Why Do We Have Such A Big Military?

[Gunny]

Either you are a troll, really immature, or niave. Perhaps all three.

The "rest of the world's" vision for the future is exactly why the US has a military. Take a look at Dafur, the Middle East, Indonesia, Somalia, Ethiopia, etc. If that is the "rest of the world's" future, I'll take the military thanks anyway.

Obviously just another one that gave up his milk money without question.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Obviously just another one that gave up his milk money without question.

Where did the L go Gunny?

 

[CSM]

Obviously just another one that gave up his milk money without question.

Sheep, shepherd or predator ... which raises the whole question of does the flock even realize that the shepherd is trying to protect the flock from predators? My guess is they do not.

 

[Reality]

Words on paper are worth only the might you have to back them up. Or hasn't history taught you anything?

I completely disagree. While this may be the nationalistic way to explain it, nationalism has nothing to do with reality.

We live in a world ruled by force We've been pointing the guns for 60 years while the rest of the world points sticks and stones at us and we like it that way.

Military has been cause celebre' for nationalism as long as the phenomenon has existed. Might makes right in the social conscience of societies. Victory, sometimes a hollow word (see the "as long as it takes" on Iraq crowd), even if it exists in a vacuum, is still a celebration of right by virtue of might.

Over excessive military spending also serves as a means of economic redistribution among elites. Under the guise of fair market value for a service or product, legislators use the overinflated defense budgets to create employment in their districts for products and services of no value to the country. Defense spending is largely argued over in the halls of congress by means of legislators taking positions based on the expected results in their districts, not based on the defensive needs of the country. A secondary result is companies like United Defense Industries Inc. are pushed toward IPO on government money, leading to fortunes made by its private investors now selling shares on the open market. The only reason UDI made IPO is through selling us crap we don't need and post-9-11 hysteria for more defense spending, regardless of what the spending got the country in return. Veridian and Anteon are other examples.

The evidence that defense spending is not synonymous with defending the country from external enemies is apparent. While our leaders sabre rattle over third world countries not following orders, the Olympics are being held in the most repressive regime on the planet. China has been at economic war with the United States for no less than a decade while it has ratcheted up its defense build up many times over. But a war with China won't be profitable. China's sweatshop and slave labor produce goods are distributed, at great profits due to low cost via exploited workers, by supporters of politicians.

Doing what we would have to do to take on the real threat to American security and its place in the world, namely prohibit any item manufactured in China from being sold within American borders, is not going to happen. We are funding a country which intends us great harm by the sale of goods at department stores. If Iraq served a purpose, like it did when it was exporting terrorism to Iran, there would have been no invasion. If every American wanted a Persian rug or some product made in Tehran, you can damn well bet their nuclear program would be just as acceptable as India's and Israel would be told to quiet down its criticism.

But nations that don't make American businessmen money are expendable to make way for a viable production partners or customers.

When has rhetoric from the White House toward Iran seemed to moderate? When exports to the country have risen. That's no coincidence.

 

[Orange_Juice]

From the looks of things, you are very misinformed and making an argument that requires turning a blind eye to a rattlesnake. Cute.

Name the rattlesnake were are so threatened by.

 

[Ravi]

Sheep, shepherd or predator ... which raises the whole question of does the flock even realize that the shepherd is trying to protect the flock from predators? My guess is they do not.

It probably depends on what else the shepherd is doing to the sheep under the guise of protecting them.

 

[Orange_Juice]

Can China be an enemy, it already is and has been working diligently to become a "super power" and all that it signifies. The trade you mention is mostly one way, them to us. They hold most of our IOU's and are developing a space capability. Once their hardware objectives are achieved then they will call the terms by which we will operate on the world stage.

Consider the Taiwan dilemma, the main reason China hasn't scooped that little island up is our powerful naval presence in the pacific. They will achieve parity or superiority soon and then they will feel free to act.

I did say treaty's and international agreements impact our military size. The Monroe doctrine, the defense of Israel proclamations and treaties with several important Arab nations all require a certain level of military size and capability.

I see you are very biased against the military industrial complex. President Eisenhower warned about that and it should remain a concern for congress.
I think that you are underestimating our potential and actual adversaries.

Do you trust China, Russia, Indonesia, Certain oil rich South American and Middle east countries to the point that America should reduce it's military to a defense of the homeland only?

By your own admission they are not threats to our homeland. You pointed out foreign nations we might get dragged into a war to defend. I just do not see them as a threat where we need this overbloated, giant military. I'll also point out, that whereas we spend more money than the rest of the world combined on the military, most of the other countries that have significant military spending are our allies. So what's the point?

The world is moving past war as a tool for international order. It's just becoming obsolete. The US and China couldn't fight a war with the global economy surviving. It would be such a disaster for the entire world that its almost unthinkable.

 

[CSM]

It probably depends on what else the shepherd is doing to the sheep under the guise of protecting them.

I suppose that is one view. However, I submit that what the predator will do to the sheep is not anywhere near as bad as what the shepherd may be doing.

Sounds an awful lot like the sheep are saying "I would rather be eaten by predators than let the shepherd hang around." That works for them until the shepherd is gone and the predators come around and start eating sheep.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I suppose that is one view. However, I submit that what the predator will do to the sheep is not anywhere near as bad as what the shepherd may be doing.

Sounds an awful lot like the sheep are saying "I would rather be eaten by predators than let the shepherd hang around." That works for them until the shepherd is gone and the predators come around and start eating sheep.

People like Ravi think they will either not get eaten or be last on the list.

Old saying. When a lion is chasing us, I do not have to be faster than the lion, just faster then YOU.

 

[Orange_Juice]

Either you are a troll, really immature, or niave. Perhaps all three.

The "rest of the world's" vision for the future is exactly why the US has a military. Take a look at Dafur, the Middle East, Indonesia, Somalia, Ethiopia, etc. If that is the "rest of the world's" future, I'll take the military thanks anyway.

Wow, you really are deeply brainwashed. Watch too many GI Joe movies or what?

You do realize that a massive, obsolete miltary was not something this nation carried like a mill stone about its neck until after WW2. We survived just fine without one prior to that

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Wow, you really are deeply brainwashed. Watch too many GI Joe movies or what?

You do realize that a massive, obsolete miltary was not something this nation carried like a mill stone about its neck until after WW2. We survived just fine without one prior to that

What a retarded retort.

 

[Orange_Juice]

Obviously just another one that gave up his milk money without question.

Bingo! You have hit the nail on the head, though I suppose you don't realize it. Our military, while unnecessary to defend the nation, is socially viewed as a tough guy institution. Its there to make unthinking people feel proud, macho and strong. That's it.

So if you oppose its wastful presence in its current bloated form, you must be somehow not strong or something.

 

[CSM]

Wow, you really are deeply brainwashed. Watch too many GI Joe movies or what?

You do realize that a massive, obsolete miltary was not something this nation carried like a mill stone about its neck until after WW2. We survived just fine without one prior to that

You do not have a clue.

Let me guess, you have never been in the military, don't have a job and suffer from terminal acne.

You are building a case confirming my suspicions about you with every post you make.

 

[Orange_Juice]

What a retarded retort.

And its about 10 times more well thought out than your reply

 

[Ravi]

I suppose that is one view. However, I submit that what the predator will do to the sheep is not anywhere near as bad as what the shepherd may be doing.

Sounds an awful lot like the sheep are saying "I would rather be eaten by predators than let the shepherd hang around." That works for them until the shepherd is gone and the predators come around and start eating sheep.

lol, I'm just goofing around. The sheep and shepherd analogy made me laugh. I have NO problem having the most powerful military in the world.

 

[Ravi]

People like Ravi think they will either not get eaten or be last on the list.

Old saying. When a lion is chasing us, I do not have to be faster than the lion, just faster then YOU.

People like RGS love to think they know what others think.

 

[CSM]

Bingo! You have hit the nail on the head, though I suppose you don't realize it. Our military, while unnecessary to defend the nation, is socially viewed as a tough guy institution. Its there to make unthinking people feel proud, macho and strong. That's it.

So if you oppose its wastful presence in its current bloated form, you must be somehow not strong or something.

What a cartload of crap! You are not even worth engaging on this board.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

People like RGS love to think they know what others think.

Hurts when I am right doesn't it Ravi?

 

[Orange_Juice]

You do not have a clue.

Let me guess, you have never been in the military, don't have a job and suffer from terminal acne.

You are building a case confirming my suspicions about you with every post you make.

You have no idea at all about what you are talking about. Wrong on all counts

 

[editec]

I think IKE summed it up rather well at the time.

Some elements of his speech are of course, no longer an issue, but still, this speech is one that I wish more REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS would commit to memory

Not only did he explain why our military strength was absolutely necessary, but he also saw how that military strength could lead to our eventualy downfall as a TRULY democratic republic.

I have emboldened the parts of this speech which speak to both of those vital issues.

Good evening, my fellow Americans: First, I should like to express my gratitude to the radio and television networks for the opportunity they have given me over the years to bring reports and messages to our nation. My special thanks go to them for the opportunity of addressing you this evening.

Three days from now, after a half century of service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as, in traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested in my successor.
This evening I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell, and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen.

Like every other citizen, I wish the new President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all.

Our people expect their President and the Congress to find essential agreement on questions of great moment, the wise resolution of which will better shape the future of the nation.

My own relations with Congress, which began on a remote and tenuous basis when, long ago, a member of the Senate appointed me to West Point, have since ranged to the intimate during the war and immediate post-war period, and finally to the mutually interdependent during these past eight years.

In this final relationship, the Congress and the Administration have, on most vital issues, cooperated well, to serve the nation well rather than mere partisanship, and so have assured that the business of the nation should go forward. So my official relationship with Congress ends in a feeling on my part, of gratitude that we have been able to do so much together.

We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America's leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.

Throughout America's adventure in free government, such basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among peoples and among nations.

To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people.
Any failure traceable to arrogance or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us a grievous hurt, both at home and abroad.

Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method. Unhappily the danger it poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle – with liberty the stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.

Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in the newer elements of our defenses; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research – these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel. <TABLE cellPadding=7 width="35%" align=left border=0><TBODY><TR><TD><TABLE cellPadding=9 bgColor=#f5cf7b><TBODY><TR><TD>[FONT=helvetica, arial, ms sans serif, sans-serif][SIZE=+2]A[/SIZE] vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.[/FONT] </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

But each proposal must be weighed in light of a broader consideration; the need to maintain balance in and among national programs – balance between the private and the public economy, balance between the cost and hoped for advantages – balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between the actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.

The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their Government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well in the face of threat and stress.
But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise.

Of these, I mention two only.

A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.

Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.

Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations. <TABLE cellPadding=7 width="35%" align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD><TABLE cellPadding=9 bgColor=#f5cf7b><TBODY><TR><TD>[FONT=helvetica, arial, ms sans serif, sans-serif][SIZE=+2]A[/SIZE]merican makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. [/FONT]</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.

In this revolution, research has become central, it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

<TABLE cellPadding=7 width="35%" align=left border=0><TBODY><TR><TD><TABLE cellPadding=9 bgColor=#f5cf7b><TBODY><TR><TD>[FONT=helvetica, arial, ms sans serif, sans-serif][SIZE=+2]T[/SIZE]he prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded. [/FONT]</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system – ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.

Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we – you and I, and our government – must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering for, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without asking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.

Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be, instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.

Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.

Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose differences, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war – as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years – I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.

Happily, I can say that war has been avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But, so much remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little I can to help the world advance along that road.

So – in this my last good night to you as your President – I thank you for the many opportunities you have given me for public service in war and peace. I trust that in that service you find some things worthy; as for the rest of it, I know you will find ways to improve performance in the future.
You and I – my fellow citizens – need to be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of peace with justice. May we be ever unswerving in devotion to principle, confident but humble with power, diligent in pursuit of the Nations' great goals.

To all the peoples of the world, I once more give expression to America's prayerful and continuing aspiration:

We pray that peoples of all faiths, all races, all nations, may have their great human needs satisfied; that those now denied opportunity shall come to enjoy it to the full; that all who yearn for freedom may experience its spiritual blessings; that those who have freedom will understand, also, its heavy responsibilities; that all who are insensitive to the needs of others will learn charity; that the scourges of poverty, disease and ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth, and that, in the goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.

Now, on Friday noon, I am to become a private citizen. I am proud to do so. I look forward to it. Thank you, and good night.

Text of this speech (which is public domain, gunnyL) was found here: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ike.htm

The basic American common sense that Ike I think represents in the above is what I think is lacking in the republic and democratic parties, folks.