Do you know the difference between an invasion of a country and going to war against a country?
829224
Yes, I know the difference. Does our president is the question. There was the invasion of Normandy during the second world war, operation Overlord. A valid invasion in the course of a declared war. What our president did when he sent our troops to invade Iraq was an act of war, as it is anytime a country invades another country without declaring war. Saddam wanted Kuwait's oil. Bush can't find Osama, so this was a diversion to placate America after 9/11, and just like Saddam's invasion of Kuwait and George's of Iraq, many innocent people were and continue to be killed.
634881
War costs money!\n\nOne complete sentence.
15565
It is a ridiculous question.  The two countries are to economically interdependent for a war to ever be waged.
700763
Well, one good thing is that you are just preventing supplies from coming into the country vs. killing people directly in battle.  However, one bad thing is that you may be starving the people in the blockaded country, which is a much more long and cruel death.
745883
the only two direct land invasion routes from foreign nations are through Mexico and Canada, (neither of which is hostile, but one has immigration issues... Canadians these days) back on track Europe and Asia have massive land borders which leave them open to attack by land in many directions... if America wished to be invaded by a European or Asian force, they would have to cross entire oceans and fight off our navy (best in the world btw) just to land troops in our borders.
1148403
It's basically who ever is on the upside of a treaty wins. Sometimes like in the WWs the central and axis powers lost by accepting an unconditional surrender (complete surrender). Sometimes it is who ever conquers the whole country, not necessarily by determined by casualties.
1043239
To some extent the policy of a country will always be against the views of some folks.\n\nAlthough there is some rationale between resisting perceived invaders this does not justify blowing up a train full of commuters in the UK or Spain, crashing planes into buildings in the US or blowing yourself up in a crown of old folks in Iraq.
227569
Dillinger is right, why would we go to war with Spain?  If we were ticking down the list of countries to invade, I think Spain would be pretty low down.  Again, we are pretty decent friends with Spain.
1098602
They are two completely different scenarios.  Vietnam was an action to stop the North from invading the South.  America won every major battle in Vietnam, but arguably lost the war.  Why?  Because we would drive the North only so far and limited our actions against them.  They eventually signed a treaty, only to break it later after we pulled out.  Iraq is different in that we are fighting hostile Iraqi citizens in their own country, and not an opposing country tying to invade.  Vietnam actually had an end strategy, to supress the North into a treaty, which we accomplished momentarily anyway.  In Iraq, the heads of state have no idea what their exit stratigy is.
1133208
You would be best served by reading a little history.  A year, day, moment does not define the "start" of a war.  War's are started due to a growing status of unresolved issues some dating ten to 100s of years old.  The "start" is really an historians reference point of declaration and is far less important than the issues leading to the "start" and the resulting consequences leading to the "surrender, truce and treaty".
687160
A war is a prolonged engagement between two military powers.  For example, I consider Vietnam a war because the US and the South Vietnamese militaries were fighting the Vietcong and the North Vietnamese militaries.  Same with the current Iraq War, two forces, prolonged engagement.  An example for a conflict is the Somalia incident back in 1991 (remember Blackhawk Down?)  Warlords over threw Somalia's government and the US and allies went in for humanitarian aid.  It was a reletively short engagement, making it a conflict.  Thats how I define wars from conflicts, but I suppose the official way is whether or not Congress declares war. (If they do, its a war.  if not, its a conflict)
719397
The USA does not go to war because of a difference in ideology. It is because of economic and defensive strategies. The war in Iraq was as much about protecting oil reserves as it was protecting US citizens from the big bad terrorists. Every country seeks to advance its financial and political interests. The US just has more resources to do it than any other nations. It follows in a long line of historical examples where a nation has gone to war on the pretence of making a better world where the actual aim was betterment of their own nation, for example the crusades, where ultimately it was just a land grab as opposed to enlightening the world to the "joys of christianity". It is, was and always will be a major issue facing the world, as nations jostle for position in the global hierarchy.
332183
no war is good for anyone.  I really think that if one coutry has a problem with another....the two leaders should duke it out and who ever is still standing wins!!  It would only cost for the flight there and back.
559927
Well a "war" is defined by an "open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations" it generally includes armed assault.  That said, WWII was a "war" b/c nations declared there be a state of hostility among themselves...the countries approached an impasse and used political pressures and militant power to try and resolve it.  \n\n\nSo, a list??  Let me try and generalize "war" in bullet-form.\n\n- Disagreement b/w one or more nations \n- Governments DECLARED OPENLY that there be a dynamic b/w the nations which includes forcefully trying to "get what they want."\n- Force in WWII included blockades, the killing of both soldiers and civilians, invading foreign territories to reach strategic targets to be destroyed, looting, raping, torture, etc. (no country is exempt from this laundry list of behaviors, some countries more guilty of certain ones than others, I won't name names).  \n\nHope my answer helped - if you need more let me know and I'll see what I can do.
391058
Afghanistan,against Russian invaders.\nthey fought for a full decade!\nwatch out AMERICA.
911913
Yes.\n\nThe difference is that Hitler started a war, and then tried to make nuclear weapons.\n\nIran is making nuclear weapons first, then they will start a war.
1031160
War is the final arm of diplomacy.  This is the way a nation gets what it needs and wants.  Sometimes a nation uses force.  It's not only about freedom, it's also about furthering our national interests, yes even keeping the oil flowing.  Sometimes its about land (the Mexican War and the Spanish American War), occasionally it's about freedoms like in WWII.