Bounty on US Troops....

[Terrywoodenpic]

To blame capitalism is to ignore political will.
We've gone to war because of political threats, religious fears, & vengeance.
Voters re-elect the leaders who start & continue the wars, eg, GW Bush,
Obama, Richard Nixon, Hillary Clinton, Truman, Johnson.
As long as the voters reward interminable war, leaders will deliver that to us.
It's a more useful explanation than some murky military industrial complex.

War is like a mob hanging, anyone who can whip up mob emotions can start a war.
Our various leaders get carried along with everyone else. No one counts the cost untill it is too late.

Some wars are unavoidable, especially when one side Invades another. The choice then is to submit or to fight

America has done a lot of fighting on other people's land. None have been wars of defence. Most have been wars of support or taking sides against a mutual enemy.

It is in America's industrial and financial interest to supply arms and fight wars.

 

[Heyo]

To blame capitalism is to ignore political will.
We've gone to war because of political threats, religious fears, & vengeance.
Voters re-elect the leaders who start & continue the wars, eg, GW Bush,
Obama, Richard Nixon, Hillary Clinton, Truman, Johnson.
As long as the voters reward interminable war, leaders will deliver that to us.
It's a more useful explanation than some murky military industrial complex.

Do people who vote for hawks really have an interest in war? Or is their vote manipulated by the military-industrial complex?
Guess who has always won in every conflict the US has started or been part of. And think about what motivates more to spend on the military, the prospect of war or a real war.
Capitalism rests on competition. Competition for the money of the consumer. Advertising is to try to convince the consumer (in this case the US tax payer) that a product is needed and wanted. In the US the most successful advertiser today is the military-industrial complex.

 

[Revoltingest]

So if someone shoves you, "why make any response"? You just take it when someone pushes you around. Or more to the point, punches you. I guess you're a pacifist.

Analogies, eh.
If we've both been shoving each other back & forth, & then there's
news that that they shoved me, I won't cry "Something must be done!",
as though it's any different from what's been going back & forth all along.

Perhaps the bounty is Russia's retaliation for our arming their enemies
to kill many Russians. If so, their response is relatively lame, eh.
Is this really a serious problem worthy of Trump making some highly
public response? Nah. Tis making a mountain out of a molehill.

 

[Revoltingest]

It is in America's industrial and financial interest to supply arms and fight wars.

And I worked for one company that supplied weapons to foreign countries.
But this obvious business isn't the issue here. The poster claims that
industry controls our leaders, making them go to war. That is an
unsupported conspiracy theory.
The better explanation is that the public generally likes going to war.
And politicians get re-elected for supporting wars....including Democrats.

Regarding the claim that we get economic benefit from being in wars,
that too is unsupported. Consider how it worked in our recent ones....

We produce much materiel which gets shipped overseas.
We employ many soldiers to use this materiel overseas.
Soldiers drop this materiel on the enemy.
The material is left there.
Soldiers come back with many dead or injured.
We take no land or booty.
We spend trillions of dollars doing this.

Where's the profit for Ameristan?

 

[Revoltingest]

Do people who vote for hawks really have an interest in war?

Yes. I recall great interest in saving Qatar from Iraq, stopping godless commies
in Vietnam, protecting Israel from Iran, & exacting vengeance in Afghanistan.

Or is their vote manipulated by the military-industrial complex?

Who in the military industrial complex (MIC) forced Kennedy, Johnson,
Reagan, Obama, & both Bushes to start or continue the failed wars?
When I worked in the MIC, my employers sure seemed to lack power.
But there is a clear connection between waging war & re-election.

Guess who has always won in every conflict the US has started or been part of.

We lost in Vietnam. We had a stalemate enduring to this day in Korea.
We didn't finish the job the 1st time in Iraq. We lost our proxy war
against Iran. And did we really win in Afghanistan?
So to answer your question.....the other guy usually wins.

And think about what motivates more to spend on the military, the prospect of war or a real war.
Capitalism rests on competition. Competition for the money of the consumer. Advertising is to try to convince the consumer (in this case the US tax payer) that a product is needed and wanted. In the US the most successful advertiser today is the military-industrial complex.

The only advertising I see regarding defense & war is by the US Army & Marines.
I've never even seen an ad by my old employer, Northrop.
US fed gov loves to portray the glory & excitement of going into battle.

Who got the most votes in the last Prez election?
Old "Blood & Guts Hillary", who had a hawkish record
in the Senate & as Obama's Secretary Of State.

 

[tytlyf]

My "truth" is to cast a jaundiced eye at all unevidenced
claims that so-&-so is a secret agent of this or that evil foe.
You fans & allies of The Big Two are free to hop on board
the conspiracy train though.
But I might mock, deride, & point at your privates.

You're not fooling anyone, you voted for one of the Big 2 and usually do. Hypocrisy.

 

[Revoltingest]

You're not fooling anyone, you voted for one of the Big 2 and usually do. Hypocrisy.

2 can play this game, Mr Stalker.

You're not fooling anyone.
You want to start another war.
You usually do.
Consistency.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

And I worked for one company that supplied weapons to foreign countries.
But this obvious business isn't the issue here. The poster claims that
industry controls our leaders, making them go to war. That is an
unsupported conspiracy theory.
The better explanation is that the public generally likes going to war.
And politicians get re-elected for supporting wars....including Democrats.

Regarding the claim that we get economic benefit from being in wars,
that too is unsupported. Consider how it worked in our recent ones....

We produce much materiel which gets shipped overseas.
We employ many soldiers to use this materiel overseas.
Soldiers drop this materiel on the enemy.
The material is left there.
Soldiers come back with many dead or injured.
We take no land or booty.
We spend trillions of dollars doing this.

Where's the profit for Ameristan?

The boom during and after WW2 was plain to see. the difference between the USA in 1940 and 1945 was even more clear to see.
Wars cost governments billions. however it is reflected in wages and profits, and a surge in new industries following up new technologies invented on the back of war.
Munitions sales to the UK during WW2 created wealth by the bucket load for the USA.

Recent wars have also fed back into American industries and research and development. Governments would never support the same level in peace time, nor be so free with tax money. The present cold and trade war with china has massively speeded up development in technology, weapons systems, and ship building. it has also diverted investment into the telecoms industry in an attempt to catch up with Huawei.
The cost in lives and material is never considered more than as a necessary part of warfare.
War is a massive employer and consumer of people. The dead never get round to complaining. those that survive get the jobs and the money.

However the long term cost is unmeasurable... but who in government cares about that... it will not be on their shift.

The people never care about anything, as long as they have employment and food on the table.

 

[tytlyf]

2 can play this game, Mr Stalker.

You're not fooling anyone.
You want to start another war.
You usually do.
Consistency.

I support the party that supports science.

 

[Revoltingest]

The boom during and after WW2 was plain to see. the difference between the USA in 1940 and 1945 was even more clear to see.
Wars cost governments billions. however it is reflected in wages and profits, and a surge in new industries following up new technologies invented on the back of war.
Munitions sales to the UK during WW2 created wealth by the bucket load for the USA.

In a world suffering devastation of most of our competition, we did well.
But our latest wars aren't that way. We attack countries who don't
compete economically with us.

Would you say that we should destroy other first world economies
so that they provide markets, but not competition? Of course not.

Recent wars have also fed back into American industries and research and development. Governments would never support the same level in peace time, nor be so free with tax money. The present cold and trade war with china has massively speeded up development in technology, weapons systems, and ship building. it has also diverted investment into the telecoms industry in an attempt to catch up with Huawei.
The cost in lives and material is never considered more than as a necessary part of warfare.
War is a massive employer and consumer of people. The dead never get round to complaining. those that survive get the jobs and the money.

However the long term cost is unmeasurable... but who in government cares about that... it will not be on their shift.

The people never care about anything, as long as they have employment and food on the table.

You've still made no case for the MIC controlling government in order
to keep us at war. You've made no connection between leaders &
companies. It's a completely unsupported conspiracy theory.
It's much like the the "deep state" conspiracy theory Trump claims,
ie, an excuse to avoid responsibility for one's own decisions & acts.
If voters really want less war, they should send the hawks packing.
But they don't.

 

[Revoltingest]

I support the party that supports science.

You support war, corruption, & creationism.

 

[tytlyf]

You support war, corruption, & creationism.

Sorry bud, you voted for 1 of the "Big 2." Can't really complain when you do it every election cycle.
I hear "True Libertarians" only support Libertarians.

 

[Revoltingest]

Sorry bud, you voted for 1 of the "Big 2." Can't really complain when you do it every election cycle.

You voted for war & corruption, but against gay rights.

 

[tytlyf]

You voted for war, corruption, & against gay rights.
Yet you complain every election cycle about other posters' votes.

You're unique in that regard. I hear True Libertarians vote Libertarian. Not republican.

"Do as I say, not as I do!" lmao

 

[Revoltingest]

You're unique in that regard. I hear True Libertarians vote Libertarian. Not republican.

"Do as I say, not as I do!" lmao

Deflection from your record of voting for war, corruption,
incompetence, & opposition to civil liberties again?

 

[tytlyf]

Deflection from your record of voting for war, corruption,
incompetence, & opposition to civil liberties again?

I'm in a generous mood today giving you posts towards your total. Care to share why you have the most posts on Religiousforums? By a large margin? Suspicious?

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm in a generous mood today giving you posts towards your total. Care to share why you have the most posts on Religiousforums? By a large margin? Suspicious?

Jealous much?

 

[tytlyf]

Jealous much?

Not of your profession. Most people have jobs and don't have time to sit on religiousforums all day, every day. Suspicious?

 

[Revoltingest]

Not of your profession. Most people have jobs and don't have time to sit on religiousforums all day, every day. Suspicious?

If you had better kwality posts,
then you too could be a paid poster.
I just got a raise....twice last year's pay!
Now I make even more than @Quagmire.

 

[tytlyf]

If you had better kwality posts,
then you too could be a paid poster.
I just got a raise....twice last year's pay!
Now I make even more than @Quagmire.

It is a little suspicious. It says a lot about your daily life and what you spend your days doing. I know a woman wouldn't put up with that, lmao.