Probably, but were not going to go to war just to make a few government contractors rich.
Is it time for US Force to leave Japan?
- Thread starter engalaa
- Start date
Probably, but were not going to go to war just to make a few government contractors rich.
Sukotto
先輩
- 9 Jul 2003
- 1,426
- 20
The film Why We Fight documents how a standing "military-industrial complex" (a phrase coined by Prez Dwight D Eisenhower in his outgoing speech) makes it much, much easier to go to war.
This may have been true during the industrial era in Eisenhower's time.
Golgo 13
後輩
- 18 Nov 2008
- 14
- 0
Not really. The money we poured in are the taxpayers money, so if someone had an agenda, it's flawless thus far because they didn't have to spend a cent. They just pick up contracts and make money.
Then the economy should be booming right. All these contractors makeing money off Iraq.
Sukotto
先輩
- 9 Jul 2003
- 1,426
- 20
Militarism has become so pervasive in our culture in the US we often don't even notice it. Why do fighter jets sometimes fly over the opening of a Packers' game? What the heck does that have to do with a sporting event?
And with all those so-called "think-tanks" that pretty much write policy that congress members wind up making into actual policy.
These "think-tanks" have their own "researchers" and publish reports saying things like "all these countries are a threat to the US". Or maybe they use the word "potential" and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
It is actually US policy to not even allow any country to even attempt to get close to a level of military that the US has. What's up with that? Paranoia?
US bases remain in Japan (and over 700 admitted in over 130 different countries, but that's another story) because of paranoia with regards to China (capitalist at this point in history). Or some people's warped ideas that they have to act tuff. But that might have to do with paranoia too.
:sorry:
Golgo 13
後輩
- 18 Nov 2008
- 14
- 0
Most of the big money was made earlier in the War. Ever heard of Haliburton and Blackwater Security? I'm sure you did because both have been involved heavily in news scandals regarding Iraq especially the $$$ they made. They were both contracted by the United States government and were paid for by the U.S taxpayers money. I'm not sure but I think a majority of contractors are hired by the U.S government and not particularly off the Iraqi people.
Uchite
後輩
- 16 Jan 2006
- 136
- 7
I think that during the World War II era and about up to the Korean War, patriotism and U.S. nationalism was at an all-time high. Going to war was seen as "heroic" and "patriotic".
With the invention of television, the veterans coming back from Vietnam and questioning what they did, why they did it, and the ever-more revealing truth that war is not fun, people really do get killed and it is not like the movies was when people starting questoning the whole idea and reason for going to war and killing people who have personally done you no harm whatsoever.
It became more and more evident that wars are fought not for or about the so-called "warriors", but only to serve the politicians' egos and greed! "Fight for your country!" No such thing anymore. If there was ever such a thing!Again, someone who has watched to much politically influenced TV in the US. So you would be for saddam having the capabilities the US has? You would be for Iran and North Korea having Nuclear weapons. You would be for China swallowing Taiwan?
So how is halliburon and blackwater going to make all of us a ton of cash?
Last edited:
I think that during the World War II era and about up to the Korean War, patriotism and U.S. nationalism was at an all-time high. Going to war was seen as "heroic" and "patriotic".
With the invention of television, the veterans coming back from Vietnam and questioning what they did, why they did it, and the ever-more revealing truth that war is not fun, people really do get killed and it is not like the movies was when people starting questoning the whole idea and reason for going to war and killing people who have personally done you no harm whatsoever.
I think you hit the nail on the head. People are expiriencing the true realities of war and that is why they are against it. Not because the threat is real. War has never presented itself the way it has before to civilians. Especially when many of us have not been affected by war on our own land since the civil war/WW2. It is easy to see why americans are so by themselves when they think about it.
Sukotto
先輩
- 9 Jul 2003
- 1,426
- 20
I just want to say I don't really watch that much television.
And hardly any tv news. Local if any. Since we don't have tv, let alone cable in our house, I only get to see the Colbert Report and Daily Show once in a while. They are funny. But they are much too light on Democrats, to be sure. As if Democrats aren't just as pro-US empire as the Republicans. Where the heck is the politically influenced tv that opposes empire, let alone acknowledges that is what the US?
How much of the world's resources do we in the "west" or in the US use?
More than our fair share for sure. And it is mostly the few that benefit from it.
The whole world is for sale?
Some people's ideology that answers yes the the previous question does get imposed on others.
yeah, it's empire.
Why might some people want to get weapons to defend themselves?
And the resources of their lands for their people?
Sukotto
先輩
- 9 Jul 2003
- 1,426
- 20
I'd say US forces in Japan make it more unsafe rather than safe.
Things were going in a pretty decent direction at the end of the 90s, North & South were doing all sorts of things together - on their own. Cultural exchanges, trade, family visits, sporting events. Didn't N & S even enter together at one of the Olympics?
But then the war criminal George W Bush and his regime came along and somehow Iran, Iraq, & North Korea were all in cahoots.
I'm currently reading North Korea Another Country by Bruce Cumings and I'd say he does a pretty good job at recalling most everything that has been going on with the North.
He is no fan of the regime, but more phallic symbols aren't going to make us safer.
Why?
Just because everyone was trying (too hard) to play 'look how we love each other' while all along the north was lying, manipulating, violation agreements, and continuing their nuclear weapons program as they damn well pleased does not mean "things were going in a pretty decent direction." It means many nations were being played for fools by that Shemp-looking little lunatic.
"War criminal"? Well, now what you are all about is very clear.
What phallic symbols?
scieck
先輩
- 1 Feb 2006
- 47
- 2
Yet there are still misguided barely adults that enroll them self to became soldiers, often backed up by families, keen and proud, to take a snap shot with their all grown up child in uniform.... what are they thinking ?
Imaging how wonderful and peaceful our Earth would be if all the people of the planet some how wakes up and realized that to become a soldier is pretty much the dumpiest thing you can do with your life.
scieck
先輩
- 1 Feb 2006
- 47
- 2
Yeh sorry I forgot to mention that it would be wonderful if along with soldiers, brainwashed like you also wake up.
Wake up and leave ignorant big mouths like you on your own? Sounds good, but like it or not there are bigger things at stake than just self-delusional prey like yourself.
scieck
先輩
- 1 Feb 2006
- 47
- 2
Do you work for the government by any chance ?
Yes there are bigger things at stake namely:
- trying to stop multinational, oil corporation, and bankers taking over the planet and screwing with little minds like yours.
scieck
先輩
- 1 Feb 2006
- 47
- 2
And does nothing in your country's history suggest to you the value and importance of a strong military?
scieck
先輩
- 1 Feb 2006
- 47
- 2
I don't subscribe to any label, labeling people only serves the purpose of satisfying the needs of the labeler.
It only suggest me that through the centuries England has made many enemies by perpetrating aggressive policies towards other countries and cultures, therefore initiating a vicious loop that makes this country spending more and more money on army and military organization, rather than for example spending money in bringing the health service and education system to the 20th century, yes 20th century, 21st is asking to much from a country that is manufacturing less and less, is exporting little, and has little natural resources (compare to other countries).
For England is vital to impose them self military as this country well being is based on consuming other countries resources.
This is neither fair or right, the whole planet needs to work together to progress as human beings.
Besides religions, all the other wars are for pure power struggles, economic interests, control over resources, nothing has changed for centuries, only the lies to keep people like you happy about their government mischiefs have changed.
A little side note i feel making:
I have nothing against British or English, I like them, that is why I leaved in this country for the past 15 years, are the government policies that I don't agree with.
Last edited:
