What reason does the USA get into Wars?

[zzzz]

It is relatively simple. Post WWII we became the most powerful nation on earth but opposed by a powerful enemy, USSR. The war mentality still existed from WWII and the hate for fascism migrated to communism. The wars between 1947 and the mid 1980's became wars of containment, containing the spread of communism. When Reagan defeated the monster empire the military industrial complex (MIC) needed to create a cause to keep defense budgets high.

Saddam's blunder with Kuwait was the only conflict that was an unforeseeable war. Bush I effectively defeated Saddam. Bush II just mopped up and strategically failed. Failure in the sense that the money used to occupy Iran was a waste and caused the troubling US debt to grow. The future will judge whether that debt will cripple the US economy.

However attempts were made for humanitarian reasons (such as Somalia) but public outrage at casualties for humanitarian reasons sabotaged this plan. The budding terrorist organizations though, looked like the golden apple to the MIC. Not only would there be an endless supply of fleeting targets but it would be a never ending campaign guaranteeing a steady stream of defense dollars for the MIC.

I am not implying that the MIC is bankrolling or supplying terrorists but they help support the the high defense budget and it is a perfect plan for the MIC. And now the Chinese have replaced the USSR as the big enemy on the horizon which calls for more high tech weapons.

It matters not who is office or who is in control of Congress, none of them are in real control anymore, it is the MIC who pulls the strings behind the scenes.

 

[Nova78]

Testosterone

 

[Douger]

The Nazi's didn't lose. They switched continents.
Operation Paperclip: US Harbored Nazi War Criminals after World War II

 

[healthmyths]

We get involved in wars today because of what happened in WWI and WWII. We tried to stay out of Europe's business but they along with the Japanese eventually dragged us into their "World War" because on a planet, all actions eventually affect you somehow.

The US can't let Russia or China block off half the planet for their little kingdom and act like it won't hurt international finance and trade, in addition to the human rights violations of killing people left and right.

Once the Cold War started we got a kneejerk reaction to everything the communists did in Europe, Asia and South America. We got sucked into wars in Korea and Vietnam when in fact those countries are very little in importance compared to Iraq sitting right in the middle of the oil country. Iraq was a justified war compared to Vietnam, but everyone likes to claim this or that war is Vietnam out of stupidity. Uh, compare the number of dead between the wars first and the outcome.

The 1960s gave the social misfits a stage against Vietnam and now those assholes have weaseled their way into every part of society telling us war is evil at every turn.

Well, if we didn't fight wars then England would still rule the US....the Jews would've eventually been wiped off the face of the Earth, etc.

Any idiot that likes to play the "peace card" everytime is an ignorant person or evil person because they don't want to deal with evil people harming innocent people in some kind of military/terrorist action somewhere on this planet.

You raised very good points BUT totally ignore the FACT all involvements were based on
"Agreements".."Treaties"..

Why do countries SIGN these treaties unless they intend to fullfil their responsibilities?

My whole point was if there WERE NO TREATIES there would be no justifications.

 

[Charles_Main]

Republicans are bullies. They love to start wars. They just don't want to fight them. Or their kids. But that's why we have poor people. Republicans refer to them as "cannon fodder". It's obvious why.

Care to Provide even one link of a Republican Referring to the Poor as "Cannon Fodder" or are you just talking right out your ass, as usual?

 

[healthmyths]

It is relatively simple. Post WWII we became the most powerful nation on earth but opposed by a powerful enemy, USSR. The war mentality still existed from WWII and the hate for fascism migrated to communism. The wars between 1947 and the mid 1980's became wars of containment, containing the spread of communism. When Reagan defeated the monster empire the military industrial complex (MIC) needed to create a cause to keep defense budgets high.

Saddam's blunder with Kuwait was the only conflict that was an unforeseeable war. Bush I effectively defeated Saddam. Bush II just mopped up and strategically failed. Failure in the sense that the money used to occupy Iran was a waste and caused the troubling US debt to grow. The future will judge whether that debt will cripple the US economy.

However attempts were made for humanitarian reasons (such as Somalia) but public outrage at casualties for humanitarian reasons sabotaged this plan. The budding terrorist organizations though, looked like the golden apple to the MIC. Not only would there be an endless supply of fleeting targets but it would be a never ending campaign guaranteeing a steady stream of defense dollars for the MIC.

I am not implying that the MIC is bankrolling or supplying terrorists but they help support the the high defense budget and it is a perfect plan for the MIC. And now the Chinese have replaced the USSR as the big enemy on the horizon which calls for more high tech weapons.

It matters not who is office or who is in control of Congress, none of them are in real control anymore, it is the MIC who pulls the strings behind the scenes.

You wrote"Bush II just mopped up and strategically failed. Failure in the sense that the money used to occupy Iran was a waste and caused the troubling US debt to grow>

The military conflict with Iraq surrendering and Saddam captured all occurred in less then a year and less then $60 billion.!

BUT with people like the below NOT respecting the "Water's Edge " as Obama recently complained..the Terrorists were Encouraged by hypocrite/terrorist supporters INCLUDING Obama that DIDN"T respect the "Water's Edge" and more importantly ENCOURAGED and helped recruit terrorists which prolonged the Iraq conflict 6 years and 10 times the costs as well as these traitors HELPING terrorists KILL 3,000+ US TROOPS!

I really don't understand people like you.
You seem a reasonable intelligent person.. YET you fall for the MSM bias reporting about IRAQ. You NEVER evidently could see the below statements ENCOURAGED terrorism!
And you and others believed the crap US troops are nazis, baby killers, civilian killers!
SO why not have just a modicum of common sense to understand that the below statements HELPED recruit terrorists! It definitely didn't respect the "WATER's EDGE"!

Durbin (D) "must have been done by Nazis, Soviets --action of Americans
in the treatment of their prisoners.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "War is lost",
U.S. Rep. Murtha(D) "Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”
Senator Kerry(D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the
dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."
Senator Obama(D) .."troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"

Don't you as a smart person understand when these statements were made they were VERY helpful in recruiting terrorists! Helpful in encouraging the thugs to justify their sending little kids with bombs who when received candy from US troops blew themselves up killing troops!
AFTER all EVEN our senators called our troops baby killers, civilian killers!
IT is Propaganda perpetuated at the time by US representatives beyond the water's edge!!!

 

[whitehall]

The federal government is charged with the responsibility to "provide for the common defense". Little girls and ignorant lefties can argue about what constitutes the common defense but that's the way the system works in a representative democracy.

 

[geauxtohell]

I was talking with my 12 yr granddaughter and she was wearing a tee-shirt with a "Peace" sign. Which I just found out was originally created for the "Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament"
View attachment 19638
Peace symbols - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

She said she had no idea about the Peace sign much less the Vietnam war.

Knowing she'll in all likelihood NOT hear the true reason for Vietnam I asked her if then she believed in when making a contract or agreement, or treaties was it wrong to abide by the terms, i.e. SEATO for example. Or the 1991 Cease Fire.

Neither of which she had ever heard of much less knew anything!

So I'm asking the people of this forum in a poll how many of you had EVER heard of SEATO?

Your 12 year old granddaughter had never heard of Vietnam?

I weep for the future of this nation.

 

[geauxtohell]

I can buy LBJ being a war monger. Wilson, FDR and Truman? Hardly..

Well, Wilson's entering the country into WWI was a historic turn of events for American Foreign policy.

I don't think he did it because he was a Warmonger.

 

[healthmyths]

I was talking with my 12 yr granddaughter and she was wearing a tee-shirt with a "Peace" sign. Which I just found out was originally created for the "Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament"
View attachment 19638
Peace symbols - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

She said she had no idea about the Peace sign much less the Vietnam war.

Knowing she'll in all likelihood NOT hear the true reason for Vietnam I asked her if then she believed in when making a contract or agreement, or treaties was it wrong to abide by the terms, i.e. SEATO for example. Or the 1991 Cease Fire.

Neither of which she had ever heard of much less knew anything!

So I'm asking the people of this forum in a poll how many of you had EVER heard of SEATO?

Your 12 year old granddaughter had never heard of Vietnam?

I weep for the future of this nation.

To be correct she said had heard but not from school which she said was to be covered this fall in 7th grade.
BUT knowing the penchant to bias the history, I wanted to give her a possible other view.

 

[Billo_Really]

I was talking with my 12 yr granddaughter and she was wearing a tee-shirt with a "Peace" sign. Which I just found out was originally created for the "Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament"
View attachment 19638
Peace symbols - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

She said she had no idea about the Peace sign much less the Vietnam war.

Knowing she'll in all likelihood NOT hear the true reason for Vietnam I asked her if then she believed in when making a contract or agreement, or treaties was it wrong to abide by the terms, i.e. SEATO for example. Or the 1991 Cease Fire.

Neither of which she had ever heard of much less knew anything!

So I'm asking the people of this forum in a poll how many of you had EVER heard of SEATO?

No I haven't.

But I have heard about the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), which is the easts' answer to NATO/EU. Which basically means if we attack anyone of those asian nations, we're at war with all of them.

What's the bad thing about SEATO?