Excellent comment and welcome back!
On Dec 27, 12:08 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:
> The US budget for the military has been enormous and for most of us
> bloated for a long time. And, much of it is hidden within other areas
> too. Overall, currently the issue isn’t so much how money is being
> spent as how public monies are being collected.
>
> And as to the historic use of the US military, the list is way too
> long to post
> here.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_history_e...
>
> When it comes to selling the people on it, if advertising didn’t work
> it wouldn’t exist. However, one of the most telling insights here is
> one from when I was a kid.
>
> "Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders
> of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple
> matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist
> dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or
> no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the
> leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being
> attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and
> exposing the country to greater danger." -- Herman Goering at the
> Nuremberg trials
>
> On Dec 27, 9:34 am, "Jason (Memphis)" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > The point was that I don't believe for a second that people will avoid
> > war for the noble reasons you originally described (reduce oppression,
> > etc.). Tribes of people (government officials, nations, religious
> > organizations, etc) will war if the cost to that specific organization
> > is not that great and the payoff far outweighs the cost. The neocons
> > probably benefited overall in the Iraq war.
>
> > A draft or conscription would probably help deter war because wealthy
> > and powerful people's children would also be put in harms way to
> > protect resources. For example, the neoconservatives would be put at
> > risk of death (or their children) instead of just having other people
> > die to protect their resources. It is quite amazing how a group of
> > old men and a few old women can convince young people to readily died
> > for a cause while those old people sit well out of harms way and don't
> > incur the financial sacrifices.
>
> > Jason
>
> > On Dec 26, 11:23 pm, Isparklaria <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 26, 7:24 pm, "Jason (Memphis)" <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > hmmmm....I wonder if an informed citizenry wouldn't just continue use
> > > > the military to increase wealth but not talk about it so openly.
>
> > > I don't think Americans would do this at this time. The United
> > > Nations, nuclear weapons and breakdown of international trade would be
> > > additional deterrents for the USA as well as other nations. I also
> > > believe that Americans as a whole don't like war. However, if an
> > > informed citizenry
> > > increased the wealth of all, or at least most, and sacrificed human
> > > lives to do it, it might be crazy and cruel, but at least it would be
> > > more equitible than what we have now. Presently a few thousand have
> > > lost lives of friends or family members, more have been seriously
> > > wounded, nearly all have lost money, by way of the national debt, and
> > > a few have made billions. Or nation as a whole has been severly
> > > weakened. This is not even counting the horrendous situation on the
> > > other side (the Iraqis and Afghanis). It is time to bring the war
> > > profiteers, and their puppets in our goverment, to trial.
>
> > > By the way, I forgot to mention General Butler's solution. He
> > > suggested conscripting suppilies as well as soldiers, thereby taking
> > > the profit out of war for arms dealers.
>
> > > On Dec 26, 7:24 pm, "Jason (Memphis)" <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > "[The military] of an informed citizenry...will be used for self-
> > > > defense and when feasible to help fight tyranny and oppression."
>
> > > > hmmmm....I wonder if an informed citizenry wouldn't just continue use
> > > > the military to increase wealth but not talk about it so openly. That
> > > > seems to be the trend and tendency. I don't think that tendency or
> > > > trend will stop until the bloodlines amongst countries and economic
> > > > ties are so strong that too many informed citizens would be upset with
> > > > the killing of their relatives from the opposing country and wouldn't
> > > > want to risk damaging the economic gains from that opposing country.
>
> > > > Jason
>
> > > > On Dec 26, 10:18 am, Isparklaria <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > I don't know what Obama plans to do with the military as far as base
> > > > > closures and the size of the standing army. As I see it he has one of
> > > > > two reasonable routes.
>
> > > > > 1. He can accept that America has taken the role of worldwide enforcer
> > > > > and do the job right. The first most important step here is to take
> > > > > the army back from control of the international corporations. I
> > > > > believe that war for profit has been the primary force running the
> > > > > American army for well over 100 years. As evidence, here is a link to
> > > > > the book "War Is A Racket," by Major General Smedley
> > > > > Butler.http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html
> > > > > Once the army is following the will of an informed citizenry, then it
> > > > > will be used for self-defense and when feasible to help fight tyranny
> > > > > and oppression. Notice that I said when feasible. Helping others, when
> > > > > possible, does help us, or so I believe. But not when it leaves us
> > > > > overextended. Then it helps no one. Life Guards, for example, are
> > > > > taught not to attempt a rescue that they think is not possible. Why
> > > > > risk two lives. Why run down our military, lose American lives and
> > > > > ruin our economy for nothing. The army must not be dominated by
> > > > > mercenaries. This is one of the things that led to the downfall of
> > > > > Rome. When our sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, cousins and friends
> > > > > are in the army, we will not go to war so easily. When we do, we will
> > > > > have a plan to win with the fewest possible casualties, like Clinton's
> > > > > war in Yugoslavia. If the Commander in chief is failing, he should be
> > > > > recalled. Much of the killing of non participating civilians occurs
> > > > > when the mission is not clear and it stalls, like in Vietnam and in
> > > > > Iraq.
>
> > > > > 2. The second approach would be to give up being the world's
> > > > > policeman. Neither the Iraq or Afghanistan wars would have been
> > > > > necessary. The Afghanis were willing to turn Bin Laden and his crew
> > > > > over to a neutral world court. Now they are roaming free. The pressure
> > > > > was working on Saddam Hussein. Inspectors were being allowed to do
> > > > > their jobs. Of course if these wars had been run properly then things
> > > > > wouldn't have turned out so badly and as much as I hate war, I might
> > > > > believe that we did the right thing.
>
> > > > > As I see it these are two reasonable options. Both of them are far
> > > > > from ideal, but necessary in the world that we live in
>
> > > > > On Dec 25, 10:01 pm, CrossBow <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > No, I did not say anti-military, but any generic reference to
> > > > > > faceless
> > > > > > people as child killers is not exactly positive either. We risk
> > > > > > dehumanize
> > > > > > them like we accuse them of dehumanizing their target enemy if we
> > > > > > drop the
> > > > > > casual killer labels. I believe we agree on most as I said before,
> > > > > > how we
> > > > > > say it is just as important. Curious enough, the old GI benefits you
> > > > > > mention are in place, and for some, particularly those diagnosed
> > > > > > with
> > > > > > traumatic stress disorder, reprieve has finally come, it is now
> > > > > > formally recognized as an actual medical condition....
>
> > > > > > read more »
>
> > > > > > Education benefits are working if you use them. Active Duty
> > > > > > military offers
> > > > > > a GI bill of $50,000 - while not Ivy League, can get you a degree
> > > > > > that will
> > > > > > keep you from re-enlisting if you are done with active duty. The
> > > > > > rest is up
> > > > > > to the individual's drive. I'm not sure that the National Guard has
> > > > > > decreased or increased, do not have the stats on that, but surely
> > > > > > the border
> > > > > > duty and over seas tours have. National Guard and Reserve have been
> > > > > > on the
> > > > > > rise for years since the decrease of combat troop count, and base
> > > > > > closures,
> > > > > > but more attention has spotlighted them since Bush and 9/11. What
> > > > > > Obama's
> > > > > > appointees do will be interesting. Any suppositions on that?
>
> > > > > > On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 5:44 PM, Isparklaria
> > > > > > <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Crossbow,
>
> > > > > > > While I enjoyed your reply, I think you misread mine. I am not
> > > > > > > against
> > > > > > > the military. I just want to see it reporting to a President who
> > > > > > > reports to the people. I would like see the public informed and
> > > > > > > also
> > > > > > > able to recall a president who is definately incompetant and
> > > > > > > probably
> > > > > > > criminal. I would also like to se the old GI benefits restored
> > > > > > > where
> > > > > > > military service gets you a college education. I would like to see
> > > > > > > real military service, not Bush's national guard stint, be a
> > > > > > > prequisite to be commander in chief. I would like to see national
> > > > > > > service of some sort, either military or peace corps or something
> > > > > > > else
> > > > > > > required for full citizenship. Enough service would also get you a
> > > > > > > free college education. There are many more changes that I would
> > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > to see. I am not for killing but I accept the necessity for now
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > for any forseable future of a strong military. But it must, must,
> > > > > > > must, must be accountable to the people. The people and or the
> > > > > > > friends
> > > > > > > and family should also be in the army, so that war hurts all
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Memphis Freethought Alliance" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
