Those who Claim People in the Military are Fighting for our Freedom/Defending Us

[supertony51]

Everything we need to assist our buddies in the new global imperialism. It requires that many bases in foreign lands, like you said, to have the logistical capabilities to fight on several fronts and at any place in the world.

Why is the US allowed to do this and nobody else? It is because we are not "allowed" to, but who the hell is going to turn away the most powerful military force the world has ever seen. We also bring some money to the poorer ones, so it is not everyone does not want us there.

Your puling what i was trying to say slightly out of context.

Take Tiawan and china for example, there has been animousity for years, and China has expressed an intrest in annexing tiawan with force if nessesary for years, Tiawan doesn't like this Idea.

The presence of U.S. Carrier groups has acted as a deterent against Chinesse military agression agianst Tiawan for years, preventing a war that if it were to take place would disrupt global supply chains and economies World over.

We could also look at Soviet intentions to Western Europe during the cold war, Russian and Chinesse relations during the cold war etc etc.

Having the biggest dick on the block also has alot of responciblites, just so happens we happen to have that dick for now.

[Raybourne]

Can you tell me why else the United Sates invaded a foreign country that was prospering and made it a complete shit hole? (Please don't use WMD, or any other such propaganda, even fighting terrorism is bullshit when your country first invented the terrorists to begin with.)

actually saddam had been known to use and produce WMDs, harbouring terrorists, invading nearby countries, and engaging in genocide.

so yeah, i dont think it was oil. even if it was, why would that be bad?

[Elemair]

You obviously have no idea how things work. I am no economist by any means, but to say that the US i spoor is just flat out wrong. Texas and California have bigger GDPs than all but like 5 or 6 counties.

You don't need to understand how things work to understand that the USA has the biggest debt in the world. It doesn't matter how much money your country makes, it is impossible to pay off a singular trillion dollar loan, let alone $16.481 trillion. This in turn makes the USA debt status - 3rd world. If they took the entire populace of the United Status and demanded that they pay every cent they have borrowed from China, your country would be 3rd world as a whole. Even if that happened, you would still have trillions and trillions of dollars to still pay off. THEREFORE if your country stopped borrowing money all together, your infrastructure would collapse and the entire civilization of the United States would be "poor".

---------- Post added 2013-02-08 at 03:16 AM ----------

actually saddam had been known to use and produce WMDs, harbouring terrorists, invading nearby countries, and engaging in genocide.

so yeah, i dont think it was oil. even if it was, why would that be bad?

Saddam improved the economic state of Iraq and kept it on a steady progressive line, now it is in a constant state of decline. Was invading it good? Was it bad? I can't say that wrecking an entire countries economic welfare over a singular man was a good idea, that's up to you though.

[supertony51]

You don't need to understand how things work to understand that the USA has the biggest debt in the world. It doesn't matter how much money your country makes, it is impossible to pay off a singular trillion dollar loan, let alone $16.481 trillion. This in turn makes the USA debt status - 3rd world. If they took the entire populace of the United Status and demanded that they pay every cent they have borrowed from China, your country would be 3rd world as a whole. Even if that happened, you would still have trillions and trillions of dollars to still pay off. THEREFORE if your country stopped borrowing money all together, your infrastructure would collapse and the entire civilization of the United States would be "poor".

---------- Post added 2013-02-08 at 03:16 AM ----------



Saddam improved the economic state of Iraq and kept it on a steady progressive line, now it is in a constant state of decline. Was invading it good? Was it bad? I can't say that wrecking entire countries economic welfare over a singular man was a good idea, that's up to you though.

Been to iraq 3 times, for a total of 39 months.

The only people saddaam was worried about helping was his own cronies.

[Elemair]

Been to iraq 3 times, for a total of 39 months.

The only people saddaam was worried about helping was his own cronies.

Even if he was just helping his cronies, he furthered the country than any singular dictator of Iraq has ever done before. Considering the amount of revenue the country was receiving before this war started, it had the footholds to become at least a 2nd world country in terms of economic growth. The country of Iraq will never change even if Saddam isn't there. A sole person can't change the community and culture of a country.

[supertony51]

Even if he was just helping his cronies, he furthered the country than any singular dictator of Iraq has ever done before. Considering the amount of revenue the country was receiving before this war started, it had the footholds to become at least a 2nd world country in terms of economic growth. The country of Iraq will never change even if Saddam isn't there. A sole person can't change the community and culture of a country.

Sure if you can ignore the Random executions, gang rapes of children, underground prisons for the children of dissenters, torture chambers etc..etc. One man CAN change the community and culture of a country, Saddam did it, and the aholltolah (yes i know spelling) of iran did a pretty good job too.

Whats the point of ecnomic growth if the only people that are going to see it is the family and close friends of the one man?

[Elemair]

Sure if you can ignore the Random executions, gang rapes of children, underground prisons for the children of dissenters, torture chambers etc..etc. One man CAN change the community and culture of a country, Saddam did it, and the aholltolah (yes i know spelling) of iran did a pretty good job too.

Whats the point of ecnomic growth if the only people that are going to see it is the family and close friends of the one man?

You can't spend the amount of money they were receiving on the family and friends of one man, it's ultimately impossible. It was furthering the economic business of Iraq. You have to put more and more money into the economy to receive more and more money. The people who work the oil fields aren't being paid nothing. The more businesses that arise in accordance with the amount of revenue they were receiving was booming. He was improving the economic state of the country on a whole and you can't ignore that. Random executions, gang rape of children, underground prisions for children/dissenters and torture chambers, etc, etc still exist and will never disappear, not now at least. Almost any 3rd world country in the Middle East has these problems, as human trafficking is a booming business to get into. BTW that is still part of their culture/community as the people of Iraq were partaking in these events. You can't do these things a sole man, it requires thousands of people and the support of like minded individuals, a community effort.

Do you think since the invading of Iraq that these things are gone, that without Saddam these things won't continue?

[tdub26]

Look deeper into the issue it is not black and white. The men and women in the military have chosen to serve the people of the United States. Every person in this country (and many others) owe a great deal to those in the military.

Politicians who abuse the military are a different issue. We tend to see the scum rise to the top in politics and our current political situation is no exception to the rule. We no longer have statesmen who hold office as a service to the country, rather many in office seek only to serve themselves and in doing so take from everyone else.

The underlying problem that is the root and has been the root of all human suffering is a lack of virtue. Our culture supports a media which propagates a culture devoid of personal responsibility, self reliance, and compassion. Like so many great civilizations before ours we become ignorant and content with mediocrity. Like a frog being slowly boiled good men fall asleep and fail to realize that their inaction causes even more problems. These problems manifest themselves in many ways ranging from acts of physical violence to financial enslavement.

Personally addressing the question of our own nature is the best and only way to permanently fix all of the problems we have.

[supertony51]

You can't spend the amount of money they were receiving on the family and friends of one man, it's ultimately impossible. It was furthering the economic business of Iraq. You have to put more and more money into the economy to receive more and more money. The people who work the oil fields aren't being paid nothing. The more businesses that arise in accordance with the amount of revenue they were receiving was booming. He was improving the economic state of the country on a whole and you can't ignore that. Random executions, gang rape of children, underground prisions for children/dissenters and torture chambers, etc, etc still exist and will never disappear, not now at least. Almost any 3rd world country in the Middle East has these problems, as human trafficking is a booming business to get into. BTW that is still part of their culture/community as the people of Iraq were partaking in these events. You can't do these things a sole man, it requires thousands of people and the support of like minded individuals, a community effort.

Do you think since the invading of Iraq that these things are gone, that without Saddam these things won't continue?

ill continue this debate with u tomorrow, i have to get up early

[Annapolis]

There definitely is a debt problem as the debt still exists, but in reality it doesn't need to be paid off and isn't expected to be. China realizes that the USA will never be able to pay them back, yet still gives them increasingly more amounts of money to further the economic situation of China as in turn they are essentially receiving all the money back that they give the USA.

We have to pay interest on those loans. That means a huge portion of our country's income goes directly into paying for the fact that we have outstanding debt. How is that not an issue?

[Elemair]

---------- Post added 2013-02-08 at 03:49 AM ----------

ill continue this debate with u tomorrow, i have to get up early

Alright have a good night sleep, talk to you tomorrow.

---------- Post added 2013-02-08 at 03:57 AM ----------

We have to pay interest on those loans. That means a huge portion of our country's income goes directly into paying for the fact that we have outstanding debt. How is that not an issue?

Do you understand the loan that you have would be un-payable on a bi-monthly or annual basis? The debt will only increase, it will never decrease, the fact is that you don't have to pay this debt back. Therefore it's not an issue.

Say we take it at a flat 5% loan on a $16.481 trillion loan, that would be .82,405 trillion dollars. Do you think that the United States can afford to pay almost a trillion dollars yearly when they continually keep borrowing more and more money? By that logic, the collapse of the United Sates economy would be imminent.

[Daerio]

Sure if you can ignore the Random executions, gang rapes of children, underground prisons for the children of dissenters, torture chambers etc..etc.

Who cares? We do not have the right to invade every country who does things we don't agree with, or that we don't like. The world cannot function like that. All it accomplishes is creating hatred for us, making us a target for the rest of the world.

If England decides they don't like people in the US being able to participate in "hate speech" (they don't allow it over there) does that give them the right to invade us, kill our leaders and destroy our infrastructure, so they can rebuild it and tax us for the privilege of using it?

If Italy decides they don't like people in the US having access to contraceptives and abortion services, does that make it OK for them to invade us?

If Canada decides they don't like people in the US not having socialized healthcare, and thousands of people dying every year because they can't afford it, does that make it OK for them to invade us?

If Europe decides they don't like people in the US having access to guns, and believing that thousands of innocents die every year because we have them, does that make it OK for them to invade us?

This perception that it's our responsibility to be 'world police' and right the wrongs of the world, interfere with other societies and instill our values on everyone, everywhere - is insane. It's complete indoctrination. It is NOT our right to interfere in the workings of every society in the world. It is NOT our right to invade countries and kill people who do things we don't agree with. We are not the moral compass for the history of the world.

At most, perhaps, we could provide amnesty to those certain victims. Women who wish to be educated in countries that don't allow it. Children that are victimized. Political dissenters. Invading their countries and killing their people only creates MORE violence, MORE hatred. It doesn't HELP anything.

[Mall Security]

War is stupid and obsolete in a civilized world, and what the world should know is War is Hell, it is not a business, and if should be all our business to never allow our names to be used to invoke it. If we can't find better ways to solve our differences without killing we shouldn't be suprised by this, or make judgements. about the incidents we aren't individually working to stop.

[Annapolis]

Do you understand the loan that you have would be un-payable on a bi-monthly or annual basis? The debt will only increase, it will never decrease, the fact is that you don't have to pay this debt back. Therefore it's not an issue.

Say we take it at a flat 5% loan on a $16.481 trillion loan, that would be .82,405 trillion dollars. Do you think that the United States can afford to pay almost a trillion dollars yearly when they continually keep borrowing more and more money? By that logic, the collapse of the United Sates economy would be imminent.

You're saying that because it is a lot of money that we don't have to worry about it?

Are you saying that we don't pay interest on our loans currently?

If we have less debt, we pay less interest and therefore we have more money to spend on domestic costs.

[Arantir]

We still have military bases in Germany. It was only a little under 100 years ago that we were at war with them, but in this day in age - can our continuing presence in Germany really be justified? In what way is it helpful to have these military bases scattered across the world, when we also posses naval and air superiority to the rest of the world? If circumstances did change, and we suddenly did need to go to war with Germany, couldn't we then respond to those changes in circumstance and reinstall nearby military bases? Why do we need to maintain this global military empire, when we cannot even afford to do so?

I think it would be more difficult to name a country in which we do not have a military base.

There's this little thing call NATO, please look it up and tell me why there would possibly be US presence there. Another thing, its called global reach.

[Iamanerd]

I don't support the war, rather I support the people fighting it.

[Roose]

You don't need to understand how things work to understand that the USA has the biggest debt in the world. It doesn't matter how much money your country makes, it is impossible to pay off a singular trillion dollar loan, let alone $16.481 trillion. This in turn makes the USA debt status - 3rd world. If they took the entire populace of the United Status and demanded that they pay every cent they have borrowed from China, your country would be 3rd world as a whole. Even if that happened, you would still have trillions and trillions of dollars to still pay off. THEREFORE if your country stopped borrowing money all together, your infrastructure would collapse and the entire civilization of the United States would be "poor".

How exactly is China going to collect? They know full well that we can't pay them and they keep loaning us money because someone has to buy their shit. Codependency.

[Flaks]

Yes I'm more mad at the politicians, but at the same time if less people joined the military, maybe they would get the hint.

The military is incentivized to a ridiculous extent. A lot of people end up joining the military because they're not sure what else to do with their lives OR as an avenue to more easily achieve their goals in life. The Military gives you a free ride through college. It increases your chances to get into a medical school ten fold etc. etc. etc.

[vindicatorx]

Oh, that's mature. As if there weren't other hidden factors behind the country that they solely chose to blame for this audacious act.

Maturity had nothing to do with it. We were pissed off and since Bin Laden was under a rock, we turned to the next best target. Bush wanted to finish off what his daddy couldn't and so they started pushing the whole WMD thing.

---------- Post added 2013-02-07 at 11:23 PM ----------

How exactly is China going to collect? They know full well that we can't pay them and they keep loaning us money because someone has to buy their shit. Codependency.

Not that we "borrow" from them they bought as much of our foreign debt as they could.

[Arantir]

My point illustrates that the country was far better off before The Soviet Union and US tried to play chess using foreign countries.

Anyway, you have no argument, what are you even doing here?

It was also better off before religious extremists took hold of the government....