Permanent War?: Has The Military Industrial Complex Finally Achieved Its Goal?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by paulitician, Dec 10, 2011.

?

Permanent War?: Has The Military Industrial Complex Finally Achieved Its Goal?

  1. Yes

    60.9%
  2. No

    21.7%
  3. Conspiracy Theory. There is no such thing as the 'Military Industrial Complex.'

    17.4%
  1. paulitician
    Offline

    paulitician Platinum Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    Messages:
    38,401
    Thanks Received:
    4,136
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +11,972
    I'm just interesting in hearing what others think about this question. It does seem to me that we are in a permanent state of War. I don't believe there are any Citizens left who actually remember a time when we weren't bombing and at War with someone. So,has the Military Industrial Complex finally achieved its goal of permanent War?
     
  2. paulitician
    Offline

    paulitician Platinum Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    Messages:
    38,401
    Thanks Received:
    4,136
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +11,972
    Ron Paul: Perpetual War is Expensive...

    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGeC5fjpHUo]Perpetual War is Expensive! Jan 20 2011 - YouTube[/ame]
     
  3. paulitician
    Offline

    paulitician Platinum Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    Messages:
    38,401
    Thanks Received:
    4,136
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +11,972
    'Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace.' Chilling but incredibly accurate words from Dr. Paul.
     
  4. BOBO
    Offline

    BOBO The Magnificent!

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2011
    Messages:
    551
    Thanks Received:
    57
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Spokane area
    Ratings:
    +57
    ...this...

    Don't Underestimate Ron Paul in Iowa - Yahoo! News

    Notice the 'suggestions' listed below that are taken from the article above...

    "...Texas congressman does not have the staying power to be a national candidate."(he's polling 2nd & he lacks staying power???)

    "...I WOULD BE SHOCKED IF HE(Paul) DID NOT WIN THE CAUCUSES."(so would I!)

    "Experts(who R these experts???) don't think he(Paul) has the organization(WOW!) or the ability to reach out past Libertarian-leaning voters to the Republican mainstream(Really!?)

    "When it's all said & done, Paul will not be the Republican nominee next year."(How does he know???).


    Then this bullshit

    Why Iowa

    ...like who the phuk is rep Steve King??? He makes it out that if one does not "court" Steve King that ones Iowa campaign is dead meat! Really??? King is an egotistical old man that thinks his importance is messianic in scope. King is a fat azzed status quo fence sitting politician. Ron's primary support base is the under 30 constituency that is getting handed the baby boomers debt. Those under 30 constituency could give a rip about Steve King. To answer your question... Yes the MIC has reached it's goal, as has the professional politicians.
    It's because of these 'goals' & the debt that comes with it that Ron Paul may well pull off a major upset. The status quo has failed to realize that Ron Paul has pulled off an engineering marvel, for Ron is reaching Repubs, Libertarians, Demmies, independents & owns the under 30 constituency as well as 25% of the military vote. The MIC fears Ron as they see their perpetual war machine about to be terminated.


     
  5. BluePhantom
    Offline

    BluePhantom Educator (of liberals)

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2011
    Messages:
    7,062
    Thanks Received:
    1,738
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Portland, OR / Salem, OR
    Ratings:
    +3,137
    Take a look at American history....from day one it's been very rare that we are not at war with someone.
     
  6. paulitician
    Offline

    paulitician Platinum Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    Messages:
    38,401
    Thanks Received:
    4,136
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +11,972
    True.
     
  7. C_Clayton_Jones
    Offline

    C_Clayton_Jones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    41,543
    Thanks Received:
    8,932
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    In a Republic, actually
    Ratings:
    +23,868
    Yes, that’s the purpose of the ‘war on terror’ – to be forever at war and have a permanent ‘enemy.’ Hence the vilification of Islam and Muslims.
     
  8. paulitician
    Offline

    paulitician Platinum Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    Messages:
    38,401
    Thanks Received:
    4,136
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +11,972
    Yea i used to laugh when people talked about the Military Industrial Complex always creating another Boogeyman for us to fear. Well i don't laugh anymore. Because it's true. There will always be that Boogeyman for us to fear. That's the only way for them to establish permanent War.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Dec 10, 2011
  9. Dragon
    Offline

    Dragon Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2011
    Messages:
    5,481
    Thanks Received:
    578
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +579
    That's actually not true. You can start either from the Declaration of Independence or from the Constitution; I'm going to do the latter, but if you do the former add seven years of Revolutionary War. I'll include only declared wars plus the Civil War. A "declaration of war" need not bear that title or include that specific language; e.g. the Tonkin Gulf Resolution was a declaration of war, as were the Congressional resolutions authorizing war in Afghanistan and Iraq. Also, a war that was declared in any phase I have included significant military involvement before and after the "official" war, e.g. the Philippine war following the peace treaty with Spain and the Vietnam War prior to Tonkin Gulf. The Civil War was not a declared war but it was also our most costly in terms of casualties by far, so it has to be included.

    Constitution ratified 1789 - 1812; peace 23 years

    War of 1812 - 1814 war 2 years

    1814-1846 peace 32 years

    U.S. - Mexican War 1846-1848 war 2 years

    1848-1861 peace 13 years

    1861-1865 American Civil War war 4 years

    1865-1898 peace 33 years

    1898-1902 Spanish American War/Philippine War war 4 years

    1902-1917 peace 15 years

    1917-1918 World War I war 1 year

    1918-1941 peace 23 years

    1941-1945 World War II war 4 years

    1945-1950 peace 5 years

    1950-1953 Korean War war 3 years

    1953-1957 peace 4 years

    1957-1973 Vietnam War war 16 years

    1973-1991 peace 18 years

    1990-1991 Gulf War war 1 year

    1991-2001 peace 10 years

    2001-present Afghan war/Iraq war war 10 years (and counting)

    Prior to World War II (including World War II iteslf): 139 years of peace, 17 years of war

    After World War II: 47 years of peace, 30 years of war.

    Prior to and during World War II, we were at war 11% of the time. After World War II, we have been at war 39% of the time. Becoming a superpower has more than tripled our tendency to be at war.

    It remains to be seen whether we will have "perpetual war" as a result of the "War on Terror." If the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan actually do end soon without a new war starting (e.g. in Iran) then the answer will be no. But the problem of being a superpower remains significant in terms of war and peace.

    I couldn't vote in the poll because I honestly don't know the answer.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. paulitician
    Offline

    paulitician Platinum Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    Messages:
    38,401
    Thanks Received:
    4,136
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +11,972
    We've been bombing & killing for at least the last 70yrs. straight. Will it ever end? Doesn't look like it.
     

Share This Page