Political Forum



Dear guest,

Welcome to the internet's top destination for the civil discussion of politics. This is a forum for discussion and debate of the issues, and not for personal remarks aimed at other discussants.

This forum has no political affiliation and welcomes your perspective on the issues. Membership is free. If you would like to join the discussions and debates please REGISTER HERE.

All new members should review the forum rules. The "Today's Posts" button automatically adjusts itself to fit your screen on its first use for Firefox and on its second use, for Internet Explorer. Have a pleasant day. (This is a spam free board.)

Old 03-28-2008, 09:39 AM   #31 (permalink)
Conscript
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny View Post
We can debate about who has the world largest military all day long. But, the fact is, the United States wouldn't dare wage war with not even a single world power because US knows that there wont be a winner no matter if they have the most powerful military or not. China could invade Taiwan at this moment, and US wouldn't do anything other then talk and talk. But, if someone like Burma attacked Taiwan, US would be the first on board.

And, regardless of your political stance, lets be honest and admit that China wouldn't hesitant to use nuclear force against the US if invaded, despite retaliation. We all know that China doesn't currently have the capabilities to invade the US, but lets face reality and realize that the US wouldn't declare step foot in Chinese mainland due to their nuclear power. It would be a death wish for the United States.

Also, lets note that a war with China would certainly be the fall of US economy. It would hit US citizens very hard. After the war with China we would be in a country with less civil liberties and poverty rates at an all time high. Most people don't even know that China funds the U.S. war in Iraq. Without China, we can expect slave tax along with insane gas prices and extreme poverty....100 times worst then the Great Depression. US would actually lose more then China economically.
Flip that coin over and the results would be the same.

The premise is moot, because no other super Power would consider attacking the US out of the same fear you mentioned, retaliation.

IMHO
BobH. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2008, 09:41 AM   #32 (permalink)
Mercenary
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 287
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobH. View Post
No disrespect, but it is not the US Military that has a weakness for sustaining an indefinite war, that weakness falls upon the Civilian side of the balance.

If one drafts a person more suited for Basketball onto a Baseball Team, can one really expect this person to be a better Baseball Player?

I don't think so. One because there is a different need and quite possibly a desire between Baseball and Basketball, and like an Involuntary Draft into Military Service results might not be as good as opposed to one that desired to be in the Military.

IMHO
Constitutionally a neverending war under our laws really can't exist. Up until the Bush admin and others violated the pre-emptive war policy which we have tried people and found them guilty in the past our military exists for one purpose and one purpose only, defense of the nation, in reality though it has historically been used constantly as an offensive weapon. The need for long protracted wars should never occur. In the event of an actual threat to the homeland there would be no shortage of recruits, the govt would have the same problem we see in Iraq, an out of control insurgency.
pedex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2008, 09:55 AM   #33 (permalink)
Conscript
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpn of Seattle View Post
I think we Americans need to get past this silly idea that we are exceptional. We aren't.

Our military is the most powerful in the world by a long shot because we spend almost as much as every other nation combined. For that reason alone we can project power like no other nation can.
No disrespect, but I believe your premise to be flawed.

One the US spends more money toward Military Technology then any other Nation on the Planet, not because the US wants to impose power towards other Nations, but rather deter other Nations from trying to impose their power onto us.

What can be argued is the intent upon why the US does intercedes on behalf of one or more other Nations.

Are "we," Americans exceptional?

The answer, I suppose, depends upon the nature of the question.

One can argue this case as well:

For years the general attitude of the European Elite has held that the Americans are a step below them in every way, and in particular culturally, a somewhat distorted and racists attitude, I might add.

IMHO
BobH. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2008, 10:02 AM   #34 (permalink)
Mercenary
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 287
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobH. View Post
No disrespect, but I believe your premise to be flawed.

One the US spends more money toward Military Technology then any other Nation on the Planet, not because the US wants to impose power towards other Nations, but rather deter other Nations from trying to impose their power onto us.

What can be argued is the intent upon why the US does intercedes on behalf of one or more other Nations.

Are "we," Americans exceptional?

The answer, I suppose, depends upon the nature of the question.

One can argue this case as well:

For years the general attitude of the European Elite has held that the Americans are a step below them in every way, and in particular culturally, a somewhat distorted and racists attitude, I might add.

IMHO
our military is set up to do what jpn suggests not what you are, and it also acts accordingly

nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles plus a basic army for home defense is all that is needed, those alone prevent invasions of the homeland

700+ military bases in more than 130 countries isn't about defense, it's about offense and maintaining hegemony
pedex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2008, 10:04 AM   #35 (permalink)
Conscript
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedex View Post
Constitutionally a neverending war under our laws really can't exist. Up until the Bush admin and others violated the pre-emptive war policy which we have tried people and found them guilty in the past our military exists for one purpose and one purpose only, defense of the nation, in reality though it has historically been used constantly as an offensive weapon. The need for long protracted wars should never occur. In the event of an actual threat to the homeland there would be no shortage of recruits, the govt would have the same problem we see in Iraq, an out of control insurgency.
In "Fact" you are probably correct, but in "Theory" it may not be as simple depending upon the circumstances.

As you mentioned, in defense of the homeland, there would be no shortage of recruits, but quite possibly no desire or intent to quit the fight either, thus possibly sustaining a long indefinite affair.

IMHO
BobH. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2008, 10:30 AM   #36 (permalink)
Conscript
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedex View Post
our military is set up to do what jpn suggests not what you are, and it also acts accordingly

nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles plus a basic army for home defense is all that is needed, those alone prevent invasions of the homeland

700+ military bases in more than 130 countries isn't about defense, it's about offense and maintaining hegemony
Not necessarily so;

There are many Nations in the World that support our presence in their country, not because of an intent of "Colonizing," but for protection from other countries that might invade and try to change the style of government.

Example Vietnam: The Government of South Vietnam, not perfect in any particular way, and many of it's citizens did not want to live under Communist control.

In the 1954-56 Geneva Convention, the Nation of Vietnam was divided between the North and the South. Citizens from both sides had the option of relocating into the section they so desired to live. The Act was accepted by both sides and agreed upon.

However before the ink was dry, the North, led by Ho Chi Minh began recruiting agents in the South to try to take down that Government and replace it with a Communist one, yet they had willingly signed the Treaty.

I believe that the original intent by both Eisenhower and Kennedy Administrations was to support the South Vietnamese Government from the Communist North.

I don't argue that incentives may or may not have occured later, but the initial idea is what the example signified.

Hegemony? One Man's Apple is another Man's Orange, and can be argued endlessly.

IMHO

Last edited by BobH.; 03-28-2008 at 10:35 AM.
BobH. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2008, 01:17 PM   #37 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 111
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny View Post
We can debate about who has the world largest military all day long. But, the fact is, the United States wouldn't dare wage war with not even a single world power because US knows that there wont be a winner no matter if they have the most powerful military or not.
Not entirely true. We have fought world powers in the past and if circumstances were right we would do it again.


Quote:
China could invade Taiwan at this moment, and US wouldn't do anything other then talk and talk. But, if someone like Burma attacked Taiwan, US would be the first on board.
The ChiComs know who butters their bread. And that is Americans. Their economy would be crippled the second they thought about invading Taiwan.

Quote:
Also, lets note that a war with China would certainly be the fall of US economy... US would actually lose more then China economically.
Actually war can stimulate your economy. WWII pulled us out of the Depression. As far as American losing more, isn't true. The ChiComs can barely feed their population. People drop like flies, they have more poor than we have people, and a 7-8 trillion $ economy always out lives a 3 yaun economy. They can make all the cheap toys in the world if they want, doesn't change the fact they are basically a third world country with leaders that have big yaps.
DamnYankee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2008, 01:25 PM   #38 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 42
Country:
Good question
Do u know a great war about american history which happened on north korea in 1950年6月,?try to find out:>
The War to Resist US Aggression and Aid Korea

Resist U.S. Aggression and Aid Korea
cncncn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2008, 01:48 PM   #39 (permalink)
Earl
 
AzTeK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Graz, Austria
Posts: 1,534
Country:
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobH. View Post
Example Vietnam: The Government of South Vietnam, not perfect in any particular way, and many of it's citizens did not want to live under Communist control.

In the 1954-56 Geneva Convention, the Nation of Vietnam was divided between the North and the South. Citizens from both sides had the option of relocating into the section they so desired to live. The Act was accepted by both sides and agreed upon.

However before the ink was dry, the North, led by Ho Chi Minh began recruiting agents in the South to try to take down that Government and replace it with a Communist one, yet they had willingly signed the Treaty.

I believe that the original intent by both Eisenhower and Kennedy Administrations was to support the South Vietnamese Government from the Communist North.
The situation that lead to the communist uprising in Southern Vietnam were homegrown because the Diem regime was simply a failing. The North just took advantage of this situation. Without foreign intervention, Southern Vietnam would have turned communist in a fairly peaceful manner since a vast majority of the southern population was very angered at the current government. The US was not only fighting against the North (and the USSR), but also against a considerable part of the South.
__________________
AzTeK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2008, 03:17 PM   #40 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 111
Country:
[quote=hbloms;160959]WOOOW!!!

Someone said that the US had to save Europe in WW2... Those assholes waited five fucking years! FIVE FUCKING YEARS![/QUTOE]

That's a hoot. Foreigners love to call Americans "war mongers" out of one side of their mouths, then whine out of the other because it took so long to get into the war.

Quote:
Now don't come and tell me it was the americans that did the most...
Depends on what you mean the most.

Quote:
The russians lost millions and fought all the greatest battles in the history of mankind BEFORE the americans wanted to have anything to do with it...
The USSR lost the most because they murdered their own people in the process.

Quote:
It wasn't the US that one the war... It was the alliance they were a part of...
Armed mostly by the US.

Quote:
What would they have done if all of Europe had turned to Nazism?
I supposed watch the Euros eat sour kraut, and turn to communism.

Quote:
If it hadn't been for Europe, USA wouldn't exist...
I agree. Most of the smart ones came here two hundred plus years ago. Thanks by the way
DamnYankee is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:47 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.1.0
A vBSkinworks Design
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=

right