I think that aggressiveness and greed are basic flaws in all humans.
Good points Antigone.
Look at animal kingdom, there are wars everywhere you look. Resources are always limited, that's the problem for life on earth. Eat or be eaten.
Well, these were the useful traits when we were hunter gatherers. Very important when protecting your group, and hunting territory against other tribes.Now we want to create one group/happy global village, so these traits are becoming a nuisance. Educating youths help a lot, but it is a constant fight against nature, these traits are hardwired to the brain too.
United States? they always joining most of the wars, like WW2, WW3, irak invations, etc
I would imagine that you have no idea of how much influence the isolationists in the US had, especially in WW1.(or how many there were)
Unless of course you intend to ignore completely any and all complicated factors that slowly drag a country into a conflict and simply deem all conflicts as examples of aggression.
Of course not. I don't think the US is the correct answer to the question presented here. I think Spain has been more aggressive historically, for example. Switzerland is a rare European example of a particularly non-aggressive country; there are only a few other European countries that are like that, like Estonia. So there are plenty of countries that can be placed as more aggressive than the US, at least when you look at the history as a whole.
, either.
I do try to frame my posts in light of the thread/questions. In the case of my first post it was clearly to answer the apparent use of involvement in the world wars to cite an example of aggression.
The 'invasion' of Canada, while very true, was hardly that in reality.
Yeah... I think you have been responding like I was disagreeing with you more than I actually was. I was hoping to explore a different aspect of the question of whether or not the US is/was aggressive, not to refute you directly. I totally agree that the World Wars are bad examples regarding US aggression. If anything, they are good examples of German aggression.
How would you go about describing its nuances? Sure, it was intended primarily for tactical reasons, but it was definitely an aggressive invasion, no?
I'm not sure I can make up my mind with regard to the question, especially because it's so variable. I mean, I had brought up Spain earlier, but Spain has had periods of general non-aggression, including right now. Japan is another example of a country that has a huge disparity between its most aggressive and least aggressive periods (although their aggressive period serves as a good refutation to the idea that Europeans are uniquely aggressive). The British (esp. English) are an intriguing possibility, but it's hard to forget that they weren't really the aggressors in the World Wars, as Antigone mentions.
How about the Goths? Is that too far back?
I probably did jump to conclusions. For that I apologize.
I was sort of on guard since out brief flurry the other week when I questioned the self-identity of another. In that case, I had been long aware that the person's political tastes were far removed from that of the people about whom he was professing kinship of blood and lifestyle.
Much to my chagrin, I wound up explaining a position that really was between that member and me.
I would ask that, prior to responding to such posts that are clearly in response to another, give the whole picture a minute before responding to mine.
About our invasion(s) of the Great White North, I would think it better to avoid the details as we could debate those until the cows come home.
I would prefer to remark that the most well known one, during the war of 1812, was more of a failed invasion than a real one. It was on the strategic side rather than the tactical one since they were confident that the Canadians would join in with them against the British. Military expeditions that are quickly repulsed are normally referred to 'abortive invasions' or something similar in history books. That event was an epic failure and it was over fairly quickly. It's kind of like calling every Germanic incursion into the Roman Empire, no matter how quickly it was sent back across the Rhine, an invasion.
Otherwise, I think that you have been a fine contributor here.
If we did the opposite question, what is the most peaceful nation or people?, certainly found ourselves the answer therefore to the question proposed here is also a response.