaking, Saddam was going down. If I was Bush’s advisor, that’s what I would have told him to say and do.

If Bush only had the Democrat’s ruthlessness at stoking up the public thirst for war like Roosevelt, Kennedy, and the Democrats in the South during our Civil War had done. If Bush had been as ruthless, he would be far more successful, period. Everyone likes a winner and everyone hates a loser.

Bush says,

“We don’t leave anyone behind, no matter how low the odds.”

It sounds a lot better than,

“I am confident we will find WMDs”.

*Snorts*

You don’t “fire up” the public by saying WMDs are out there.

Therefore, such states should not enjoy the protection of territorial sovereignty that the UN gives other states.

Poor TequilaMockingBird is evidently very impressed by al Jazeera’s sanitized English website. TMB should read MEMRI & Palestinian Media Watch for translations of the vitriol & hatred that al Jazeera & other Arab media outlets broadcast to the Arab world, cheerleaders of terrorism as they all are. While TMB is at it a visit to HonestReporting& for a look at US news outlet distortions might also be in order.

I’m worried by neoneocon’s “Jacksonian” proposition which seems to be, boiled down, that the US should exercise its overwhelming military superiority to crush any government or faction that opposes it.

With the above statement TMB’s reading comprehension gets a failing grade. Please, TMB, read more carefully: The driving belief of the Jacksonian school of thought is that the first priority of the U.S. Government in both foreign and domestic policy is the physical security and economic well-being of the American populace. Jacksonians believe that the US shouldn’t seek out foreign quarrels, but if a war starts, the basic belief is “there’s no substitute for victory” — and Jacksonians will do pretty much whatever is required to make that victory happen. But misplaced worry is ever the hallmark of anti-warriordom. They worry all the time about the prospect of a Coalition victory in Iraq(Heaven forbid!) but never seem to worry about the Islamists. Up is down, in is out, white is black.

Bush’s mind was a clean slate when he was elected: He couldn’t have found Iraq on a map. His claque of neocon advisers wanted, above all, conquest of Iraq. 9/11 was not a reason but an excuse.

This is a bit different than most anti-warrior ad hominem attacks on Bush. Most claim Bush had already made up his mind to topple Saddam even before he was elected. TMB’s version has him influenced by a “claque” after election. I’m wondering why TMB thinks Presidents hire advisors — to ignore them?

TMB, 9/11 was neither the reason nor the excuse for action against Saddam. Saddam’s harboring of terrorists & his failure(for over 10 years!) to abide by the conditions of his defeat after he was kicked out of Kuwait were a couple of reasons for the toppling of Saddam. There are many more reasons, but 9/11 itself had nothing to do directly with the toppling of Saddam, except as an horrific example of the end result of a timid US foreign policy in the years after Vietnam.

Folks like TMB must think the terrorists & the despots that use them as proxies make threats just for fun. Hamas threatens death to all Americans & Israelis? Not to worry — they are just letting off some good natured steam. Bin Laden extols the virtues of the Caliphate? Just a sweet fellow momentarily upset. Apparently nothing the enemy says(or does) has any effect on the TMB’s of the world.