General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Military ruined this country
The American economy is significantly based in the production of war machinery. War machinery has almost no value outside of wartime. Another resource subtracted from the system are young people, who, would otherwise be working at the factory producing washing machines or table saws or clothing if they weren't in Germany providing security over any resurgence in Nazism.
America followed the war weapons industry the way China followed the make everything else industry. Look who won. We are now arguing over whether class sizes should be increased, social security should be decreased, and all because America decided that making tanks and warships and jets were the answer to everything.
At the best engineering schools, military recruiters are snatching up the best and brightest to go design another weapon or drone. These same minds are sequestered and will not improve the competitiveness of America globally or even domestically because what they're producing is worthless.
So let's not pretend that the fiscal cliff has nothing to do with the stolen resources that make up the American Military Industrial Complex. All other theft is minor by comparison. The Military also has the status of being it's own country. It has it's own land, court system, and even hospitals and shopping centers.
In order to coddle the citizens into accepting this type of system that jeopardizes their lives, is through propaganda. Americans have been convinced that without this expansive military, we are doomed to be attacked by our enemies. So, we again can thank the military for creating a populace of paranoid freaks.
So let's continue the arguments over social security, medicare, infrastructure, food stamps, et al. The 800 pounder will continue to be the 800 pounder.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Generic Other
(29,080 posts)It's sad. And there seems nothing we can do to change this fact. Men without balls quivering in fear. Mostly old men who didn't get their chance on the battlefield.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)Government sponsored research with military focus has lead to
- Cell phones
- GPS
- The internet
- Advanced batteries
- Digital cameras
- Airliners
- Personal computers (actually computers of all sizes)
There are many more...
Arctic Dave
(13,812 posts)Maybe. Maybe not.
But was spending billions of dollars a year to the war machine worth it?
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)Without NASA, which was bascially a military sideline, any number of things, including velcro would not be here today.
The lightstick the kids love on Halloween was invented in a military lab if you need another example
Arctic Dave
(13,812 posts)Once again, that lightstick is nice, but it's not like it changed the world.
But let's face it, a lot of the military budget does not go to research, they take others research and militarize it.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)They can afford it, most civilian companies cannot
jeff47
(26,549 posts)The military has the luxury of paying for basic research. Civilian world long-term R&D is virtually gone now. Companies demand a faster turn-around than basic research can produce.
Today, basic research is only funded by Universities or the government (both DoD and civilian). Cutting DoD spending in favor of social spending won't improve that.
Arctic Dave
(13,812 posts)However the overall budget for R&D is minimal for the DoD.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Arctic Dave
(13,812 posts)On a scale. It's appalling.
The problem with military R&D is that of all the money used, little can be useful outside of killing people.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)
OnlinePoker
(6,127 posts)It was invented in 1948 by a Swiss electrical engineer and patented in 1955. The U.S. had nothing to do with its invention.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velcro
As for the rest, military manufacturing, especially the high tech items like aircraft, is done in the U.S. to keep the technology from going to the enemy. The workers are well-paid and in most arms industries, unionized. If the U.S. stopped manufacture of weapons, your manufacturing base would essentially collapse as very few things can be made in the U.S. that can't be made somewhere else for a lot less money. As we saw during Black Friday, people will still buy foreign made crap at Walmart despite the protests because they won't (or can't) pay the cost if the item was actually made in the U.S.A. and the workers were paid a decent wage.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)
godai
(2,902 posts)Generic Other
(29,080 posts)to become self-sustaining? In a free enterprise model aren't you supposed to show a profit you wish to stay in business?
The military sucked the taxpayers dry in a worthless quest to bring PAX Americana to a world that never asked for nor accepted the idea. They did this in spite of the fact they impoverished the American people, many of whom vehemently opposed this use of our tax dollars.
You say the military transformed modern life with its wonderful inventions, but it has terrorized and destroyed more lives than it has improved. It has made us feared and hated throughout the world.
How exactly might life have been better in America if we had followed Ike's advice and slowly demobilized our military industrial complex after WW2? We started the Cold War and sustained it with a massive arms build-up. How many nuclear warheads and other weapons systems did we develop since then? What is the cost of such technology in terms of dollars, of citizens' lives, effects on the environment? How many human necessities were left unmet? How many hungry, homeless, jobless Americans did it cost?
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)Its hard to plan and budget for, in and out of Government. Not sure it is possible to measure success. One helluva a lot of money has been spent, that's for damn sure. I used that short list to illustrate that good stuff comes from military oriented research, since it clearly has.
PAX Americana was done at the direction of the Federal Government in all of our names. The military did not spend a dime the Congress did not appropriate and the President approve. That includes Ike. I am not the only person to have pointed that out in this thread.
The would of/could of questions are interesting speculation. It is really hard to tell. In my current area of interest, the education system that had seemed to serve us well for generations clearly has broken down. More theories than dollars as to why that happened. Minority groups that had substantive investment have not risen at the level expected either.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)They ARE STILL doing it! I'd have to rewrite that into the OP title just to start.
What we need is a Military-Toys-R-US cyber-store everyone can visit to see the price tags.
How much does it cost to run the nimitz class aircraft carrier per year?
160 million = personnel.
Aircraft fuel and maintenance parts = $400 million per year.
Carrier depreciation $530 million.
Aircraft carrier fleet cost per year for family of four $200
Stealth Aircraft = $2 billion each
Predator missile $70,000.
F-22 Raptor stealth fighter jet costs $150 million.
Etc., etc.
If everyone had to go thru with a cart and pay on the way out, how much would they buy?
This idea would make an interesting edupolitical web site!
Generic Other
(29,080 posts)I also am not buying Korean Conflict, Vietnam Incursion, or Iraq Liberation. Or using a DAMN credit card to "Charge It!"
All the military is to me is a well armed moneysucking organization that has the hugest sense of entitlement on the planet.
Romulox
(25,960 posts)That's why BOTH parties enthusiastically support "Free Trade"--apparently oblivious to its consequences. That's why "Free Traders" like Robert Reich, Paul Krugman, and Bill Clinton can represent themselves as "economic populists" even as the American industrial infrastructure has withered under the policies they espouse.
probably comes in second to what ruined this country.
Romulox
(25,960 posts)It's all part of the same plan.
former-republican
(2,163 posts)
LeftInTX
(34,286 posts)"Genie" probably isn't the correct term, but it's something out of control.
Taverner
(55,476 posts)catch the spit.
(6 posts)Sit in your ergonomic computer chair and hash it out on DU. That oughtta solve things! 
rwsanders
(3,180 posts)A law that says that all imported items must be certified that they were produced in accordance with US environmental and labor laws and the companies that are importing it must pay for the certification.
Because let's be honest, this isn't about trade at all, but about profits and circumventing the law.
If that contradicts any of the free-trade treaties, well treaties be damned, it isn't the first time we've broken one.
Healthy international trade is such that items that can't be produced in one country are produced elsewhere and traded for something that the other country produces well. The Cousteau Society (when Jacques was still alive) loudly stated our model of economic development for developing countries was devastating to them.
liberalmike27
(2,479 posts)I say MSNBC, even Current TV to some extent isn't really liberal. They are the liberal representation of the corporate media. But liberal? Nope!
Free Trade has been awful. Yes, we have gotten cheap stereos, and clothes. The damage it's done is phenomenal.
The obvious is job-losses, of course. Less obvious, but completely connected is the effect of the job losses on tax collection. We've lost about 30 million jobs, and if you do the calculation of all taxes lost, you'll come up with about one Trillion a year in lost revenues.
So, see a story about a city, or state, or even the federal government struggling?--think free trade. Free trade did that, free trade destroyed our tax base.
Add to that, without the good jobs, without the contributions to labor, and then from labor to politicians, more Republicans were elected, and Democrats became more con-servative. This resulted in nearly 35 years of low, to no wage growth. So people who might have paid more taxes because of the natural growth of wages, pay less now.
Republicans bought up and corrupted the media in their favor, and they bought up Republicans and Democrats too, along with about 30 think-tanks they use to disseminate information into society.
And there is the increased spending every City and State are having to shoulder because of increased crime, due to all of this.
To fix it? The first thing is to realize what a complete and rounded problem it has been, to spread the thought around more on social media, and hopefully try to elect politicians who actually know how godawful it's been to the U.S.'s employment and tax base. Keep pointing out, as you have, that our media isn't liberal at all in this way, and that it has been a terrible thing, even to non-union jobs that by now would probably be up to $13 an hour had these jobs not been exported. And it was a choice. It wasn't inevitable, it wasn't unstoppable, it was a choice, by our government.
And now, it's folding in on itself, it's collapsing everything. We add tariffs, make product cheaper to produce here, and other countries will then have to raise their salaries to create some demand for the products they produce in their own country, rather than mostly supplying us with product. Demand is the key.
nolabels
(13,133 posts)Our countries ability to protect the corporate largess around the world with the scraps they are throwing us is going to collapse, that's when we get to pick up the pieces. Hope it turns out reasonable but with so many indoctrinated and uneducated fools it's looks tough
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)the companies that are part of the military-industrial complex?
When President Truman finished his presidency, he drove himself and his wife back to Missouri in their modest car.
When LBJ finished his presidency, he and his family members got rich from the Viet Nam activity. Until his widow died in 2007, his widow profited by being on the board of directors at Halliburton. She was was Halliburton's largest individual share-owner after its merger with KBR, a company that got rich from its contracting activities in Viet Nam.
Even secretaries and assistants in the White House, and persons related to them, can get rich by investing in companies that are part of the war machine.
Who is going to stop this madness? Nobody that we know.
earthside
(6,960 posts)We hear it constantly ... if you don't think this is part of the military-industrial-lobbyist propaganda effort, then you are sadly mistaken. All part of instilling the notion that to oppose military spending and general submission to the military is tantamount to ingratitude to all those who 'served' ... no matter what they did (eg. the huge military paper-pushing bureaucracy), or who they killed or maimed (eg. nerds in control rooms in Nevada dropping drone bombs on 'collateral damage' half a world away).
Special programs to find jobs for 'veterans' while those with no military 'service' are not accorded the same level of concern. Then there are career military retirees who draw a pension at 55 years old, then go to work for a 'defense' contractor and make thousands and thousands of dollars more each month courtesy of the gullible 'patriotic' middle class taxpayer.
We have created a special class of citizen in this country -- the military participant, who is praised and lauded for their personal choice, is/was paid by the rest of the taxpayers and who, if some are to be heeded, ought to be given more credence and deference on all issues (especially by the Repuglicans and veterans organizations who, I think if they could get their way, would give military personnel two votes each at election time).
It is the simple truth that we spend a trillion dollars a year on the military and military related agencies ... more if you start adding in spending for 'homeland' security. And it is also true that we could very adequately defend the United States, that is the fifty states, for less than half of what we are presently spending on what is in effect our imperial military.
I'm all for going over the 'fiscal cliff' if for the first time it actually means real cuts in the bloated military spending we have witnessed especially since 2001. There is plenty of money for all the needs of genuinely needy veterans of Bush's and Obama's stupid wars in Afghanistan and Iraq if we would just close about half of the imperial outposts (bases) that the country operates overseas -- it is just a matter of priorities (one reason why I do not give anything to 'charitable' veterans organizations).
The OP is more correct than they know, in my opinion -- the military has ruined this country and it will wreck this country once and for all if it isn't reined-in and we get to a much more reasonable and critical attitude towards the military and those who chose to join it.
JEB
(4,748 posts)for the profits of the oligarchs, just doesn't have the same ring to it. Though it is more accurate.
Bigmack
(8,020 posts)I "served" my country for 4 years... Marine Corps... during that time, I never.. NEVER... not for one second... served or protected the US.
I killed and brutalized darker people, I was the muscle for the MIC..
My generals tell it all...
“War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious.
“I spent 33 years in the Marines. Most of my time being a high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer for capitalism.”
Gen. Smedley Butler, USMC two time Medal of Honor recipient. 8 Purple Hearts
`I believe that if we had and would keep our dirty, bloody, dollar soaked fingers out of the business of these (Third World) nations so full of depressed, exploited people, they will arrive at a solution of their own. And if unfortunately their revolution must be of the violent type because the `haves' refuse to share with the `have-nots' by any peaceful method, at least what they get will be their own, and not the American style, which they don’t want and above all don’t want crammed down their throats by Americans.' –
Gen. David Shoup, United States Marine Commandant...Medal of Honor recipient.... 2 Purple Hearts (I'm proud to say that Gen Shoup was my Commandant during the first part of my time in.)
great white snark
(2,646 posts)I assume you wouldn't want any of that dirty Wall St. money.
Also, like it or not, you did protect and serve your fellow Marines who happen to be citizens of this country.
A HERETIC I AM
(24,876 posts)And after reading your post , it's clear you didnt read it at all
Bigmack
(8,020 posts)I took every dime I could get.
It didn't pay me back for what I did, but it got me educated enough to see the fucking truth.
Oh.. and fuck you, asshole.
You don't know shit.
My brother Marines were the only thing I fought for/served. Not the country.
Fuck you doesn't even cover it.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)Reminds me of some of the early morning conversations around the desk of our unit's Master Sergeant!
Served with the Marines at Camp Pendleton as a Naval Gunfire Liaison Officer...consider myself more Marine than Navy.
Semper Fi.
RepublicansRZombies
(982 posts)Stopped Prescott Bush from overthrowing FDR, but they are still trying...
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)after all they helped end Viet Nam.
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)Said if he knew before going in what he knew after, he would be speaking Candian today.
rwsanders
(3,180 posts)that is loyal to the ruling class.
Lightbulb_on
(315 posts)With only a fraction of one percent of the population serving?
rwsanders
(3,180 posts)1% with:
drones (with hellfire missles), tanks, armored personnel carriers, machine guns, A-10's, C-130 spector flying artillary platforms, helicopter gunships, etc. With the backing of the FBI, CIA, and NSA who are monitoring all electronic communication.
Vs. the small portion of the population who will stand up for their rights and the constitution
Tell me how you think it will go down.
You don't think they can convince those that are serving, that the people they are fighting are the threat to the country rather than those who are trying to fulfill it's meaning?
Look at the pay of an E-5 with some years in. They are making 25% more than I did as a state employee with a MS degree and this is an E-5 no dependents, high school education only and this was not a person that was collecting hazardous duty pay.
Why do you think Limbaugh is on armed forces radio?
I was taught in High School that this is how Prussia functioned. An "army with a country" the teacher said.
FailureToCommunicate
(14,605 posts)Good rant.
unhappycamper
(60,364 posts)
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)Texin
(2,851 posts)Little Orphan Annie's benefactor, Daddy Warbucks himself was such a person and the cartoon's creator understood that the people and their companies that supply munitions and infrastructure for the military are the ones that stand to gain the most from perpetual war. All anyone has to do to understand that sorry truth is to look at weasels like Cheney and Rumsfield to see this in action. Both of these warmongers stood to benefit in perpetuity by ginning up a war to drain profits from Halliburton and KBR, along with others like GE, Lockheed, Northrup Grumman, and others that manufacture the planes, engines, munitions, etc. that supply the military. These are the people and their companies that should earn the disgust of the citizens of this country. Another sinister and rarely mentioned factoid is that it benefits the warmongers to keep the majority of the citizens in this country poor or underemployed. What better way to recruit warriors for their military campaigns (in the absence of the draft) than to have no jobs or shit jobs for young, barely educated, mostly rural - but a larger growing number of urbanites - to become fodder for the neverending war efforts by the people will gain the most from wars and rumors of wars? It's true that the brass and the suits love their guns and glory, but without the ghouls to fan the flames of terror and their clamor for the endless war on terror, the exploitation of an increasingly ingorant population - ignorant wittingly, I might add - there'd be no real hunger for war in this country.
patrice
(47,992 posts)coalition_unwilling
(14,180 posts)and fill them back in (receiving a wage for so doing) than sit at home idle.
You can think of the military (and its sibling, the military-industrial complex) as a grand Keynesian experiment. Without government expenditures on munitions and materiel, one can definitively state that the civilian unemployment rate would be at least 2-3% higher than it currently is (standard macroeconomic theory).
One can argue whether this policy is the best Keynesian policy the country can follow. I say it is not, but that does not obviate the fact that the government spending helps keep the wheels of the economy turning and its pump primed (at the risk of a mixed metaphor). Likewise, the Keynesian element of our miltiary is kept secret from the American people, who are sold a whole host of propagandistic and miltarist fetishistic reasons for the huge military budgets.
Arctic Dave
(13,812 posts)that "hole" while we have other legitimate projects that need addressed.
coalition_unwilling
(14,180 posts)that cutting the miltiary budget without increasing government spending elsewhere will, all other things being equal, result in a shrunken GDP and consequently higher unemployment.
Here's an area where the government, for example, could and should dramatically increase spending, imho:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021884067
Arctic Dave
(13,812 posts)
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Republican President Eisenhower put them to work digging useful holes.
They connected all the holes together, poured in cement,
and then we had an Interstate Highway System.
coalition_unwilling
(14,180 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)slackmaster
(60,567 posts)
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Response to stevenleser (Reply #79)
stevenleser This message was self-deleted by its author.
Taverner
(55,476 posts)byeya
(2,842 posts)If you signed up knowing the country was engaged in wars of choice, and for the profit of the arms dealers, I don't have as much sympathy for you.
The "cult of the veteran" is still playing on the emotions of WW2 and the people drafted into other wars and acts of aggression. I don't buy into it.
OnlinePoker
(6,127 posts)Last edited Tue Nov 27, 2012, 12:32 AM - Edit history (1)
It's the same as saying if you go work as a lumberjack, knowing that it's a highly dangerous job, you wouldn't have much sympathy for them either. Every job has risks and it should be the employer's responsibility to mitigate that risk or pay for the consequences. The government, as the employer, has taken on that responsibility as they should have. It is up to management (the President and Congress) to decide how much risk to put the employees at.
patrice
(47,992 posts)Technically this would also include Iraq, because Iraq was SUPPOSED to be this quickie, slam, bam, thank-you-mam, roses in the streets experience, but it turned into HELL instead, not quite that nice "clean" low-American-body-count thrill ride the MSM was backing.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)... by a Republican General and President.
And now, we die a slow death to appease the warmongers of hate and destruction and get a shitload of grief if we dare to not bow down and worship at the alter of "teh troops."
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)The politicians did this to the military, to the economy, and to us all.
DinahMoeHum
(23,604 posts)vs. the military ("fighting fools"
do not make for a strong economy or a free nation.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)The military is subordinate to a civilian authority, one we elect to power.
We (the electorate) ruined this country.
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)And we keep electing the same ones over and over and over.
Arctic Dave
(13,812 posts)They either abide by them or they are told, They hate America" and other garbage.
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)People who will do the right thing rather than greasing the squeakiest wheel.
Arctic Dave
(13,812 posts)Maybe they should be realistic in what our countries threats really are and not basing it off of expanding their budgets.
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)
Arctic Dave
(13,812 posts)I'm not a big fan of his warmongering. That's why I didn't donate to him or help his campaign. I did vote for him though, not that it matters up here.
I focused soley on local candidates. Except Elizabeth Warren
BanTheGOP
(1,068 posts)We should disband all foreign US Military operations and, instead, cede our control of the military to the United Nations, along with providing them the patents dedicated strictly to the development of women and children killing machines. This will show other nations of the world that we DO mean business in not showing our bullying side, and allow them to stand down their own weapons so we all live in in harmony.
This worked for Europe, so what's good for the goose is good for Ed Flanders too.
patrice
(47,992 posts)its own peace missions, domestic & foreign.
Lightbulb_on
(315 posts)Until someone with a Dept of War decides to do something about it...
biohazard9550
(12 posts)Though I'm not sure how it can be properly implemented
Lightbulb_on
(315 posts)
Response to BanTheGOP (Reply #28)
Post removed
+1000000....
bvar22
(39,909 posts)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.
It is spending the sweat of its laborers,
the genius of its scientists,
the hopes of its children."
---President Dwight Eisenhower
ancianita
(43,307 posts)The rest of the nation's adults must support as much downsizing as possible. The military has created more enemies for the USA than it has friends, and as such, is a national security threat.
There's room in this economy to absorb those who lose jobs from a downsized military. They can transition to green renewables work, health-related fields, teaching, skills development through union training. They simply have to face that the bloated military-industrial-congressional complex is against America's long term interests. That their patriotic duty can be reflected in other work. 
KoKo
(84,711 posts)We've built schools , roads and embassies in Iran, Afghanistan and vast Military installations in Africa, and the ME in Quatar and elsewhere.
The constructions skills learned in Nation Building can be put to good use here in the USA.
Bring them HOME!
ancianita
(43,307 posts)the skills you claim for the military actually belong to military contracted corporate workers who our troops "protect" at much lower pay while those contractors do the "nation building." Very few skills taught to troops are applicable to helping nation building here anymore. My Navy-trained electrician brother knows this for a fact. None of this training is provided to troops anymore. So no. Nation building isn't what comes from bringing "trained" troops home. If you can prove otherwise, I welcome the enlightenment. But the scope of the military since Vietnam is no longer to train its troops with major nation building skills. Poll current veterans who can't find jobs.
As an aside: one example of our "nation building" was our helping -- legally and monetarily -- the Iraqis to write a constitution that provides ITS citizens with single payer healthcare for life. If WE can't afford it, how can they?
KoKo
(84,711 posts)and let Obama bring on a Jobs Act to really Work to Rebuild America and give all our returning soldiers and others Construction Jobs and those related to Rebuilding our American Infrastructure.
I understand what you say in your post about what has gone on...but, all of them need work and let those who have done it train those who haven't and lets bring them all home!
Thanks for your reply...
Arctic Dave
(13,812 posts)Oh, wait, they did.
Red Dawn.
See! Without a bloated Military the North Koreans will invade us and take our freedoms...Wait...What? The North Koreans will invade us?
That is the most idiotic movie plot ever.
True. It is a stupid movie plot but one that the military will more then willingly give their support to because it makes them look good and will help sell their budget demands.
eridani
(51,907 posts)--invading North Koreans could pose a real problem!
jeanlibny594283
(8 posts)Red Dawn is nonsense
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)
DOWNSIZE THE MILITARY
Baitball Blogger
(52,344 posts)salinen
(7,288 posts)sometimes I make sense.
Baitball Blogger
(52,344 posts)For some reason, they think Democracy takes too much time. Go figure.
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)Companies were made to make war machines that were "necessary" for WW II victory.
Then came the cold war, and the need for more sophisticated war machines.
Why can't we retool those industries again, to make solar panels, wind turbines, more fuel efficient cars?
Are they all that much afraid of change, or are they making more profits from war machines?
zipplewrath
(16,698 posts)Hardly. It has been a very long time since engineering, or even the hard sciences, could claim to be scooping up the "best and brightest". God knows they aren't going to the military acadamies. Banking and finance probably have the claim today, followed by law school and medical school. Engineering school these days is run roughly like a trade school and has little interest in the "best and brightest". Top mathematics graduates end up working for Wall Street creating those "derivatives" and other instruments that cause so much trouble.
white_wolf
(6,257 posts)Law school applications are down 40%. It's no longer a safe bet career wise so the best and brightest are probably going into banking and finance like you said.
zipplewrath
(16,698 posts)I've heard that the law degree has become a replacement for the MBA for alot of people. It's more valuable, even if you never take/pass the bar or actually practice law.
It is true that with a law degree you can do everything from investment counseling to real estate broker. Heck you can perform marriages too in most states. About the only thing you can't do is practice medice, or give a massage. (States have tight restrictions on massage so that they can control prostitution).
white_wolf
(6,257 posts)The only thing I want to do is practice law, so I never considered other options. Honestly, I couldn't really imagine going through all the trouble of law school and not taking the bar.
zipplewrath
(16,698 posts)Can't remember where, and I'm always suspicious of statistics in the general press. But something like 15% of folks that graduate from law school never pass/take the bar.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)The mainstream media, other than Fox News, are owned by large corporations like GE who also profit from a war economy so they really don't want to show what we are doing in other countries. To do so would outrage the average American and they would demand that our military and foreign policy be reformed. In order to get the truth of what is going on, many of us turn to Amy Goodman's Democracy Now, or Thom Hartmann, or even Al Jazeera, which are hard for the average busy American to find somewhere on the radio or on TV to tune into to get the latest headline news. They have also been buying up our print media so that it's hard to get in depth reporting and editorials anymore that are factual and not spin in our newspapers and magazines.
Separation
(1,975 posts)With people who I have assisted or lives saved. For the one poster who was in the Corps for 5 years and didn't help one person. I find that hard to believe, in my time in the Marine Corps I did humanitarian missions in Haiti, Puerto Rico, east and west Africa with thousands of tons of humanitarian goods delivered. I'm currently in the Coast Guard and have saved 26 lives with about as many assisted.
Only around %10 of the military is combat arms. The rest are POG's, support. That's a pretty broad brush your swiping there. How many 3rd world towns now have running water, or a bridge, etc. to say the military ruined this country...that's just closed mindedness.
then are you saying that the military is a great institution and we couldn't have a sucessful country without? Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, lost many millions of lives. Much of those lives were about resources. If you don't understand that we attacked Iraq twice to steal the oil, then you're naive. And we don't need the same institution that does humanitarian work to drop bombs from drones.
Separation
(1,975 posts)I know first hand that the military is there to break shit and kill people. I am definitely not naive about Iraq. But to paint a broad brush and say that the military ruined this country is very close minded.
It was the same military that saved our country from being torn in two. It was the same military that freed Europe twice.
Now if one was to say the military industry and the people behind that were to blame along with the politicians in charge then I may be more apt to agree. The military doesn't just roll off on their own, last I checked civilians told us where to go.
was the last legitimate war and it ended 67 years ago. We need a military, but not the one that currently exists. This one is corrupt, mostly because politicians are using the military to bring pork to their districts, which almost all contain bases or military contractors, like you've noticed too. So we continue to overproduce military hardware and occupy too many countries.
We've outsourced almost every industry overseas. We need to recreate an industrial base that doesn't exist anymore. The only way to achieve this is to reduce the military budget by half at least.
quinnox
(20,600 posts)There are some duers who buy into this too, unfortunately, going by a couple recent threads where they showed this kind of brainwashed "the military are our heroes" attitude.
Even the "support the troops" is garbage, if you think about it. Um, Why should I support someone killing people that I don't think should be killed? (re: Iraq, for example) No one deserves automatic hero status just by joining the fucking military. Hell, a few of these folks are out and out psychos who will kill people with no remorse, and get off on it. Remember those leaked videos where the soldiers were pissing on the corpses in Afghanistan, and making fun of the corpses, pretty disgusting stuff. Remember the army dude who went on a killing spree there, he went and killed woman and children, while they were sleeping in their beds. Needless to say, I don't consider that heroic in the least, in fact, it is the lowest form of cowardice...
That said, of course there are a few real heroes in the military, just like there are heroes in other fields and jobs. Like firemen or policeman or medical workers, and so on. Individuals can be heroes in all fields, but it seems, the military folks are treated as automatic ones by a lot of our people, and by our culture in this country. I called it a "military worshipping culture" in a previous OP, and I believe that is true.
byeya
(2,842 posts)
mike_c
(37,051 posts)I'd like to see the total defense budget cut by 75%.
elleng
(141,926 posts)nothing inherently wrong with the military as long as civilians make ultimate decision and DO NOT ALLOW military industry to gain influence.
99Forever
(14,524 posts).. that ship sailed a very long time ago, which (if I am guessing correctly) is the point of the OP.
elleng
(141,926 posts)and with people who make their lives there.
I supported Wes Clark for President, there is no better person for that or any job, and I learned a great deal from him.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)... "nothing inherently wrong with the military." (even that is debatable), there damn sure is plenty wrong with a society that is militarized and gives carte blanche to it's actions and open the gates to it's national treasure.
alarimer
(17,146 posts)How dare anybody even suggest cutting the military budget! If you try, you hate our troops! They have us cowed by fear (all terror all the time) and a rapt worship of the everything military.
Eisenhower warned against the military-industrial complex and it has come back to bit us in the ass time and time again.
The make up phony wars just to keep weapons manufacturers in business. Every contract for every weapon has parts made in almost every district. No Congressman is going to risk the wrath of his constituents by closing factories in his or her district.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)2010 US GDP: $14.45 Trillion
US Military Budget 2010: Procurement $140.1 billion, Research and Development $79.1 billion. So $219.2 Billion spent on the production of war machinery.
So, 1.5% of GDP was spent on the production of war machinery. 1.5% is not "significantly based". For comparison, we spent $421 Billion at Wal-Mart in 2010, which was 3% of GDP.
Let's put the entire 2010 defense budget in there: $683.7 billion. 4.7% GDP. Still hard to call less than 5% GDP as 'significantly based'.
Why use 2010 numbers? It's the last year there was a budget.
Sources: (DU won't put them in as links nicely)
GDP: http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_cd&idim=country:USA&dl=en&hl=en&q=us+gdp
Military Budget: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States#Budget_for_2010
I trust the irony of saying this on the Internet is lost on you. Perhaps you should go reheat some Turkey-day leftovers in your microwave oven. Or you could call someone using your cellular telephone.
Unemployment among factory workers is currently very high. If those soldiers were "back home", it's unlikely they'd find nice factory jobs.
Ironically, high-paying factory jobs in the US are primarily in building equipment for the military - they can't outsource for classification reasons.
The US.
US 2011 GDP: $15.09 Trillion, 315 Million people, $47,904 per person.
China 2011 GDP: $7.32 Trillion, 1.35 Billion people, or $5,422.22 per person.
"China's kicking our ass!!" is a false right-wing talking point designed to slash US worker paychecks. Additionally, China's stability is based on unsustainable growth. They're starting to have some problems since they can no longer maintain their growth.
You're finally brushing up against the actual issue - it's not that our economy is based on making weapons. Too much of our Federal Budget is sent to the DoD.
Double taxes on the rich and use the money on social spending, and our military spending is fine. But since we're not going to do that any time soon, we need large DoD cuts because they consume too much of our budget.
No, DoD civilians are still government employees, subject to the government's pay scale. The government simply doesn't spend enough on employees to hire "the best and brightest" from the best engineering schools. And military pay is terrible compared to what these people can make in the civilian world.
Now, you could theoretically make a case that military contractors are sucking up these "best and brightest", but they don't have nearly as much money as other parts of the economy - remember how Wal-Mart alone was 3% of GDP? The "big money" comes from engineering something for Wall Street.
Well, you'd have to demonstrate the size of those stolen resources first. 1.5% of GDP is dwarfed by lots of other "stolen resources" - such as virtually everything done on Wall Street.
The military has no land. The Government has land, upon which they build military installations.
And if you're upset by the UCMJ, you should probably explain how civilian courts are supposed to enforce rules in other countries. All those people you complain about being in Germany aren't within the jurisdiction of US civilian criminal courts.
salinen
(7,288 posts)you leave so much out. Just the rental on all those bases overseas for one. The we spend 421 billion at Wal-mart doesn't make sense. Who are WE? Citizens spending money shopping, that's not included in GDP.
O yes, the argument that only the military could invent these great products. Well, they do snatch up bright people who otherwise would have probably been bright elsewhere.
We are kicking China's ass. Only less so every single day.
Too much money to DoD. Yep.
The best and brightest are working for McDonald Douglas or Raytheon. Good pay for drone designers.
Wall Street are thieves? There not the only ones.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Rentals come out of Operations and maintenance, with a little from Military Construction and Family Housing.
The only weapons systems not included in that budget are the nukes. They're under Department of Energy. But we're not building new ones so the R&D and procurement is relatively small.
GDP is "the market value of all officially recognized final goods and services produced within a country in a given period of time."
Wal-Mart sells final goods. By definition, they are being sold at market value. Whether or not their foreign-made goods are imports for the purposes of GDP depends on how exactly they're imported.
But most importantly, that number is present to provide a sense of scale. The money we spend on "building weapons" is half of what we spend at Wal-Mart. To claim our entire economy is built around "building weapons" is silly when a single retailer's receipts is twice as much money.
Fact is the military did discover and/or "invent" those technologies. To claim private enterprise would have "figured it out" ignores the fact that private enterprise had no reason to research those technologies.
For example, companies really had no need for a computer network that can survive a nuclear strike. So private enterprise had no reason to invent the Internet. In fact, private enterprise invented several proprietary networks in the place of the Internet.
Data doesn't support this conclusion. That's why I provided a link to it.
Yes, China has had some explosive growth recently. But they have a very, very long way to get to the US, and there's a lot of enormous problems between now and "beating" the US.
No, they pay crap compared to Wall Street. Writing new programs for Wall Street is one or two orders of magnitude more money. Plus, there's not that many drones being designed compared to the number of "best and brightest".
salinen
(7,288 posts)for this back and forth. We agree that the huge budget for DoD is bloated and unnecessary, right? If I wrote this thread again, with your helpful replies, it would be titled "The Military and Wall Street with the help of corrupt politicians ruined the country."
No, this country isn't ruined, not quite yet. But it's headed that direction. Peace.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Your main premise continues to be the military is destroying the country. I do not agree with that.
We should cut DoD spending, but that doesn't mean the military is destroying the country. It means we're spending too much on them at our current rate of taxation.
hired gun mercenaries, I guess you must approve since all that you can come up with as a point of fault is that they use too much tax payer monies.
How about the insanely high suicide rate among enlisted people. Gee, maybe seeing headless Afghani babies has a negative effect.
Again the knowledge that Iraq had no WMD's but Cheney had already promised his oil bud's foreign territory. Powell knowingly lied to Congress. Like I said, WW2 was the last war. The rest are resource grabs. So our military is being used to intimidate countries with resources or other strategic interest.
"National Security interests" is the new code for "We're coming for your stuff"
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Yes, thinking that $200 Billion from one of the few entities that can actually do basic research is not a big deal means I'm a bloodthirsty murderer who wants to slaughter brown people in their beds.
Clearly the one directly follows from the other.
Your claim that our economy is based on making weapons are laughably false. Attacking me won't change basic math.
BlueMan Votes
(903 posts)the citizenry is already too well armed. insurgency would be a LOT worse than it was for us in iraq.
Lightbulb_on
(315 posts)Anyone who aggressively invaded for the purpose of conquering the US would not be as delicate with us as we are with the populations of Iraq and Afghanistan.
The reason that insurgency gives us such trouble is because we are not willing destroy every village, district, province that could hold an enemy or has attacked us. Restraint, restraint, restraint...
Yes, I know that the idea that we are "gentle" to these populations is odd to some but it is a relative matter. The violence could be at an much higher level.
BlueMan Votes
(903 posts)geography is a Bitch.