• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

"Stop looking at these kids as heroes," says vet who made war documentary.

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Without a volunteer military we would revert to a draft once again, the end of which is claimed by my generation. This time around hopefully college is not an automatic deferment, or foot spurs.
In the final year of the draft, there was no college deferment.
I'd also eliminate exceptions based upon age, gender, religion, health & sexual preference.
Either everyone is eligible to be killed & maimed against their will, or no one should be forced.
Let all in Congress be on the front lines.
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
Let all in Congress be on the front lines.

I think one of the biggest problems, there are few left in Congress, the recent members not included, who have been or have family members who are, in the military, and the last president to serve was G H W Bush.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I think one of the biggest problems, there are few left in Congress, the recent members not included, who have been or have family members who are, in the military, and the last president to serve was G H W Bush.
I don't think being a war veteran means good judgement about peace vs war.
One might or might not have it.
Neither does having never been a soldier mean one lacks such good judgment.

Our biggest problem is that voters will re-elect politicians who pursue these
wars which we (not me) only claim to oppose. GW Bush was re-elected
for starting'm. Hillary won a plurality of votes for Prez for starting & cointinuing'm.
Obama won re-election for continuing'm, despite his contrary campaign promises.

Vote based upon the policies a politician would implement....not veteran status.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
I think one of the biggest problems, there are few left in Congress, the recent members not included, who have been or have family members who are, in the military, and the last president to serve was G H W Bush.

There is a fake Nam Vet Dem in Congress. Does that count?
 

Cooky

Veteran Member
More Russian? How would that have come about?
More communist? Perhaps. The US has been a major impediment to democracy for most of its history.

Well, don't you think it's odd that North Korea was backed by the Russians and the south by America? Or how about Venezuela with the Russians backing one dictator and america backing an alternative. Is it a coincidence that Russia wants Assad and America supports the rebels? What about Russia going into Afghanistan and then America doing the same a few years later? Remember Cuba? The list is extensive.

...There is a clear trend here. The Russians and the Americans are competing for global influence... Without us, standing in their way, they would have dominated much of the world already.
 

Cooky

Veteran Member
The big bad USSR would make the freedom living conservatives wear furry hats! Oh, the humanity!
;)

Regardless of their goals, they sure do try very hard to influence and reward certain governmental behavior. Perhaps we should all ask ourselves what the world would look like today if nobody ever stood in their way?

...I can only wonder what the world would look like.
 

Cooky

Veteran Member
clearly without the United States military, Russia would have had the luxury of dominating any country of their choice.
They could do genocides, and who would stop them?
The world would be their oyster.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
...There is a clear trend here. The Russians and the Americans are competing for global influence... Without us, standing in their way, they would have dominated much of the world already.
Regardless of their goals, they sure do try very hard to influence and reward certain governmental behavior. Perhaps we should all ask ourselves what the world would look like today if nobody ever stood in their way?

...I can only wonder what the world would look like.
Without the constant American military threat forcing them onto a permanent war footing, what would their history have been?
It was America, after all, who were the imperialists par excellence. What might the world look like without the Russkis to keep us in check?
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
clearly without the United States military, Russia would have had the luxury of dominating any country of their choice.
They could do genocides, and who would stop them?
The world would be their oyster.
Transpose Russia and US and then consider the question.
The US has been invading, occupying, annexing, fixing elections, installing puppet dictators, quashing democratic movements, &c for practically its whole history.
President Monroe declared American hegemony over the whole western hemisphere all the way back in 1823, for example.
 
Last edited:

Cooky

Veteran Member
Without the constant American military threat forcing them onto a permanent war footing, what would their history have been?
It was America, after all, who were the imperialists par excellence. What might the world look like without the Russkis to keep us in check?

Imperialists par excellence? How’s that?

We are pro-democratic, and non-expansionist. We are for free elections and human rights.
 

Cooky

Veteran Member
Transpose Russia and US and then consider the question.
The US has been invading, occupying, annexing, fixing elections, installing puppet dictators, quashing democratic movements, &c for practically its whole history.
President Monroe declared American hegemony over the whole western hemisphere all the way back in 1823, for example.

This is just simply not true. We never militarily forced anyone into annexation. With Russia, the tactics of expansionism are always violent and painful.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Woberts

The Perfumed Seneschal
clearly without the United States military, Russia would have had the luxury of dominating any country of their choice.
They could do genocides, and who would stop them?
The world would be their oyster.
America has done genocides before, and has the power to now. Do you care?
We are for free elections and human rights.
The US has either supported dictators, invaded at the behest of corporations, or invaded because they didn't like the leader in:
Cuba
Chile
Saudi Arabia
Yemen
Turkmenistan
Equatorial Guinea
Oman
El Salvador
Nicaragua
Guatemala
Honduras
Panama

And that's just the ones I can think of off the top of my head.
Not really a supporter of free elections, wouldn't you say?
Of course, they don't support human rights either, since LGBT are still treated as second class citizens. I wouldn't call putting the Japanese-Americans in concentration camps during WW2 the kind of thing you do if you support human rights, either.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
This is just simply not true. We never militarily forced anyone into annexation. With Russia, the tactics of expansionism are always violent and painful.
Hawaii.
We are pro-democratic...
We are for free elections....
1953 Iranian coup deposing a democratically elected leader to install the Shah.
And when they eventually deposed the Shah, we killed a million Iranians in a proxy
war (Iraq) using biological & chemical weapons. So much for human rights, eh?
 

Cooky

Veteran Member
1953 Iranian coup deposing a democratically elected leader to install the Shah.
And when they eventually deposed the Shah, we killed a million Iranians in a proxy
war (Iraq) using biological & chemical weapons. So much for human rights, eh?

I Don't think that's true.

"a history of dozens of allegations made by various branches of the Soviet government for the entire post-World War II period charging that the United States had used biological weapons. As best as is known, all of these allegations are deliberate, fraudulent concoctions. The most notorious of these were the allegations made by the Soviet Union, the People's Republic of China, and North Korea, charging that the United States used biological weapons during the 1950-1953 Korean War."
United States biological weapons program - Wikipedia
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Imperialists par excellence? How’s that?

We are pro-democratic, and non-expansionist. We are for free elections and human rights.
This is just simply not true. We never militarily forced anyone into annexation. With Russia, the tactics of expansionism are always violent and painful.
What! :eek: You need to bone up on your American history.
You're in California, aren't you? Your state used to be Mexico.
The entire Southwest used to be Mexico. America invaded Mexico, occupied Mexico city and annexed most the country.

This was less than ten years after the US annexed thousands of square miles of Cherokee territory and marched the people to Oklahoma in the dead of Winter.

We later contrived a war with Spain and seized the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Guam and, temporarily, Cuba. We killed ~3 million Philippinos in a genocidal extermination.

A few years later we decided to build a canal to connect the Atlantic and Pacific -- and seized Panama.
In fact, there's hardly a country in South or Central America that we haven't controlled, by one means or another, at one time.

Free elections and human rights? Every time an exploited people attempts to establish a democracy or 'take back their country', the US installs a repressive,right-wing dictator or puppet government.
America doesn't like democracies. They're bad for business, with all their red tape, share-the-wealth policies and concern for the general welfare. A good dictator will keep the people in line and protect exploitative, American owned industries, in exchange for American muscle keeping his job secure.
I can give you examples.

America has always been imperialist. "The business of America is business", not human rights or democracy.
From Major General Smedley Butler, USMC:
"It may seem odd for me, a military man to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty- three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service. I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 (where have I heard that name before?). I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested." Smedley Butler on Interventionism

Challenge: Pick any ten year period in the last century, and I'll list some American, imperialist shenanigans.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I Don't think that's true.

"a history of dozens of allegations made by various branches of the Soviet government for the entire post-World War II period charging that the United States had used biological weapons. As best as is known, all of these allegations are deliberate, fraudulent concoctions. The most notorious of these were the allegations made by the Soviet Union, the People's Republic of China, and North Korea, charging that the United States used biological weapons during the 1950-1953 Korean War."
United States biological weapons program - Wikipedia
"Use" is a tricky word. Did Ameristanian soldiers use them?
Likely not.
Did Ameristan supply them for use by a proxy?
Yes.
United States support for Iraq during the Iran–Iraq War - Wikipedia
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I Don't think that's true.

"a history of dozens of allegations made by various branches of the Soviet government for the entire post-World War II period charging that the United States had used biological weapons. As best as is known, all of these allegations are deliberate, fraudulent concoctions. The most notorious of these were the allegations made by the Soviet Union, the People's Republic of China, and North Korea, charging that the United States used biological weapons during the 1950-1953 Korean War."
United States biological weapons program - Wikipedia
We did install or support repressive, unpopular regimes in the region -- Syria, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia.
We also sold them chemical weapons. Where do you think Saddam Hussein got the bombs to gas the Kurds?
 
Top