Oh no, by all means keep it in our memories, lest we forget what doesn't work.
Well, isn't that what any nation should do? In any case it appears very similar mistakes have and are being made in Iraq, so who remembers what is a little moot, but I digress.
My side? Well, you asked:
Boer, First, Second, Malayan, Korean, Vietnam, East Timor, Afghanistan, Iraq.
Most all of 'em from start to finish.
But that's the country I call home, It's not really where I'm FROM. Same as you good self I'd suggest, Bricky. I could seriously muddy your waters by telling you of an ancestral line that as shown a propensity for conquest that would make Dubya weep with desire, but I digress further.
So we've come to this then have we, stats? My team / your team. IMHO you trivialise the whole discussion when you want statistics like that. How do you stack up against the British Empire Hmm? Or the Ottoman Turks, Alexander the Great, hell, while we're at it, the Romans?? Hell, I nearly forgot Napoleon.
The ability to prevail in most conflicts largely due to crushing weight of numbers and weaponry, in MODERN history, hardly equates to proof of moral right, don't you think?
And let's not forget who the "willing" are. U.K.- well, Blair's weak and they can hardly afford to miss this one if they still want to power-share the running of the world now can they? Aussies?- another downpayment on the busted ANZUS treaty, just in case Indonesia look our way. The Europeans that did go? Most of 'em needed the money for their coming- out ball when they appeared from behind the Iron Curtain and needed a new dress to wear at the NATO piss-up.
One current = Iraq, one undecided = Which??
