"Except For Ending Slavery, Fascism, Nazism and Communism, WAR has Never Solved Anything."
Wars sending U.S. into ruin
- Thread starter Avro
- Start date
"Except For Ending Slavery, Fascism, Nazism and Communism, WAR has Never Solved Anything."
Most of that you didn't do it on your own fyi
As for slavery, it was only with in your borders. A paper saying they were free didn't really make them free in the society did it ? It too many decades
And communism never ended. In fact it never existed. USSR and China were/are communist in name only. They were/are totalitarian dictatorships. The only way war brought the USSR down was that their involvement bankrupted them. And now China holds the US by the financial balls. Not a pretty picture. McCarthy must be spinning in his grave.
Wow, four myths in one declarative sentence. This could be a Guinness record! Did you have to cross your fingers?
Well considering that these wars have been for the sake of the US (well the US regime, I doubt your average American is getting much out of them), ... Iraq = oil (obviously), Afghanistan = gas pipeline (counters Russia/Iran), both = isolating Iran geographically, etc.
I'd say that the occasional terrorist act aside, these wars are bringing (a few in) the US far more wealth than ruin.
In the US it's because the military defence complex forms a massive portion of their economy (in conjunction profits from 'conquests'). That and if you take Iraq for instance, they get it back indirectly when their companies move in once they have control.
I suppose you could say Canada also profits from war but not it's own involvement; rather the selling of hardware. Afghanistan is more about going where the boss tells you--no real benefit afaik (oh right, I meant aside from helping the poor Afghans).
Higher when you consider that many industries directly related to the US military get grants or subsidies. US military is much more high-tech than others.
I'd say that the occasional terrorist act aside, these wars are bringing (a few in) the US far more wealth than ruin.
In the US it's because the military defence complex forms a massive portion of their economy (in conjunction profits from 'conquests'). That and if you take Iraq for instance, they get it back indirectly when their companies move in once they have control.
I suppose you could say Canada also profits from war but not it's own involvement; rather the selling of hardware. Afghanistan is more about going where the boss tells you--no real benefit afaik (oh right, I meant aside from helping the poor Afghans).
Higher when you consider that many industries directly related to the US military get grants or subsidies. US military is much more high-tech than others.
What, you never wrote any history books?
In Canada, we tend to rewrite them in order to get everything to fit nicely into today's politically-correct thinking. Some call it "education."
"Except For Ending Slavery, Fascism, Nazism and Communism, WAR has Never Solved Anything."
War and the profit motive is what created those problems.
War and the profit motive is what created those problems.
Somehow what really happened in history comes out, I have a nice little collection of history books dating back to 1858, I find that the ones written at the time of an event seem to be closest to what actually happened. I hate reading these revised politically corrected kids read today.
Canada ended slavery by a peaceful Royal decree; though I agree that in the US case, it may have been necessary. Fascism again was a necessary case along with Nazism owing to their own militaristic nature.
As for communism, what war? We had a Cold War and a few small-scale proxy wars, but do those really count as war, unless we consider economic war? In fact, the jury is still out on that one. Some argue that had we not taken an aggressive stance on the Soviets from the start, and built friendly relations with them, the Cold War would likely have ended sooner rather than later, with both sides coming out stronger than they did owing to the money saved from bloated militaries on both sides. Essentially, friendly relaitons would have let the USSR's guard down, allowing more freedom of movement, with those seeing the West wanting to incorporate those ideas into their own system. In the end, it would have been a gradual shift towards a mixed economy and eventually a gradual shift towards democracy, again, likely sooner than the Cold War ended.
Again, none of this is provable, but neither is the assertion that US military aggression ended the Cold War. Consider Vietnam and China.
So the only one I think most people would agree on is fascism and maybe slavery in some cases. As for communism, the jury is still very much out on that one.
Cold War - http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Cold_War
I personally think we just out spent the Soviets, they could not keep a growing consumer economy happy at the same time as maintaining an arms race with us. Smarter heads prevailed an the "Cold War" was put on hold for a while.
There were only really two major countries involved, the Soviet Union and the U.S. All the other countries were just chess pieces.
What makes you think those two are not also chess pieces in that they the US also ran up a debt that can never be paid off, right now your weakest spot is your $ problems. The contest was not about who could go further into debt.
Notice that when they got out of the arms race their economy got it's second wind. America just traded 'enemies', as soon as the USSR could no longer be blamed it just switched who the enemy was. Winning the cold war should have meant a decrease in spending, instead it brought and even greater spending and the target also got larger.
How can you be convicted that your country alone cannot be conned? In this case the con is letting you think you are in the drivers seat.
Notice that when they got out of the arms race their economy got it's second wind. America just traded 'enemies', as soon as the USSR could no longer be blamed it just switched who the enemy was. Winning the cold war should have meant a decrease in spending, instead it brought and even greater spending and the target also got larger.
How can you be convicted that your country alone cannot be conned? In this case the con is letting you think you are in the drivers seat.
And this is where both countries really lost their way. Instead of showing concern for their respective and each other's peoples, they cared only to push each their own respective ideology. The costs of the Cold War caused much suffering on the Soviet side, more so than if the Soviet system had just let itself putter out naturally through friendly relations. I remember one documentary recently showing how the Beatles had influenced Russian thought more than any aspect of the Cold War. The US overlooked the power of simple culture and diplomacy in actually helping the Russian people rather than trying to win a war for its own sake as a kind of macho sport.
You're right. This is where countries like Sweden were particularly smart. Mind your own business beyond whatever legitimate international obligations you may have, save your money and focus on the betterment of the people.
I should mention too that the US citizenry has suffered from the Cold War too in terms of a more unstable economy. I that what the Cold War was about? Was it all worth it in the end?
Not to make too much light of it, but you know what they say, "Hindsight is 20/20 only if you have an eye in your @sshole."
Now that we are all having this economy problem, yes we have suffered, was it because of the end of the "Cold War" new concept. I don't know. I don't think anyone wants to go back to one country always out doing another in making nuclear bombs.
Let us say that the U.S. withdraws from global involvement, money shifts from defense industry to what?
MHz suggested developing the Colorado Shale deposits. Not a bad idea, but what happens to the mechanical, electrical and aerospace engineers? They know nothing about paving roads. No, we do not have to step backwards, but forward. It will be technology that will ultimately decide our fate. Just look at what advances we have made in medical area's as a result of the space program, or the first successful nuclear bomb detonation. We still can develop the Colorado Shale deposits without displacing our scientific workers.
MHz suggested developing the Colorado Shale deposits. Not a bad idea, but what happens to the mechanical, electrical and aerospace engineers? They know nothing about paving roads. No, we do not have to step backwards, but forward. It will be technology that will ultimately decide our fate. Just look at what advances we have made in medical area's as a result of the space program, or the first successful nuclear bomb detonation. We still can develop the Colorado Shale deposits without displacing our scientific workers.