General Discussion

Sherman A1

(38,958 posts)

25. Well,

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 03:50 PM

Feb 2013

Yes, JFK & Kruschev made a deal one to avert war.
There was also a mobilization ongoing, overflights of Cuba and a a rather large Naval "Quarantine" in progress. That deal didn't happen in a vacuum of diplomatic niceties, war was very, very close to occurring. Believe as you wish, but there was a huge military involvement and presence that kept the two nations from going to war. The Berlin Airlift was another example of preventing a war with a military presence.

The smaller wars were fought on the outskirts of the empires so to speak, but not all of them involved the US & Soviet Union directly or indirectly, some certainly did in the global chess game of power and influence.

Could things have been done better and with less costs, certainly, but 20/20 hindsight is a great thing. I don't have it, but apparently there are those that do.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

49 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Let us tie military spending to a percentage of tax revenues [View all] Angry Dragon Feb 2013 OP

Or, base it on actual work accomplished and products produced. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #1

Military accomplishment is often in what does NOT take place rather than what does. OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #4

How's that worked so far? Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #6

I disagree. OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #8

Maybe. But, how has having a bloated military stopped wars for us? Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #9

Depends on what you mean by "stopped." OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #10

So, how did our "strong military" do in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Iraq, Afghanistan, and the rest? Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #13

Not the military's fault. OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #14

Which can only give one pause in turning over a huge machine to incompetents. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #17

To the best of my understanding, OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #19

If they go to trial. See drone operators and torturers for reference. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #21

Well, Sherman A1 Feb 2013 #16

As I recall, it wasn't the military that stopped the wars. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #20

Not to take this discussion off-track, but......... OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #23

As a pacifist, I don't see war as an answer. Rather, I see it as an avenue to more war. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #28

So what about existing security treaties? OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #37

Yes. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #45

So I guess America's promise, signed on a treaty, wouldn't mean anything after all. OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #46

Tsk. Tsk. See treaties with various tribes of Native Americans for precedents. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #47

Still doesn't make it right to break it. OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #48

Well, Sherman A1 Feb 2013 #25

And history shows that when a country finds itself involved avebury Feb 2013 #43

Agree something must be done. think Feb 2013 #2

This message was self-deleted by its author OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #3

I find the 50% figure very doubtful. OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #5

Do you have figures to dispute my claim?? Angry Dragon Feb 2013 #11

The data just doesn't support the claim. OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #12

I have some problems with this Angry Dragon Feb 2013 #22

50% of discretionary spending. hay rick Feb 2013 #49

Let's create a schedule for Peace, the gradual diminuition of defense spending. Coyotl Feb 2013 #7

Isn't that already close to the current situation though? OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #15

$3.2 Trillion was brought in Angry Dragon Feb 2013 #18

Today about 19% of budget goes to Defense tritsofme Feb 2013 #24

Thanks. That's closer to what I thought. n/t. OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #26

How is Social Security part of the budget?? Angry Dragon Feb 2013 #27

Even if it is, it may be just listed there for information's sake, to show how much was spent. N/t. OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #29

It is listed there as part of the budget and the monies brought in by it as revenue Angry Dragon Feb 2013 #30

And if you take out everything but defense it goes up to 100% tritsofme Feb 2013 #31

I am arguing that SS is not part of the budget Angry Dragon Feb 2013 #32

I just don't understand how the way Social Security is treated in the budget is relevant tritsofme Feb 2013 #33

Because you are adding in what is spent on SS into total federal spending Angry Dragon Feb 2013 #35

Well, you started the thread with "tax revenue" in the title. OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #36

Defense comes out of the budget, how much of SS comes from the budget?? Angry Dragon Feb 2013 #38

Leaving these semantic arguments behind tritsofme Feb 2013 #39

In this case... dems_rightnow Feb 2013 #41

Social security is self funded and shouldn't be on that chart. It's not part of the general fund. JVS Feb 2013 #34

If you want to reduce military spending Revanchist Feb 2013 #40

I an not really against military spending just a fair comparison with other spending Angry Dragon Feb 2013 #42

What we really need to cut out is wasteful spending. OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #44