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.
Probably, but were not going to go to war just to make a few government contractors rich.
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.
I don't even know where to start with this post. Just the current state of the economy should discredit this whole argument. After 6 years, we have poured more money into Iraq than we could ever recouperate even if we had some sort of agenda to do so. Maybe the accountant who came up with this conspiracy should be fired.
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.
This may have been true during the industrial era in Eisenhower's time.
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 $$$ they made. They were both contracted by the United States government and were paid for by the U.S taxpayers money. I'm not sure but I think a majority of contractors are hired by the U.S government and not particularly off the Iraqi people.Then the economy should be booming right. All these contractors makeing money off Iraq.
The film Why We Fight documents how a standing "military-industrial complex" (a phrase coined by Prez Dwight D Eisenhower in his outgoing speech) makes it much, much easier to go to war.
Militarism has become so pervasive in our culture in the US we often don't even notice it. Why do fighter jets sometimes fly over the opening of a Packers' game? What the heck does that have to do with a sporting event?
And with all those so-called "think-tanks" that pretty much write policy that congress members wind up making into actual policy.
These "think-tanks" have their own "researchers" and publish reports saying things like "all these countries are a threat to the US". Or maybe they use the word "potential" and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
It is actually US policy to not even allow any country to even attempt to get close to a level of military that the US has. What's up with that? Paranoia?
US bases remain in Japan (and over 700 admitted in over 130 different countries, but that's another story) because of paranoia with regards to China (capitalist at this point in history). Or some people's warped ideas that they have to act tuff. But that might have to do with paranoia too.
:sorry:
So how is halliburon and blackwater going to make all of us a ton of cash?Most of the big money was made earlier in the War. Ever heard of Haliburton and Blackwater Security? I'm sure you did because both have been involved heavily in news scandals regarding Iraq especially the $$$ 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.
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. :shock: 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! :clueless: "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?
So now with the whole North Korea situation, do we need US forces in Japan?
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.
He is no fan of the regime, but more phallic symbols aren't going to make us safer.
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.
How fortunate for you that there are still people who care enough to protect your right to spew your ignorant garbage that they are willing to devote their lives to it. How very fortunate for you.
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.
The narrower the mind the more they like to label people.Ah, yes of course, a conspiracy nut! It all fits.
and ?So, you're from London, right?
The narrower the mind the more they like to label people.
and ?
I don't subscribe to any label, labeling people only serves the purpose of satisfying the needs of the labeler.You didn't mention if the label was correct. Nevermind, I think I see.
And does nothing in your country's history suggest to you the value and importance of a strong military?