Did Biden suggest a plus side of war?

[randr]

His talk about how good weapons economy will be for us is not what I want to hear.

[SharonClark]

1. Do you have a source?

[randr]

2. Yes, recent speech

[SharonClark]

5. A real source? Like a video or transcript of his exact words?

[Sympthsical]

6. New York Times has a transcript

Here's the salient excerpt:

From the outset, I have said I will not send American troops to fight in Ukraine. All Ukraine is asking for is help, for the weapons, munitions, the capacity, the capability to push invading Russian forces off their land. And the air defense systems to shoot down Russian missiles before they destroy Ukrainian cities.

Let me be clear about something.

We send Ukraine equipment sitting in our stockpiles. And when we use the money allocated by Congress, we use it to replenish our own stores, our own stockpiles, with new equipment. Equipment that defends America and is made in America. Patriot missiles for air defense batteries, made in Arizona. Artillery shells manufactured in 12 states across the country, in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas. And so much more.

You know, just as in World War II, today patriotic American workers are building the arsenal of democracy and serving the cause of freedom.

[randr]

10. The masters of war continue to place profit over progress

And, I may add, PEACE!

[emulatorloo]

14. IMHO that's Fox news style willful misinterpretation of what Biden said.

People ignorantly think we are sending cash money to Ukraine. We are not.

Biden needed to explain the old equipment stockpile situation to the American people so they don’t fall for Republican disinformation.

[womanofthehills]

48. Big profits

We’re #1: The U.S. Government is the World’s Largest Arms Dealer

“The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) came out with its annual analysis of the global arms trade this week and as usual, the United States was the number one weapons exporter by a large margin. For the five years from 2017 to 2021, the U.S. accounted for 39 percent of major arms deliveries worldwide, over twice what Russia transferred and nearly 10 times what China sent to its weapons clients. In addition, the U.S. had far more customers – 103 nations, or more than half of the member states of the United Nations.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhartung/2022/03/18/were-1-the-us-government-is-the-worlds-largest-arms-dealer/?sh=1619499b5bb9

[SharonClark]

34. Thank you.

[Magoo48]

41. Only the greedy MIC and other profiteers benefit from war. All humanity fails.

[Caliman73]

42. While I am not a fan of militarism, I can't see that as a "plus side of war".

He is saying that the reality of the world is that we supply weapons to countries that are fighting for their survival against an aggressor. That we are using weapons that have been manufactured already and sitting in our stock piles. That sending those older weapons to help countries defend themselves, then allows us to use money ALREADY allocated for defense, to acquire newer more technologically advanced systems for our defense that are built by our workers in our country.

I don't see it as a "plus side" I see it as putting the best possible framing on a shitty situation.

[Sympthsical]

43. Oh, I agree

He's not making a bad point. It's a silver lining of the situation.

It just kind of felt a little ham-handedly shoved in there to me. But mine is more a speech writing critique than a policy one.

[womanofthehills]

49. We sell weapons to 103 nations

https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhartung/2022/03/18/were-1-the-us-government-is-the-worlds-largest-arms-dealer/?sh=1619499b5bb9

[BeyondGeography]

3. He said it would help companies in TX, PA and OH

Not a highlight of his speech. That’s a backroom point, IMO. Pisses more people off than it wins over.

[LymphocyteLover]

7. But it may appeal to Republicans in the House, who he needs to win votes from

[JI7]

4. Probably has to do with the people saying it hurts the US

to provide this to Ukraine , Israel etc

[sarisataka]

28. That is how I took his comments

But I believe it could have been phrased better

[womanofthehills]

50. Not just them - we sell to 103 nations

Our weapons have flooded the world for a few to make big bucks. Many in congress are invested in these companies

[EX500rider]

52. And if those countries didn't buy from the US they would get them from China or Russia etc

Not sure how that's a improvement.
Countries do have legitimate defense needs.

[bucolic_frolic]

8. What choice do we have? They can eat our civilization, or we can assist in fighting them.

[randr]

9. That has eternally been the question

Fight or Flight
We seem to be incapable of taking the profits out of weaponization.

[The Magistrate]

11. Just Because Someone Makes Money Off It Doesn't Mean It Oughtn't Be Done

It's an unfortunate fact the weaponry is a necessity, and 'arsenal of democracy' is a fair enough rallying call. More true than otherwise at the moment.

[bigtree]

15. the objectionable thing isn't that someone's making money. That's a canard.

his remarks suggested that production of replacement weapons was part of his justification for appropriating the money.

It was an unfortunate, and unsettling remark in an amazingly prescient and historic address.

Framing arming Ukraine as a boon for states producing replacement weaponry, in any context, is a dubious and dangerous thing to say when discussing justifications for militarism.

[The Magistrate]

17. Seems More Honesty Than Offense To Me, Sir

The more salient point is that replacement was already in the works, and so it is a canard to paint supplying weapons to Ukraine as a money cost to the United States, which is the posture our fifth column in Congress thinks will make support for Russian atrocity look respectable. It is further worth observing that, as wars often do, battle in Ukraine has made hash of peacetime projections of how much ammunition would be needed. Meeting present needs and building future stocks will take labor and capital and produce profit, there's no point blinking it.

[bigtree]

33. so it's to the point that money spent isn't a burden to the U.S.

...as much as it's a boon.

Greasing the skids will get you there fast, but there might be a problem slowing down once you arrive at your destination.

So says our nation's history of weapons production in response to political and perceived, persuaded, or provoked national security interests and concerns.

Production for use.

Abe Lincoln, at Edwardsville, Illinois, on September 11, 1858:

"What constitutes the bulwark of our own liberty and independence is not our frowning battlements, our bristling seacoast, the guns of our war steamers, or the strength of our gallant and disciplined army. These are not the reliance against the resumption of tyranny in our fair land. All of them may be turned against our liberties without making us stronger or weaker for the struggle."

"Our reliance is in the love of liberty, which God has planted in our bosoms. Our defense is the preservation of the spirit, which prizes liberty as the heritage of all men, in all lands everywhere." Destroy this spirit and you have planted the seeds of despotism at your down doors."

[The Magistrate]

44. In The Political Present, Sir, It Is A Useful Point

So I've no objection to it being made.

[bigtree]

53. cart leading the horse

...playing rhetorical politics with the goal of greasing the skids for military spending.

In this one instance, the president has not only taken the bait of republican demagoguery, but he's casting military spending in a manner which encourages patronism - just to make a political point which is a rabbit hole of justification for a whole host of future military industrial spending, and giving credibility to a canard.

I'm old enough to recall million dollar missiles dropping in the desert as Lockheed and Ratheon rubbed their hands together with glee at the prospect of replenishment, which was then advantaged to include even newer forms of destruction for the war market.

9-11 was a watershed for the military industrial industry. Is this another watershed moment?

It would be better if we simply handed the money to defense industries and let them spend it themselves - Richard Perle

[SteveX]

12. Seems to me

That President Biden was explaining how the system actually works when Congress appropriates money for weapons in Ukraine.
I would assume most people don’t know how this works.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

13. It's horrifying.

[Srkdqltr]

16. So.. of everything he said, that was all you heard?

[Autumn]

22. It's not like we don't have enough weapons to blow up the fucking world yet. Amirite?

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone.

We have a lot of hungry, cold, homeless people in need. I wish politicians would think of them for a change

[Srkdqltr]

23. Of course. He said that too. Wish I knew how to fix it.

[Autumn]

25. I'm at the point where I want to hear him tell Hamas and Israel to work it out, or not.

We're done here.

[MyNameIsJonas]

26. Of course you're at that point. You've got nothing to lose.

Americans are the most selfish people out there. They don't care if the world obliterates itself just as long as it doesn't impact them.

It's always been that way. It was that way during WWII too until the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. Americans did not like funding the fight in Europe.

It's so easy to not care what is happening in Ukraine or the rest of Europe or the Middle East when you can lay your head down, tucked nicely in your bed at night.

Let's be honest, the ME can burn and the chances of it impacting you personally, beyond maybe the frustrations of higher gas prices, is pretty small. Even the events of 9/11 barely impacted most people directly.

We've always had luxury of disengaging from the world because of how isolated we are geographically.

It's easy to not care.

So, congrats, you and MTG have something in common.

[Autumn]

29. Israel is not my country. Palestine in not my country. The United states of America is my

country if anyone in the ME decided to bomb my country them I will show concern and will be fine with going in. Perhaps Hamas and Bibi need to be treated like children instead of so called leaders. . Work out your problems or don't, we are done.

[randr]

46. I beg your pardon

There are thousands of Americans buried across this planet who gave their lives for the freedoms of others.
We are' frankly, growing tired of the real world "loses" that never seem to end and mostly are suffered by the innocent.
I think the parties involved have had enough time to work out the issues they MUST deal with. A whole generation of people are subject to the poor decisions of people long gone.

[W_HAMILTON]

38. The part of the speech that was quoted above was in reference to Ukraine vs. Russia.

Not Israel vs. Hamas.

Are you willing to turn your back on our Ukrainian allies fighting for their democracy against fascist invaders?

I'm glad Joe Biden isn't.

[Autumn]

40. There is a huge difference between what is going on between the Ukraine and Russia and what has been going

on for well over 50 years with Israel and Palestine. One is a war for Democracy, the other is not. I support the Ukraine in their justified war against Russia. I do not support Hamas or Israel in their frequent bombing attacks against each other. .

[randr]

35. No, I heard a man I am proud of

Still, he reminded me of the MIC we have been warned of. And it seems we have grown complacent.

[leftstreet]

18. "patriotic workers are building the arsenal of democracy"

well

[Elessar Zappa]

19. What's the problem with that statement?

Ukraine and Israel need weapons to defend their democracies from fascists. Someone has to make them.

[leftstreet]

20. It was an effective statement during WWII

But today it's a bit tone deaf

If Biden had been speaking to workers at a weapons manufacturer, it would make sense. But to the general population - I think not.

[bigtree]

21. production for use

[peggysue2]

24. If we lived in a perfect world, there would be no need for weapons

But that's not the world we live in.

We are engaged in a global war between democracy vs despotism. It's a war we cannot afford to lose, globally or domestically, unless we're willing to give up on democracy and stretch our necks to the autocrats.

The opposing sides--Putin, Putin-like nations, wanna-be movements, as well as terrorist groups--are quite willing if not eager to put their boots on the neck of every existing democratic country. Supporting our democratic allies is an obligation as well as a defensive act and in that sense you can, indeed, call it patriotic, supporting our country and our form of governance with all its warts.

I would love to think that talking things over would resolve these issues. But that's simply not the case. We either defend ourselves and our allies now or we it give up. My father and grandfather's generation knew this. Now it's our turn, our moment to secure the future, a democratic future, for our kids and grand-babies.

God have mercy on us if we don't.

[leftstreet]

31. Americans are against more money for the military

You don't have to search for polls, just ask your neighbors or someone at a grocery store.

I was only pointing out that we're not living through WWII, and I think Biden's statement was extremely tone deaf.

[peggysue2]

32. His comments are only tone deaf if . . .

we disregard the true danger of the moment. I don't argue the bloated nature of our defense expenditures over time--projects gone bad, hideously over-priced equipment and probably corrupt intermediaries. But . . .

This is a moment we cannot shrug off or wave our hands around in virtue-signaling. The threat is real. The danger is close, as in right in our back yard with these on-going coup maneuvers. If our allies need help, we provide it. Root causes need to be dealt with but right now we must neutralize the situation to stop the killing be it in Israel, Ukraine, etc.

As far as asking my neighbors or taking a poll? I don't think either route is appropriate when we're talking about doing the right thing, the necessary thing to protect our democracy.

It's all about the framing. I think if you asked most Americans if they supported democratic governance, the vast majority would say, Yes, absolutely. Well, it doesn't come free.

On the other hand, there are many projects in the United States, people and well-being projects, desperately needing funding and attention.

However, if we lose our democracy? None of that will matter. Ever again.

[ismnotwasm]

27. Biden is very skilled in tough political waters

Like, amazing at it. He was using historical context to lay out an ugly current reality. We didn’t start this fire

[Emrys]

30. It does maybe jar, but I think he's just stating a fact.

A lot of the complaints from RWers and Putinites about the support given to Ukraine, for instance, talked as if what was being given was hard cash rather than (often outmoded) weaponry, and that any money given would just disappear (in the more extreme allegations, into Biden's pockets), whereas a GREAT deal of it will circulate in the US economy and those of other countries offering material support.

His statement addresses that, if anyone's listening.

[WarGamer]

36. Any worker who can weld and build a navy ship or fighter plane...

Can weld and build housing and infrastructure for Americans.

[treestar]

37. there are people who claim WWII got us out of the depression

that mentality it still out there.

[randr]

47. WW11 did lift us out of a depression

And in the end the man who lead us to victory warned us of the monster we had created.

[Progressive dog]

39. No he did not suggest a plus side to war

He told the truth. He spoke of being prepared for war.

[betsuni]

45. No.

[revmclaren]

51. No.