World is Falling Apart Thread (Locked forever)

[jp1]

They probably wouldn't admit it, but a lot of western nations also love the fact that we basically pay for their defenses.

Without USA, NATO would fall apart, and Russia would annex all of Europe. Next time one of you Europeans want to denounce the USA, be glad you're at least not speaking Russian to do it.

He's 'Murican.

[ElkinFencer10]

To be fair, in Japan's case it's our influence on the post WWII constitution that takes the choice away from them. There's an aspect of national pride that gets trampled on as a result.

It's not just our influence; we the wrote the constitution for them. I have great admiration for Japan because of that, but I agree that it's impractical for them to have such limitations and for us to have such an expense.

I have no problem with America's defending our allies, but we shouldn't double as the UN's military force. Of course, I've been saying for years that we need to cut our military spending by at least 50% (that would still give us the world's best funded military by far) and use that money to balance our budget, pay off our debt, and invest in the social services we so desperately need.

[Ack]

Really if we should learn anything from the last few wars it's that you don't invade a country, topple a regime, and try to rebuild it when it's neighboring regions aren't stable and/or friendly with the regime your toppling. We basically just threw fuel on the fire that is the Middle East with our recent conflicts and now we get to see the repercussions. Honestly we need to either A.) Obliterate the enemy as quickly as possible, or B.) do surgical strikes/operations targeting the worst problem areas covertly with a small specialized force. These long drawn out public wars just lead to more deaths, hate, and expenses in the long run and "rebuilding" then leaving does jack all when you have to go back and mop things up again within a decade. Another thing is training/arming the military of the country you just beat the hell out of is a horrible idea unless you are prepared to stay with them for the long haul.

Actually...we did this. During Desert Storm, we wiped out the world's fourth largest military in a matter of weeks. We used a small specialized force to conduct operations in Somalia in the mid-1990s that resulted in the deaths of several US military personnel. Operation Iraqi Freedom was launched in March 2003, and within a matter of months we had brought down the enemy government, driven their dictator into hiding, and then captured him before New Years. We hit with such speed and ferocity that rival powers completely rethought their strategic plans for how to deal with a sudden US invasion.

The issue in Iraq wasn't that neighboring nations were unstable or were friendly to the regime. Iran, Syria, and Kuwait loathed Saddam. He had gone to war with all of them within the previous 25 years, subjugated the vast majority of his population, and had attempted genocide against the Kurdish regions in the north. Very few people in the region can say they "liked" Saddam or his government. Initially when the Iraqi government collapsed, the remnants of the Ba'athists began an insurgent campaign that was then further fueled by missteps in handling the transition of power. In particular we banned former Ba'athist officials from participating in the new government, which resulted in up to 100,000 people put out of work that were then easy recruits for a guerrilla force.

Also, while opposing nations and stateless organizations in the region may not have liked Saddam, they seized upon the opportunity to hit a bigger, exposed enemy. Hence al-Qaeda moved in to support and control Sunni guerrillas while Iran began funding and arming Shia militia. These groups first targeted us but also went after the new Iraqi security forces, which were still relatively untrained and green in the field. This, combined with moves that could be considered politically retaliatory by new Iraqi PM Nouri al-Maliki, led to the continued destabilization of the country.

There are two major lessons that I see for the US in Iraq(and they are effectively repeats of lessons from Vietnam):

1. Democratic nations cannot fight protracted wars unless faced with a threat directly that the public can see.

2. Post-war nation building requires putting in power individuals who take conciliatory approaches to deposed government officials and are seen as above reprisal.

Unfortunately we screwed the pooch on lesson 2, and as a result we got screwed over on lesson 1.

[Exhuminator]

1. Democratic nations cannot fight protracted wars unless faced with a threat directly that the public can see.

2. Post-war nation building requires putting in power individuals who take conciliatory approaches to deposed government officials and are seen as above reprisal.

Don't forget

3. Intentionally creating power vacuums insures instability, aiding in continuous protracted military industrial expenditure.

[ElkinFencer10]

1. Democratic nations cannot fight protracted wars unless faced with a threat directly that the public can see.

2. Post-war nation building requires putting in power individuals who take conciliatory approaches to deposed government officials and are seen as above reprisal.

Don't forget

3. Intentionally creating power vacuums insures instability, aiding in continuous protracted military industrial expenditure.

Not to mention that the creation of that power vacuum is what gave ISIS and opportunity to form.

[Ack]

I have no problem with America's defending our allies, but we shouldn't double as the UN's military force. Of course, I've been saying for years that we need to cut our military spending by at least 50% (that would still give us the world's best funded military by far) and use that money to balance our budget, pay off our debt, and invest in the social services we so desperately need.

The reason we contribute so heavily to the UN is because most nations tend not to or pull back at the first sign of struggle. In 1990s Rwanda, most UN forces were effectively unarmed and unequipped soldiers from African nations. The only really effective lot in the group were the Belgians, and after a couple of their soldiers were killed while trying to protect civilians, Belgium pulled all of them out(against their wishes). Most countries tend to drag their soldiers out of the UN at the first hint of trouble. Conversely two of the largest contributors of UN peacekeeping troops are actually India and Pakistan.

Oh, and as for our military expenditures...the truth is, that money is actually being spent on way more than you realize. The military and military contractors have made massive contributions to the United States and the world using that money: the Internet for example, or satellite technology. Robotics, radar, transportation, aeronautics, radio tech, cybersecurity, medicine, space exploration, undersea exploration, and all of the resulting industries have all benefited from military spending. And that's just on the R&D side, not to mention the considerable amount of aid and rescue work our military engages in, and the millions of civilians employed by the military or military contractors throughout the country.

[Ack]

Not to mention that the creation of that power vacuum is what gave ISIS and opportunity to form.

Actually, ISIS formed in the crucible of the Syrian Civil War from two organizations, the al-Nusra Front in Syria and the Islamic State of Iraq. The Islamic State of Iraq, which is just one name of what was Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's al-Qaeda in Iraq, is actually from an older organization of Zarqawi's that pledged allegiance to al-Qaeda in 2004, the Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad, founded in 1999 in Jordan. Zarqawi formed this group after a stint in a Jordanian prison, which was the result of his forming another terrorist organization(Jund al-Sham) after returning from Afghanistan to fight the Soviet invasion as a Mujaheddin...though admittedly he actually didn't do much fighting against the Soviets. al-Zarqawi only arrived there while the Soviets were pulling out and actually spent his time in Afghanistan as a reporter.

[MrPopo]

I have no problem with America's defending our allies, but we shouldn't double as the UN's military force. Of course, I've been saying for years that we need to cut our military spending by at least 50% (that would still give us the world's best funded military by far) and use that money to balance our budget, pay off our debt, and invest in the social services we so desperately need.

Oh, and as for our military expenditures...the truth is, that money is actually being spent on way more than you realize. The military and military contractors have made massive contributions to the United States and the world using that money: the Internet for example, or satellite technology. Robotics, radar, transportation, aeronautics, radio tech, cybersecurity, medicine, space exploration, undersea exploration, and all of the resulting industries have all benefited from military spending. And that's just on the R&D side, not to mention the considerable amount of aid and rescue work our military engages in, and the millions of civilians employed by the military or military contractors throughout the country.

Right; the money being spent ends up employing a shitton of people. If you massively slashed that it would be a huge surge in unemployment.

[Exhuminator]

Gee guys, I'm glad our government is so clean and transparent with its military expenditure, and there's absolutely no waste of tax payer money at all.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/03/1 ... nse-Budget

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-p ... LQ20131118

[Ack]

Gee guys, I'm glad our government is so clean and transparent with its military expenditure, and there's absolutely no waste of tax payer money at all.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/03/1 ... nse-Budget

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-p ... LQ20131118

Admittedly though there's waste pretty much anywhere the government spends money. Hell, there's waste anywhere money is spent.