Why are Democrats always against Wars?

In reading this post, and the way you present it, I would be surprised if you would be able to put the right shoe on the right foot. You can't get any more slanted than this. Why are democrats against wars? We are only against the wars we should never have been in the first place. The United States has for some time now felt the need to be the police force of the world. And it matters little that a country presents any real threat to us.

You talk about Vietnam as though it were a necessary war. Not even close. It would have been one thing if we had gone there to win but we never did. When you surround a village that you suspect contains the enemy and then send helicopters over the village to warn the civilians that it is about to be attacked only to find once you do attack that no one is there how do you ever expect to win anything? This was done time and again. Yes it attempted to protect innocent people but what is the point? If you were there you know damn well what I mean. So many people killed and for what? We walked away from that wholesale slaughter and that country has never had it so good. The only difference between it and Korea is we are still in Korea! Anything resolved there? Not a damn thing.

Then along comes the Gulf war. This was justified as we needed to protect Kuwait. That accomplished we walked away. That President knew right from wrong and did not let his advisers make him go wrong. Then along came another chance to kill more Innocent people and with very little evidence to support it we went to war with IRAQ....again. Totally unnecessary as they posed no direct threat to us. And it cost not only trillions of dollars but hundreds of thousands of lives. Are they better off. Only time will tell. Are we better off....no...because our real enemy is still out there and looking to find ways to get us and in so many ways they have already.

If you truly think that war is an absolute must, no matter what the reason, then please be the first to sign up, but don't drag down everyone else with you.

Sometimes we have to go to war? Why did we have to go to Viet Nam? Why did we have to go to Korea? Why did we have to enter into any of the wars we have been involved in for the last 50 years?

There has been no reason for any of them that is sufficient for the sacrifice of even one life. Even an "enemy" life.

We lost Viet Nam, by the way. And the dominoes didn't come tumbling, as the predictions said they would.

I'll tell you the real reason why we go to war in the modern age: it's good for business. Corporate profits. Control of markets. Making dangerous parts of the world safe for trade. It's all about money. Making the rich richer.

I really only feel qualified to talk about the wars that have taken place during my lifetime (born in 1961), but in 1935, a retired United States Marine Corps Major General and two time Medal of Honor recipient named Smedley D. Butler wrote a short book called War Is a Racket that is pretty universal. You ought to read it. Here's a brief excerpt:

"I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents."

I believe you *MEANT* to say: "Why do Demotcrats *SAY* they are 'against war!' when they have started *SO MANY*"?

Like:
War of 1812 (1812 to 1815) U.S. Casualties: 20,000 deaths, 4505 wounded in action : Democrat James Madison

The Mexican–American War (1846 to 1848) U.S. Casualties: 13,271 deaths, 4152 wounded in action: Democrat James K. Polk

American Civil War (April 12, 1861 to April 9, 1865) Casualties: 110,000 deaths, 275,200 wounded in action: Republican Abraham Lincoln

Spanish-American War (April 25–August 12, 1898) U.S.Casualties: 332 combat deaths: Republican William McKinley

World War I (August 1914 to November 11, 1918) U.S. Casualties: 53,402 deaths, 204,002 wounded in action: Democrat Woodrow Wilson

World War II (December 8, 1941 to August 14, 1945) U.S. Casualties 407,300 deaths, 670,846 wounded in action: Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt

Korean War (June 25, 1950 to July 27, 1953 )U.S. Casualties: 54,246 deaths, 8142 missing in action: Democrat Harry S. Truman

Vietnam (U.S. involvement 1961- 72) U.S. Casualties: 58,193 deaths, 153,303 wounded in action, 1948 missing in action: Democrat John F. Kennedy

Gulf War (August 2, 1990 to February 28, 1991) U.S. Casualties: 378 deaths, less than 1000 wounded in action: Republican George H. W. Bush

Afghanistan War (October 7, 2001 to present) U.S. Casualties: 1098 deaths, 2379 wounded in action: Republican George W. Bush

Iraq War (March 20, 2003 to December 15, 2011) U.S. Casualties: 4,404 deaths; 31,827 wounded in action: Republican George W. Bush

6 Democrat Wars Democrat caused War Deaths: 552,166
5 Republican Wars Republican caused War Deaths (excluding the Civil War): 6,258 Republican caused War Deaths *INCLUDING* the Civil War: 116,212