OKAY we tried the PNAC approach.... - Democratic Underground

Brundle_Fly

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Nov-12-05 02:51 AM
Original message

OKAY we tried the PNAC approach....

it failed.

what's next?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mestup

(756 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Nov-12-05 02:52 AM
Response to Original message

1. uh.... No Oil Spigot Left Behind?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ThoughtCriminal

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Nov-12-05 03:34 AM
Response to Original message

2. Containment

Isn't flashy, but it won the Cold War without WW-3.

The idea behind PNAC is similar to those who thought the solution to Communism would have been to go to war against the Soviet Union in '46-'48. Might have worked - if an extra 40-60 million dead (my guess) in Europe doesn't bother you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

lvx35

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Nov-12-05 03:49 AM
Response to Reply #2

3. Wow, I wonder how history would have turned out if we had!!!

we would have won, because that was before the Soviet Union had the bomb, and we had it...But communism would no longer be considered a failed system, but a utopian possibility that had been crushed by american imperialism. The whole world would might still be talking about Marx, and revolution.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ThoughtCriminal

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Nov-12-05 04:37 AM
Response to Reply #3

4. Nasty war

The United States only had a handful of nuclear weapons and the B-29, while remarkable for the time reaching the target was not guaranteed. The Soviet Union was a bit more dispersed, so I don't think that three of four atomic bombs would really be a knock out.

Taking on the Red Army in Europe in 1946 - I really don't know, but it would have been bloody. Mass starvation and continued warfare would have been devastating to the civilian population.

Would attitudes toward communism be more favorable in the aftermath? I doubt that since Stalin had pretty much given it a rather ugly reputation.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

lvx35

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Nov-12-05 05:06 AM
Response to Reply #4

6. I agree on containment totally.

Edited on Sat Nov-12-05 05:07 AM by lvx35

It would have been bad otherwise, containment is very sane. but I don't think the Marxist "fire in the minds of men" could have been contained more effectivly than just letting the Soviet union collapse. I literally think communism would look much viable today if it had fallen for military reasons rather than its own faults.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

bananas

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Nov-12-05 05:45 AM
Response to Reply #6

7. Containment of what?

Exactly what do you guys want to "contain"?
Containment of religious fundamentalism?
Too late, it's already taken over here.
Containment of fascism? Same thing.
Containment of Red China?
Those "communists" are keeping our economy afloat.
Containment of Iraq? Never a threat to us.
Containment of Iran? Also not a threat to us.
Back in 2000, we weren't at war with anyone.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

lvx35

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Nov-13-05 01:17 AM
Response to Reply #7

8. containment of iraq verses invasion.

if iraq used wmds they would be counter attacked in similar ways. we are talking about how much better this doctrine was over pre-emtive war.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

cornermouse

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Nov-12-05 04:46 AM
Response to Original message

5. Well no.

We're not done yet. There are still "adjustments" and the nuclears. We just have to try harder. :sarcasm:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Mon Apr 29th 2024, 11:11 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.