Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Many people died in the Soviet Union before the "iron curtain" came down.
They paid the price to being inferior to Russia in military might.
Hungary in 1956 comes to mind.
Contrast the 1956 Hungarian revolution to the 1989 Polish Revolution which was totally nonviolent and the Polish in contrast to the Hungarians got what they wanted. Oh and they didn't get butchered either.
Compare the historic fate of Prussian and Imperial Germany to its much less militaristic neighbors. Sweden, Netherlands, Denmark, Switzerland, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, etc. None of these countries were hyper militarized and none of these nations were bombed to ruins and had their populations die by the millions.
Contrast the 1956 Hungarian revolution to the 1989 Polish Revolution which was totally nonviolent and the Polish in contrast to the Hungarians got what they wanted. Oh and they didn't get butchered either.
33 years later
The Hungarians didn't want to suffer another 33 years
Compare the historic fate of Prussian and Imperial Germany to its much less militaristic neighbors. Sweden, Netherlands, Denmark, Switzerland, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, etc. None of these countries were hyper militarized and none of these nations were bombed to ruins and had their populations die by the millions.
Compare the historic fate of Prussian and Imperial Germany to its much less militaristic neighbors. Sweden, Netherlands, Denmark, Switzerland, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, etc. None of these countries were hyper militarized and none of these nations were bombed to ruins and had their populations die by the millions.
But all those instances you cited are failures above the military level. State department, even POTUS mistakes. They're not military failures. You sure you're on the right thread?
That does nothing to diminish my point. The US government chose those failed paths because they had a large military and a large military-industrial complex at their disposal. When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail. And sure, if that hammer is being used to try to drive screws, it's not the hammer's fault, it's the user, but you don't look at the mess created by using the hammer and say "that hammer sure is an awesome tool!" But of course a hammer is an inanimate object, the military is comprised of sentient people. The upper brass that keeps allowing itself to be used in follies, often encourages being used in those follies to justify their budget, is complicit. And at some point the young man or woman who signs up, willingly yields his/her free will and personal judgement to the chain of command despite this dubious history is complicit. And the Pentagon, White House, etc. have able to get away with this stuff as much as they have because they stoke this mythologizing of the military and the use of military action, and so the public that buys into that is complicit as well.
Compare the historic fate of Prussian and Imperial Germany to its much less militaristic neighbors. Sweden, Netherlands, Denmark, Switzerland, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, etc. None of these countries were hyper militarized and none of these nations were bombed to ruins and had their populations die by the millions.
Compare the historic fate of Prussian and Imperial Germany to its much less militaristic neighbors. Sweden, Netherlands, Denmark, Switzerland, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, etc. None of these countries were hyper militarized and none of these nations were bombed to ruins and had their populations die by the millions.
Compare the historic fate of Prussian and Imperial Germany to its much less militaristic neighbors. Sweden, Netherlands, Denmark, Switzerland, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, etc. None of these countries were hyper militarized and none of these nations were bombed to ruins and had their populations die by the millions.
That does nothing to diminish my point. The US government chose those failed paths because they had a large military and a large military-industrial complex at their disposal. When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail. And sure, if that hammer is being used to try to drive screws, it's not the hammer's fault, it's the user, but you don't look at the mess created by using the hammer and say "that hammer sure is an awesome tool!" But of course a hammer is an inanimate object, the military is comprised of sentient people. The upper brass that keeps allowing itself to be used in follies, often encourages being used in those follies to justify their budget, is complicit. And at some point the young man or woman who signs up, willingly yields his/her free will and personal judgement to the chain of command despite this dubious history is complicit. And the Pentagon, White House, etc. have able to get away with this stuff as much as they have because they stoke this mythologizing of the military and the use of military action, and so the public that buys into that is complicit as well.
Okay, I'll give you that. It's one way of looking at it...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
