why are our presidents such war mongers? (invasion, lobby, military)
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.
As the Prussian General Carl von Clausewitz said:
"War is the continuation of diplomacy by other means"
If you're the President of Uruguay, you have neither the military nor the diplomatic position to engage in war.
If you're the President of the United States, you have the military ability to engage in war and the diplomatic position to handle the international consequences. And sometimes, the pure cost-benefits analysis of engaging in a war makes war a more appealing option than not engaging in war.
In other words, war is a tool to affect change. Powers that have such a tool will be the ones to occasionally wield it.
I am not saying it is a good thing necessarily; it is simply a natural result of the asymmetric power of the United States compared to any other power.
Typical text book stuff right out of the manual. Don't see Uruguay in any danger being attacked. There also is nobody in existence that Uruguay wants too or needs to attack. Could it be that Uruguay has the superior system?
What you are saying is that America has a safe way of waging war..That they are always geared up for it and that they have so much influence diplomatically to deal with any war? You may be living in the past. When was the last time America has a successful war?
What is the "change" that has come into effect with the involvement of American forces in Afghanistan and Iraq? Recently the Americans in Afghanistan were training and fighting along with national Afghans...I am sure they used as much influence and diplomacy as humanly possible..THEN suddenly the allied Afghan fighters turned their weapons on their "friends" and killed their American mentors and friends...Seems that all that stuff about asymmetric power and American projection of power...is falling on it's face.
The old way does not work anymore. If you want successful war- It depends on having valid and good intelligence- America has become so hated..that even for a million dollars the usual informants are talking...It might be better if your nation of privateers and pirates re-think this crap called THE ART OF WAR...everyone has the playbook.
Because the petrodollar is losing foothold.
Haven't you noticed that we've invaded countries and killed the leaders who said they were leaving the petrodollar for oil trading ?
you are correct.
Additionally, those that get military contracts are very powerful... look at the largest stockholders of each of these
Their ownership is a Wall Street who's who list When these companies do well.... sell more hardware to the gov... Wall Street is happy. Note that the politicians and Wall Street don't have kids in the war....
Kissinger said this "Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy."
What you see as war mongering lies in the constitutional duty of the president to defend the country.You believe the countries best defense is to wait at h borders and wait for an attack. Others view is to stop an attack before it happens. No matter who is president they certainly have more information on what is needed the the general public
Moronic thinking like this gets you in a world of hurt.
You folks have prosecuted wars all over the globe and look what happened regardless! None of the wars you've prosecuted since WWII were for defense of the nation but rather expansionism at it's very rudimentary. IKE warned you about this chit but you still can't get yourselves to define your defense from your empire building in the use of force.
The borders you're talking about; you've only got two of them and one of them is as porous as a seive for reasons of economic gain and plethora of votes so there goes your security in one stroke of the pen.
What country you've previously bombed the crap out of was actually considering invading you?
Did bombing the crap out of any of them do one whit to prevent the worst terrorist attack perpetrated against you?
Did invading Iraq bring any kind of peace and stability to that region?
Did overlooking Afghanistan and rushing into Iraq reap the rewards you envisioned only to have you then turn around and return to Afghanistan where you ONCE AGAIN have your hands tied behind your backs while your young folk are dying on a daily basis and FOR WHAT? Security of the U.S.? No one coule possibly be that retarded to believe that moronic balloon floated by your corporate enitities with ties to folks like Cheney etc..
You really gotta wake up and withdraw to your oceans and perform your protection of your country in International waters. An invasion ain't coming from Afghanistan, unless you count the unmitigated protection of their damn poppy crops for the stuff to arrive in the U.S. as refined Heroin.
Grow the hell up and learn something from all of these fiascos you've so enthusiasticly perpetrated all over the place with no discernable benefit other than to bankrupt your country and make it even more vulnerable to the absolute worst threat to your security; that being the ECONOMIC one. Your enemies are buying you up lock stock and barrel, sitting back and waiting patiently while Nero fiddles, Rome burns. The reserve currency becomes such a bone of contention for other countries that a move might be made to unravel that lever you've enjoyed and then the real fun begins in earnest on that roller coaster ride you're on.
Voting Romney to get rid of Obama; voting Obama because he courts the ethnic and racial devide votes. What the heck happened to voting for a guy with some integrity and proven moral foundations.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,325 posts, read 54,330,205 times
Reputation: 40716
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan
Voting Romney to get rid of Obama; voting Obama because he courts the ethnic and racial devide votes. What the heck happened to voting for a guy with some integrity and proven moral foundations.
You even got one of those?????
JMHO .02 cents worth.
That's apparently become limited to write-in votes.
Because they've been purchased to be warmongers. Doesn't take much to figure that out.
Of course, we vote them in to office in the first place, instead of voting for candidates who would do much better--but who have less money, don't appeal to those who would rather have lots of wars, and don't get nominations as a result.
The price of U.S. occupation of Iraq, the price of U.S. empire in the Muslim world, is terror. The Islamic terrorists of 9/11 were over here because we were over there. We were attacked by suicide bombers in New York for the same reason that our Marines were attacked by a suicide bomber in Beirut. We took sides in a religious civil war, their war, and they want us out of that war. The fifteen hijackers from Saudi Arabia did not fly into the World Trade Center to protest the Bill of Rights. They want us off sacred Saudi soil and out of the Middle East. Is there anything over there--oil, bases, empire--worth risking an atomic bomb on U.S. soil?
Pat Buchanan
You reap what you sow.
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.
there is an anti-interventionist & anti-war candidate
