So you think you have no vested interest in this fight?Jaekus wrote:
It's situational, depending on the country you're in. In Australia we tend to get roped into the wars US gets itself into, when we have a very healthy relationship with our closer Asian neighbours too, without those particular strings attached. Iraq has never been in Australia's interests, there have been no attacks here yet we're expected to spend billions of our taxpayer's money to fight another country's war. It's a bit frustrating.
I don't care if you are convinced or not, you sleep under the blanket of security the US provides, fact.ruisleipa wrote:
The figures indicate you are the one who has an unrealistic view. But, you can't convince me that the US budget for arms is reasonable no matter how hard you try or dress it up in some shit about how you're protecting the rest of the world, sorry. I admit there is an element of that, but on topic, your war budget is fucking ridiculous. Fact.lowing wrote:
If we were the war mongers that you seem to think we are, we would have colonized more of the world, especially after WW2 rather than give it back and in fact pay to rebuild the nations devastated by war, even the nations that started it and were our enemies. We would have stolen our oil instead of develop the technology to refine it and buy it from the rightful owners. Instead as Colin Powell stated, all we ask was for land to bury our dead.
You have a dim warped sense of what America is all about. Fact is we are strong, and we use that strength for deterrence not for conquering. We do this for our own security as well as the security of our allies, freeing you up to spend money on everything other than your own defense.
lol whateverlowing wrote:
I don't care if you are convinced or not, you sleep under the blanket of security the US provides, fact.
Do you go to work for the love of your company or do you do it to profit from your efforts. A hospital does not open for the love and concern of the public health and well being and an insurance company does exist to make sure you do not have to pay for your misfortunes. So please get real in this argument, of course everything is done for money and profit, this does not make it unnecessary or evil. There is no one here that goes to work for principal or for free.Turquoise wrote:
Well, that argument is only half true. We do benefit to a degree from it. However, clearly, most of the benefits go to the industries connected to it.lowing wrote:
From where I sit, if missiles are going to be pointed, which is inevitable, it is better to do the pointing and having control over it, than it is to be pointed at. You and I benefit form such military superiority. So please do not piss in the bed you sleep well in.ruisleipa wrote:
True turqoise...vested interests in producing weapons and war machines...insane amounts of money spent on them...jobs reliant on them (not that those jobs couldn't potentially be found elsewhere)...the USA arms industry fuelling global conflicts...some people get filthy rich, lots of people in other countries feel the sharp end of some USA missile. not good
Military contractors aren't doing it for love of country -- they do it for profit. Sometimes, their pursuit of profit and national interests align -- sometimes they don't.
I thought you said the US has suxch a stupidly huge defence budget to keep us all safe, but now it's so some people can MAKE MONEY? Holy shit.
My world has collapsed.
Goin to bed.
My world has collapsed.
Goin to bed.
I am sorry you are so ridiculously idealistic to suggest that all efforts regarding R and D, maufacturing, deploying and defending ourselves and you is supposed to be free. I hope when you wake up, you do so in the real world.ruisleipa wrote:
I thought you said the US has suxch a stupidly huge defence budget to keep us all safe, but now it's so some people can MAKE MONEY? Holy shit.
My world has collapsed.
Goin to bed.
Oh and there are Americans awake in your country right now sitting on alert so can sleep soundly. Although I admit, they are getting paid. Good night.
Last edited by lowing (2010-05-23 13:06:23)
I don't recall Finland having any issues with anyone right now, who are they sitting alert and defending him from? Can we drop the unwarranted self importance, Americans - Consistently making up phantom enemies in order to justify their own existence, that's all It is nowadays. I suppose having American soldiers based around is good for the local booze and prostitution industries though.
Nope they don't, they sit back and let everyone else do the fighting for them, while they stay free to run their industries, for profit I would imagine. Evil evil Finland.Mekstizzle wrote:
I don't recall Finland having any issues with anyone right now, who are they sitting alert and defending him from? Can we drop the unwarranted self importance, Americans - Consistently making up phantom enemies in order to justify their own existence, that's all It is nowadays. I suppose having American soldiers based around is good for the local booze and prostitution industries though.
phantom enemies are only phantoms due to deterrence. What short memories you have.
Although I don't think we have bases directly in Finland, the point is, they are covered. I forgot he was from Finland usually the Euro's here are from Germany and the UK.
Last edited by lowing (2010-05-23 13:15:25)
People will do and think anything in order to give themselves a little ego boost here and there, it's nothing but delusion really. You don't get anything out of yelling at everyone telling them they're sleeping at night safety because an American soldier is standing guard except some sort of bizarre self satisfaction. That's all it ever is with some people.
No it is a direct response to the declaration that the US is an evil war mongering nation, that spends its resources on military for profit. When the facts are we protect ourselves as well as our allies so they can spend their resources on them selves. Taking note that, they are not even feeding the world as much as the US is, even when they are freed from the burden of military defense.Mekstizzle wrote:
People will do and think anything in order to give themselves a little ego boost here and there, it's nothing but delusion really. You don't get anything out of yelling at everyone telling them they're sleeping at night safety because an American soldier is standing guard except some sort of bizarre self satisfaction. That's all it ever is with some people.
It isn't ego , it is fact. No Euro bases exist in the US and there is a reason for that.
Last edited by lowing (2010-05-23 13:22:48)
Because noone else cbf policing the world tbh. America comes across as indulgently self important to the rest of the world.
you guys are morons if you see what lowing writes and you think america
Tu Stultus Es
Of course you couldn't. We do it for you, and at our expense.Jaekus wrote:
Because noone else cbf policing the world tbh. America comes across as indulgently self important to the rest of the world.
Yes, I know, most of the US does not support self reliance over govt. dependency. So he is right, do not take what I say as what America is about today.eleven bravo wrote:
you guys are morons if you see what lowing writes and you think america
Sure, as long as you get real whenever you talk about wanting smaller government. Clearly, you don't include the military in your definition of it.lowing wrote:
Do you go to work for the love of your company or do you do it to profit from your efforts. A hospital does not open for the love and concern of the public health and well being and an insurance company does exist to make sure you do not have to pay for your misfortunes. So please get real in this argument, of course everything is done for money and profit, this does not make it unnecessary or evil. There is no one here that goes to work for principal or for free.Turquoise wrote:
Well, that argument is only half true. We do benefit to a degree from it. However, clearly, most of the benefits go to the industries connected to it.lowing wrote:
From where I sit, if missiles are going to be pointed, which is inevitable, it is better to do the pointing and having control over it, than it is to be pointed at. You and I benefit form such military superiority. So please do not piss in the bed you sleep well in.
Military contractors aren't doing it for love of country -- they do it for profit. Sometimes, their pursuit of profit and national interests align -- sometimes they don't.
This is because national security is a function of our govt. I fully support funding what our govt. is supposed do. I do not support our govt. forcing its citizens into dependency on govt., through wealth redistribution and other govt. intrusions on private citizens.Turquoise wrote:
Sure, as long as you get real whenever you talk about wanting smaller government. Clearly, you don't include the military in your definition of it.lowing wrote:
Do you go to work for the love of your company or do you do it to profit from your efforts. A hospital does not open for the love and concern of the public health and well being and an insurance company does exist to make sure you do not have to pay for your misfortunes. So please get real in this argument, of course everything is done for money and profit, this does not make it unnecessary or evil. There is no one here that goes to work for principal or for free.Turquoise wrote:
Well, that argument is only half true. We do benefit to a degree from it. However, clearly, most of the benefits go to the industries connected to it.
Military contractors aren't doing it for love of country -- they do it for profit. Sometimes, their pursuit of profit and national interests align -- sometimes they don't.
Well, actually, quite a lot of the country is dependent on government via military spending, as I elaborated earlier with military industries that cleverly placed themselves in each state.lowing wrote:
This is because national security is a function of our govt. I fully support funding what our govt. is supposed do. I do not support our govt. forcing its citizens into dependency on govt., through wealth redistribution and other govt. intrusions on private citizens.Turquoise wrote:
Sure, as long as you get real whenever you talk about wanting smaller government. Clearly, you don't include the military in your definition of it.lowing wrote:
Do you go to work for the love of your company or do you do it to profit from your efforts. A hospital does not open for the love and concern of the public health and well being and an insurance company does exist to make sure you do not have to pay for your misfortunes. So please get real in this argument, of course everything is done for money and profit, this does not make it unnecessary or evil. There is no one here that goes to work for principal or for free.
Several cities are almost completely dependent on the purchases of military base personnel, like Fayetteville, NC.
And as far as wealth redistribution goes, all taxation is wealth redistribution. The market itself is wealth redistribution.
Finally, a large portion of the military budget is not actually for defense but rather expansion of our power into other countries.
Last edited by Turquoise (2010-05-23 14:01:02)
Indeed. And it can't be argued that this is for altruistic motives -- it's clearly for the benefit of the US first and foremost.Turquoise wrote:
Finally, a large portion of the military budget is not actually for defense but rather expansion of our power into other countries.
Are we really going to have to get into this whole thing about working for the people as opposed to taking from the people? You know when I speak of wealth redistribution what I am talking about and you also know it is growing exponentially.Turquoise wrote:
Well, actually, quite a lot of the country is dependent on government via military spending, as I elaborated earlier with military industries that cleverly placed themselves in each state.lowing wrote:
This is because national security is a function of our govt. I fully support funding what our govt. is supposed do. I do not support our govt. forcing its citizens into dependency on govt., through wealth redistribution and other govt. intrusions on private citizens.Turquoise wrote:
Sure, as long as you get real whenever you talk about wanting smaller government. Clearly, you don't include the military in your definition of it.
Several cities are almost completely dependent on the purchases of military base personnel, like Fayetteville, NC.
And as far as wealth redistribution goes, all taxation is wealth redistribution. The market itself is wealth redistribution.
Finally, a large portion of the military budget is not actually for defense but rather expansion of our power into other countries.
What is your objection to a community building its local economy on the local industry? Or are you still trying to maintain that working for profit, building for profit is evil? I think we already covered this in your last post, and that notion is beyond the reality of the world in which we live.
We are at war within those countries Turquoise, the fight is there, or would you rather have it here?
Last edited by lowing (2010-05-23 15:11:16)
Is your country benefiting from this fight that you object to? I suppose Bali wasn't close enough to home to convince you.Jaekus wrote:
Indeed. And it can't be argued that this is for altruistic motives -- it's clearly for the benefit of the US first and foremost.Turquoise wrote:
Finally, a large portion of the military budget is not actually for defense but rather expansion of our power into other countries.
An Indonesian extremist militia group attempting to overthrow the Indonsesian government, in which the Indonesian government found, arrested, tried and executed the culprits isn't really a good basis for your argument.
Please, I'd prefer you troll someone else whilst I ignore you. Thanks.
Please, I'd prefer you troll someone else whilst I ignore you. Thanks.
Fact is, dismissed as it may be, you are alittle too comfortable in your self righteousness for your own good. to think that it can't or won't happen to you is a denial that your country will eventually pay for.Jaekus wrote:
An Indonesian extremist militia group attempting to overthrow the Indonsesian government, in which the Indonesian government found, arrested, tried and executed the culprits isn't really a good basis for your argument.
Please, I'd prefer you troll someone else whilst I ignore you. Thanks.
By the way, it was an Islamic extremist group.and several of your fellow countrymen were killed
Last edited by lowing (2010-05-23 15:01:48)
Jaekus wrote:
Please, I'd prefer you troll someone else whilst I ignore you. Thanks.
I edited. please take note. and by the way, if you want to ignore my posts, I am all for it. You bring little to the table anyway.Jaekus wrote:
Jaekus wrote:
Please, I'd prefer you troll someone else whilst I ignore you. Thanks.
and to be honest, I was talking to Turquoise and ruis. anyway
Last edited by lowing (2010-05-23 15:09:59)
Agreed, which also comes from military expansionism.lowing wrote:
Are we really going to have to get into this whole thing about working for the people as opposed to taking form the people? You know when I speak of wealth redistribution what I am talking about and you also know it is growing exponentially.
Conservatives always seem to turn a blind eye to that. I'm willing to admit that entitlement spending needs to be cut back, so now all you have to do is admit that military spending is overboard.
If your argument is that working for profit is better, then you should be against having entire local economies dependent on military spending, because that is dependent on the government's budget, not spending that is governed by the market.lowing wrote:
What is your objection to a community building its local economy on the local industry? Or are you still trying to maintain that working for profit, building for profit is evil? I think we already covered this in your last post, and that notion is beyond the reality of the world in which we live.
Paranoia doesn't strengthen your argument.lowing wrote:
We are at war within those countries Turquoise, the fight is there, or would you rather have it here?
Yes, we're at war, but we're reaching the point where we will need to withdraw soon.