how about we get rid of 90% of military expense?

[sarcastic sam]

they DO want such, or at least are ok with the govt and military DOING so. Look, dude, I already TOLD you nobody DARES invade, or even SERIOUSLY screw with, ANY nuke power. 10% of our military is MORE, by far, than Isreal has, total, and nobody dares screw with them, on any level that ANY military can prevent, that is.

haha yeah um ok cuz nobody launches suicide bomb attacks against crowded restaurants in Tel Aviv, nobody launches rocket attacks from Gaza into populated civilian areas of Israel, and nobody has attacked Israel with conventional military forces 5 FVCKING TIMES IN JUST THE LAST 50 YEARS, RIGHT??

With the rise of terrorism and global periahs like North Korea and Iran, conventional forces have NEVER been this important since the dawn of the First World War.

 

[sarcastic sam]

Wow do you piss your bed every night too?

only when your mother spreads her legs nice and wide for me

 

[perseverance]

well i agree with jammer i dont think the U.S. government wants to fight foreign wars especially since they almost always become expensive and unpopular. But sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do.

Bush had a choice about invading Afghanistan and Iraq and he chose to go through with it and the result has been abject failure on all fronts. Afghanistan will fall back into the hands of the Taliban as the puppet Karzai is dangling from a lamppost in Kabul and Iraq has been completely destroyed, that country probably won't ever recover fully from the US-UK invasion.

Now you're picking a fight with Iran and also Obama has sent US Naval ships deep into the Pacific Ocean which has angered China and has a resulted in increased Chinese military spending particularly on their Naval fleet. Is there anyone your Governments don't want to anger?

 

[perseverance]

The US has bases all over the world to "protect" its allies. The US has bases all over Europe, including the UK. Therefore, the UK knows the US is there to defend them if someone were to attack which means they can spend less on their own defense. I agree with you, I wish the British government would stop supporting everything the US does, but they are bought off by the same companies as our government.

Considering that over 600 British men and women have died fighting alongside you in Afghanistan and Iraq, I would say that what you describe is the very least you can do. However American bases in Europe has nothing to do with helping your allies. It has everything to do with the US maintaining a presence in Europe and also stationing itself as close to Russia as possible. I still remember the big uproar made by Putin when the US wanted to place a defence structure in Poland.

Amen. I love how so many Americans think Iran is our enemy while they are ignorant of the wrongs the US and Britain have done to Iran. When one sees what the US does in the middle east and the stuff the British and US did to Iran, it makes sense that Iran wants nukes.

The reason the US wants action on Iran is because Iran will ignite a nuclear arms race in the Middle East which is a threat to the US presence there and also the US's best friend Israel will lose their status as the only real military power in the region. Iran will tip the axis in the Middle East if it gets nuclear weaponry.

 

[Machina29]

The American government HATES going to war because it knows that wars are ultimately costly and unpopular. They only resort to it when all other avenues have closed, and they're dealing with a terrible mad regime like the Saddam Hussein regime that invaded two countries (Iran and Kuwait) and committed gas attacks against its own people. Letting guys this run amok in a very unstable region was not good business for anybody. European nations learned the hard way long ago that colonialism is more costly than it is worth.

The government loves war. Why else would the people in congress be heavily invested in defense companies? Why would they lie about the Gulf of Tonken incident happening to get us in the Vietnam war? The US created Saddam to combat Iran. We gave him weapons and money, including the chemical weapons he used. The US created Osama Bin Laden too, and they are continuing the same path in Libya and Syria. They have learned nothing from their mistakes.

The Iranian people are not the enemy - but the government is. What wrongs have we done to Iran? We helped the place modernize its nation, develop its economy, and helped it build its infrastructure and education system. We encouraged literacy and helped keep the country from becoming a satellite state of the Russian Empire and then later its successor the Soviet Union.

If you don't consider killing their leader and installing a tyrannical dictator (The Shah) to ensure the US and UK get their oil a wrong, then I'd like to know your definition of wronging someone. The US has been constantly trying to get it's hands back on the Iranian oil fields since 1979 when the Shah lost power. How does placing sanctions on the country help modernize the nation and develop its economy? Sanctions are an act of war.

But now, the ultra Islamist Iranian government paints the U.S. as the enemy.. but the entire Iranian nation HATES the government and hopefully - with american support - will be able to throw off the shackles of this insane theocratic dictatorship.

Gee you mean they use propaganda to turn their people against the US in the same way the US government uses it to turn our people against Iran? The fact that you think the entire nation of Iran hates their government shows how much you believe the propaganda machine that is US mainstream media. If another country killed our president and installed a puppet regime to help extract our resources, I'm pretty sure I would consider them an enemy too.

 

[Machina29]

Considering that over 600 British men and women have died fighting alongside you in Afghanistan and Iraq, I would say that what you describe is the very least you can do. However American bases in Europe has nothing to do with helping your allies. It has everything to do with the US maintaining a presence in Europe and also stationing itself as close to Russia as possible. I still remember the big uproar made by Putin when the US wanted to place a defence structure in Poland.

Well either way, the US presence in Europe leads to those nations not spending as much on their own defense....so the US subsidizes their defense. I agree to an extent that US owes Britain. It really sucks that your leaders didn't follow France's lead and avoid these pointless wars.

The reason the US wants action on Iran is because Iran will ignite a nuclear arms race in the Middle East which is a threat to the US presence there and also the US's best friend Israel will lose their status as the only real military power in the region. Iran will tip the axis in the Middle East if it gets nuclear weaponry.

The US doesn't bully countries with nukes, such as Pakistan. Iran knows this. They see what happens to their neighbors who don't have nukes which is why they want them. Anyone who actually thinks Iran wants nukes so they nuke Israel is a ****ing idiot who buys into the war propaganda. Israel isn't the US's best friend. Israel's friendship is a plague on the US. I'd say the British or the Australians are the best allies the US has. Israel isn't even close to those two.

 

[jammer]

Research 'Public Choice Economics" and "Military-Industrial Complex"

I’m sure there’s a lot of pro-communist theories that promote the hatred of “American Imperialism” these two aren’t the only ones

You mean when they lied us into war by using the deaths of thousands on 9/11 caused by RADICAL islamists as a pretext to drum up fervor to take out a MODERATE muslim country(Iraq)?

There was a UN mandate that ordered Iraq to let us search their military stockpiles, and they continually refused to let that happen. And Iraq did in fact possess weapons of mass destruction, in terms of poison gas as well as the SCUD missile technology to hit large cities, as they did in the War of the Cities during the Iran-Iraq War. The fact that we didn’t know the real truth because Saddam kept getting in the way of our investigation, combined with the fact that Iraq had in the past possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction, no too mention Saddam`s hard support for terrorism, made that invasion necessary.

And not only did the U.S. support it, it was condoned and encouraged by the United Nations.

We basically gave him the chemical weapons to use on Iran. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_... 80%93Iraq_war

While Wikipedia is obviously not the most reliable source of intelligence, let’s talk about the article you brought up anyway:

According to your article, as we all know the U.S. did export chemical weapons to Iraq, but the article states that the US “would have never accepted the use of chemical weapons against civilians, but the use against military objectives was seen as inevitable in the Iraqi struggle for survival.”

The US supplied these weapons, and has large stockpiles of its own, but of course this is meant as a last self-defense resort to prevent a general national collapse.

It was not meant to commit genocide against an entire group of unarmed civilians. It’s examples like this that peace-loving communists use to twist and make America look bad, when really all the U.S. was doing was trying to prevent the collapse of an entire country.

What do you think Saddam, the Shah, Mubarak, the Saudi's, Yemeni's, Kuwaitis and Bahraini's are?

They’re regional despots. But none of these guys caused as much regional problems on the scale of the first guy in this list, Saddam.

Hence, sanctions that only hurt the people and not the well-fed government elite. like raising corporate taxes, the costs are always passed onto the consumer. Conservatives understand this.

Sanctions are the least hurtful way yet most effective way of bringing rogue nations to their knees. It’s not a perfect system, and yes civilians suffer, but it is more humanitarian than bombing the crap out of the country, which is only a last resort after all other avenues have failed.

"we" installed a military dictator that tortured his own people to replace an democracy in order to secure oil profits. We then supported Saddam Hussein's invasion of Iran that killed hundreds of thousands including with chemical weapons.

Whenever we “installed” a bad leader it was always us picking a lesser evil over an even greater one. Such is the nature of world politics, unfortunately.

I just thought I should provide a Conservative perspective on this.

lol you mean communist hippie, overly simplistic view of world events perspective

 

[jammer]

See, I thought you were on the far left because you just attacked a very well known CONSERVATIVE school of economics and a REPUBLICAN WAR HERO PRESIDENT Dwight Eisenhower. You also spoke out of ignorance of economics and without conducting very basic research, like a liberal.

Haha looks like you’re the ignorant one here: Public choice theorists can be found in both Republican and Democratic camps. Whether the theory is conservative or communist hippie depends on how the theory is used to describe the motivation of political leaders. Most Republicans would prefer to focus on American problems rather than foreign ones, that’s why any theory promoting foreign intervention goes against the beliefs of most conservatives.

As for military industrial complex, this is just a relationship between legislators, the armed forces, and defense contractors. It is not a political ideology, unless it is used to support a certain point of view. And in your post, this view was clearly a hippie communist one.

Are you a liberal globalist that thinks the US should be a puppy of the UN?

I think the U.S. should do what it can to protect its global interests. The U.S. was actually urging the UN to move faster with regard to the invasion of Iraq, so you tell me who the “puppy” was here :crackup:

by invading a moderate muslim country like Iraq.

You keep mentioning a ’moderate muslim’ country like Iraq. I don’t know why you keep doing this. The US has not declared war on radical Islam, it has declared a war on terrorism. It does not matter that Saddam was a moderate leader in terms of religion, what matters is that he reached a point where he was destabilizing an entire region.

Its cited.

Only a tiny portion

mhmmm. Then we put sanctions on Iran for daring to defend itself from an aggressor using chemical weapons...this was in the 80's.

Of course we did. Iran was - and still is - the enemy, and we can punish them any way we find necessary. An Iranian victory over Iraq would have led to horrible consequences that the U.S. at that time wanted to avoid.

Wait, a western-educated democratic leader was a greater evil than a military dictator(a King) in Iran? I think you should stop being

In the opinion of the American government, U.S. military advisors, and the U.S. president, yes, he was.

Hey did they work on Cuba and Iraq?

Yes, actually they did. Remember how sanctions on Cuba led to the removal of Soviet nuclear weapons from that country. And as for Saddam, he’s no longer around, is he

Looks like you’re the one who needs to conduct better research.

 

[goundra]

u r full of it. We've KEPT sanctions on Cuba, ever since, and they have done NOTHING basically. Kennedy risked ALL our lives, "bluffing" Khruschev into removing the missles from Cuba. Sanctions had NOTHING to do with it he threatened nuke WAR to get them to pull back! Also, WE put castro into power, and Batista before him, just like we put Saddam into power, and The Ayatollah, and countless others, because of profits to the oil compancies and military suppliers drive ALL political decisions and have done so for at least a century, in the US.

 

[perseverance]

Well either way, the US presence in Europe leads to those nations not spending as much on their own defense....so the US subsidizes their defense. I agree to an extent that US owes Britain. It really sucks that your leaders didn't follow France's lead and avoid these pointless wars.

Britain has never really spent much on its military, there were men in World War II running around with single bolt action rifles while our allies all had semi-automatic weaponry. I have heard tales of the Falklands War where some British servicemen didn't even have something as basic as a helmet to wear for a modicum of protection. Britain has always asked its servicemen to achieve a great many of things on a shoe-string budget and the reason our Armed Forces has achieved the kinds of things it has achieved is down to the nature of those who serve rather than the equipment they are issued with.

France are in Afghanistan, stationed in Kabul for the time being, I think they might be making a full withdrawl at the end of next year (but don't quote me on this). NATO has been hijacked by the United States for the purpose of seeing the US keeping up the Jones's.

The US doesn't bully countries with nukes, such as Pakistan. Iran knows this. They see what happens to their neighbors who don't have nukes which is why they want them. Anyone who actually thinks Iran wants nukes so they nuke Israel is a ****ing idiot who buys into the war propaganda. Israel isn't the US's best friend. Israel's friendship is a plague on the US. I'd say the British or the Australians are the best allies the US has. Israel isn't even close to those two.

We in Britain feel the same way about the US that many in the US feel about Israel. I don't think that Britain benefits in anyway, shape or form from an alliance with the United States.

If the US does involve itself in the Israel vs Iran spat, then I hope Britain will have enough sense to keep out of it.

 

[goundra]

I just wish Britain (and France, etc) would pay back what they OWE us for the billions (due to inflation and interest) of $ we spent on rebuilding them, via the Marshall Plan. we'll just shine on the fact that we saved their asses from the Germans (twice, actually)

 

[jammer]

u r full of it. We've KEPT sanctions on Cuba, ever since, and they have done NOTHING basically. Kennedy risked ALL our lives, "bluffing" Khruschev into removing the missles from Cuba. Sanctions had NOTHING to do with it he threatened nuke WAR to get them to pull back! Also, WE put castro into power, and Batista before him, just like we put Saddam into power, and The Ayatollah, and countless others, because of profits to the oil compancies and military suppliers drive ALL political decisions and have done so for at least a century, in the US.

Sanctions have done nothing to Cuba? Obviously you havent been there lately lol

As for oil, of course it`s important. It`s how our industrial complex is able to run, and supply millions of people with jobs so they can earn money to feed their families. If these scumbag governments in these rogue countries shut off our oil supply, guys like me and you would eventually be out of work and die of hunger.

I don't think that Britain benefits in anyway, shape or form from an alliance with the United States.

Yeah, except for the fact that we saved you guys from being utterly destroyed by the Germans twice in 30 years.

So ungrateful.

 

[perseverance]

I just wish Britain (and France, etc) would pay back what they OWE us for the billions (due to inflation and interest) of $ we spent on rebuilding them, via the Marshall Plan. we'll just shine on the fact that we saved their asses from the Germans (twice, actually)

I suggest you go and do some historical research instead of posting such diarrhea.

 

[perseverance]

Yeah, except for the fact that we saved you guys from being utterly destroyed by the Germans twice in 30 years.

So ungrateful.

Did you really? I also suggest you go and do your own research instead of posting such diarrhea.

The US and UK relationship benefits the US and the US only, I would so love for Britain to severe ties with the US. If the United States wants to go around antagonising countries then that's fine by me, but I am appalled that Britain feels the need to involve itself as well.

It would benefit Britain to stop going to war on the behalf of others and focus on creating stronger ties with the BRIC nations who will inevitably replace the United States as the next superpowers of the world.

 

[jammer]

Did you really? I also suggest you go and do your own research instead of posting such diarrhea.

Truth hurts doesn`t it..

Britain would have lost world war I, it was teetering on the brink of collapse. Only a fresh infusion of U.S. troops and aid kept britain propped up. The Germans had crushed the Russians in the East, and were coming to finish the job against england and france and would have done so if it had not been for the arrival of the americans just in the nick of time to save the day.

The Americans once again saved britain`s a$$ in World War II by providing aid and then invading Europe, once more preventing the germans from overrunning you guys.

Every historian knows this.

It`s a good thing most british still appreciate what america did for them, and they know who their real friends are.

The only person spewing diarrhea on this thread is you.

 

[perseverance]

Next you'll be doing an Obama and claiming that your Great Grandfather liberated Auschwitz.

Also who are your British friends exactly? I don't know many people in Britain who like the United States. Your flag has been burned on our streets nearly as much as on the streets of Baghdad, Kabul and Tehran.

I don't hate the United States far from it, I just do not believe that being your ally benefits us. Hundreds of my fellow countrymen have died in Afghanistan and Iraq combined and many thousands more have had life changing injuries fighting in conflicts which did not, have not and never will benefit Britain.

The sooner the US and UK alliance finishes the better. It should have ended in 2005 when we finally finished paying off the Marshall Plan.

 

[jammer]

Also who are your British friends exactly? I don't know many people in Britain who like the United States. Your flag has been burned on our streets nearly as much as on the streets of Baghdad, Kabul and Tehran.

who are our british friends? Well why don't we start with all the british soldiers who have died fighting on our side..

I don't hate the United States far from it, I just do not believe that being your ally benefits us.

I just told you how it benefits you. It saved you from being raped by the Germans (twice) and by the Soviets during the Cold War.

 

[perseverance]

who are our british friends? Well why don't we start with all the british soldiers who have died fighting on our side..

They go to Afghanistan because it's their job, they didn't go out to these far off places for the United States.

I just told you how it benefits you. It saved you from being raped by the Germans (twice) and by the Soviets during the Cold War.

Risible, next you'll be telling me that the United States was the sole reason that World War II was won.

That would be almost as hilarious as the US trying to stop nations like Iran having nuclear weaponry when the only nation to use them was the United States.

 

[jammer]

They go to Afghanistan because it's their job, they didn't go out to these far off places for the United States.

They fight and die with us because the british know the americans did the same for them.. thats why the british government is our ally today

Risible, next you'll be telling me that the United States was the sole reason that World War II was won.

oh no, the fact that 15 million americans served in europe and the pacific and that the US paid for the entire war had Nothing to do with the fact that the allies won. After all britain and the soviet union were doing so well on their own before the united states arrived to save their a$$es

:crackup: :crackup: :crackup:

That would be almost as hilarious as the US trying to stop nations like Iran having nuclear weaponry when the only nation to use it was the United States.

So we should let iran have nuclear weapons, you're a genius!

 

[backseatjuan]

since all we NEED is the N guard, the nuke missile subs (about 1/2 of them) and maybe the spec ops boys.

That' for defense against real enemies.


But let's not forget the imaginary enemies that the United States creates by crashing its own planes into buildings. These imaginary enemies are needed for the little Hitler syndrome the bankers that control your country have.


So no scum, you have to pay taxes, and they have to print more money and spend that sh`t to kill people.


I suggest you just sh`t up and accept it, because concentration camps (oyy oyy, I misspoke, reeducation fema camps) are in place for your smart ass. You will be reeducated if you are on the yellow hit list, and exterminated if you smart enough to make it to the red kill list.