Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

RocRizzo55

(980 posts)
4. Yes to all
Tue Jan 2, 2024, 06:17 AM
Jan 2024

Less blood, more talk. Though some may like violence, and revenge, it is not the only option. Many of those that you mentioned, and others were only resolved through violent means, due to leadership believing more in the military, than in negotiation. Then again, it may be a mostly male thing.
Pear Harbor has long been refuted as a means for the US to enter WWII. Read your history. Many in the US did not want to get involved in WWII until after Pearl Harbor.

An eye for an eye leaves many blind, so yes, it applies to ALL situations.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Israel/Palestine»They're Calling Ethnic Cl...»Reply #4