Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (145314)	9/10/2004 12:34:10 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

As for the damage of the war itself yes it was extensive but if the Communists didn't want it to happen perhaps they shouldn't have engaged in a war of agression against the South. As the wife beater always says, "She made me do it, she just wouldn't shut up." And if the North had just accepted what WE wanted, and shut up, we wouldn't have HAD to create a hell on earth in that nation with millions of deaths. And then leave.

To: TimF who wrote (145314)	9/10/2004 12:45:27 PM
From: GST	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<but in many ways it was after the war> Our intruding on their drive to unify their country set the stage for what followed after the war. Those who collaborated with us were treated as traitors to their own country -- they received brutal treatment and that is a fact. But what would the course have been if we had not intervened? It is highly unlikely that the unification of the country would have been anywhere near as brutal. We set the stage. They died on the stage we set. Who is to blame? Our role was central to the millions who died in the war and those who suffered after the war. Traitors who help foreign invaders to kill millions of your countrymen are unlikely to be treated kindly.