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.
Not really, previous generations have always been more violent... especially when it comes to war.
We live in a pretty quiet, peaceful era when it comes to war, and the wars that are fought today are very different than wars fought in previous generations
We also have the distinction of being the only country to have used nukes.
The lunatics in DC have been at it while
The problem with war is that politicians interfere. The politicians get us into war, they then should step back and let the military do what it does best. Until the military decides its over. I guarandamntee there would be less conflicts than now.
The problem with war is that politicians interfere. The politicians get us into war, they then should step back and let the military do what it does best. Until the military decides its over. I guarandamntee there would be less conflicts than now.
This isn't a banana republic. This country should NEVER step back and LET the military do anything without strong civilian oversight. The military should always be kept on an extremely tight leash.
And for the military to have the right to declare when a war is over is beyond ridiculous.
The problem with war is that politicians interfere. The politicians get us into war, they then should step back and let the military do what it does best. Until the military decides its over. I guarandamntee there would be less conflicts than now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter
This isn't a banana republic. This country should NEVER step back and LET the military do anything without strong civilian oversight. The military should always be kept on an extremely tight leash.
And for the military to have the right to declare when a war is over is beyond ridiculous.
Man, you're living in the wrong country.
DD I can somewhat see what he is saying. The politicians were the idiots that got us into Vietnam, as well as Afghanistan, and Iraq! They're the ones treating our military like a damn police force! So, if we're going to go to war, then we better damn well be willing to commit as we did in WWII! Otherwise, why waste our time, and risk American lives trying to solve other people's problems, that obviously don't want them solved anyway? Better yet. How about they cut out the loopholes where certain privileged individuals avoid serving on the front lines while the average joes end up having to go there! Let some of these empty suits grab a gun and head to the front lines, and then watch how our involvement drops in meddling in the affairs of other nations.
So, we should have let Germany take over the world, twice?
And we should NOT have retaliated against Japan?
"Doth protest too much"
It IS amazing how some people have their heads so far in the sand that they don't realize that there ARE bad people in the world.
"Can't we all just get along"
Ok, so that's three wars justified. Congratulations. You picked Hitler and the country that attacked us on two occasions. Try a little harder to get past the typical 'our military rocks' mentality though. Every war after WWII, why did we do it? The majority of them were **** measuring contests between us and the USSR. The various conflicts in the Middle East that have been occurring for the last 20-30 years have been about economic gain.
You're right of course, there are bad people in the world, but why are so many being ignored. Kim Jong Un is objectively the worst dictator currently alive, yet our only true act against them was a James Franco movie. African and South American dictators and warlords run free. And probably one of the worst offenders of war crimes in the last few decades is still at large, but it would be rather hard for the US to invade itself.
Look at how far the rest of the world has gone by avoiding an overwhelming military budget.
We could start by removing our military forces from the Middle East. The fact that we are supporting a Feudal Kingdom is both embarrassing and obscene. We do not have any "friends" in that area. We only have financial interests. Those are not worth spending our wealth or casualties. It is [ast time to leave the entire area.
They've allowed us to become the police of the world, thereby offloading what should be their fair share of their own defense onto our shoulders. Our military spending has allowed them to surpass us in just about every area BUT the military.
It's an exercise in futility... and we are following history. See: Fall of the Roman Empire for a glimpse of where we are heading.
The problem with war is that politicians interfere. The politicians get us into war, they then should step back and let the military do what it does best. Until the military decides its over. I guarandamntee there would be less conflicts than now.
I can think of one other incident that would have involved nuclear weapons if people let you have your way. Korea would be no more, and I imagine Vietnam as well. No, your idea that the military should not answer to civilian leadership is as bad as any other right-wing idea. We've seen this.
DD I can somewhat see what he is saying. The politicians were the idiots that got us into Vietnam, as well as Afghanistan, and Iraq! They're the ones treating our military like a damn police force! So, if we're going to go to war, then we better damn well be willing to commit as we did in WWII!
Yes, if winning the war was their intent. Since winning is secondary to making certain entities freakin wealthy, the last 50 years of losing wars have been a stellar success for them. Rinse, repeat.
There has been no legitimate war since WWII, period. The initial several weeks of bombs reigning down on Afghanistan should have been enough. It worked in Libya, and we had no business putting boots on the ground once we had decimated the Taliban and sent them into the hills. Not to mention that we could have done this 100X as needed, and not lost a single life in the process.
Nuking Japan was probably unnecessary, but then again....we did what we had to do. They DID start if after all.
Other than that, i agree with you.
That's what we were told in grade-school history classes, yeah. But there's a long and very real history behind Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor. If you're interested in understanding history rather than blindly regurgitating what you were told as a kid... well google is a good place to start.
I mean this is the Information Age. There's really no excuse for such a limited, ethnocentric view of the world.
Granted the Iraq\Afghan war were left out of this particular graph but it shows up until 2000 as generally declining.
Does no one remember the military cuts in the 90's? Clinton wasn't assassinated or anything over it either.
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.
