What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The realities of the US war machine

frigidweirdo

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
35,251
Reaction score
4,381
Points
1,130

"A report by Brown University’s Costs of War project and the Center for International Policy shows that the US’s dependence on for-profit contractors for war-zone duties contributed to mission failures in Afghanistan in particular."

"Up to half of the $14 trillion spent by the United States Department of Defense since the September 11, 2001 attacks went to for-profit defence contractors,"

So, Afghanistan last 20 years and $14 trillion was spent, with "up to" $7 trillion going to such companies how much profit did they make?

Well, enough for them to tell everyone it wasn't much. Any time someone's telling you this, you KNOW they're hiding something.


Here's an article trying to hide the profits by showing only the major arms of these companies and saying "hey, they make most profits from this and that, and these weren't used in Afghanistan". A simply ploy.

But anyway.... Iraq was a for-profit war. The whole idea was to reduce the impact of OPEC. Four OPEC countries gave the US cause for concern, when early in Chavez's time in office he had a big OPEC meeting and got them to agree.

Venezuela a few years later had a US supported coup against Chavez, which ultimately failed.
Iraq was invaded in 2003
Libya was bombed in 2011
Iran and Venezuela had heavy sanctions against them

Also Afghanistan, a neighbor of Iran's, along with Iraq, would probably have been staging areas for the "inevitable" invasion of Iran, that simply hasn't happened yet because the US isn't in a position to win easily.

All these lives being destroyed by going to fight, just so some rich people can make a nice tidy profit.
 

C_Clayton_Jones

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
63,363
Reaction score
21,198
Points
2,250
Location
In a Republic, actually
"Up to half of the $14 trillion spent by the United States Department of Defense since the September 11, 2001 attacks went to for-profit defence contractors,"
Which raises a disturbing question: how long can these contractors go without needing another war?
 
OP
frigidweirdo

frigidweirdo

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
35,251
Reaction score
4,381
Points
1,130
Which raises a disturbing question: how long can these contractors go without needing another war?

Probably not long.

The media has been pumping out things to get people to want to go back to Afghanistan since is all kicked off, before the US had even left.
 

Colin norris

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2021
Messages
6,238
Reaction score
2,443
Points
908

"A report by Brown University’s Costs of War project and the Center for International Policy shows that the US’s dependence on for-profit contractors for war-zone duties contributed to mission failures in Afghanistan in particular."

"Up to half of the $14 trillion spent by the United States Department of Defense since the September 11, 2001 attacks went to for-profit defence contractors,"

So, Afghanistan last 20 years and $14 trillion was spent, with "up to" $7 trillion going to such companies how much profit did they make?

Well, enough for them to tell everyone it wasn't much. Any time someone's telling you this, you KNOW they're hiding something.


Here's an article trying to hide the profits by showing only the major arms of these companies and saying "hey, they make most profits from this and that, and these weren't used in Afghanistan". A simply ploy.

But anyway.... Iraq was a for-profit war. The whole idea was to reduce the impact of OPEC. Four OPEC countries gave the US cause for concern, when early in Chavez's time in office he had a big OPEC meeting and got them to agree.

Venezuela a few years later had a US supported coup against Chavez, which ultimately failed.
Iraq was invaded in 2003
Libya was bombed in 2011
Iran and Venezuela had heavy sanctions against them

Also Afghanistan, a neighbor of Iran's, along with Iraq, would probably have been staging areas for the "inevitable" invasion of Iran, that simply hasn't happened yet because the US isn't in a position to win easily.

All these lives being destroyed by going to fight, just so some rich people can make a nice tidy profit.

That's the capitalist system republicans
So fiercly defend.
Those contractors paid a heavy price with their lives. I hope it was worth it and the likes of Cheney and Bush gave them their best wishes.
 

Mac-7

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2019
Messages
31,818
Reaction score
22,029
Points
2,865
"Up to half of the $14 trillion spent by the United States Department of Defense since the September 11, 2001 attacks went to for-profit defence contractors,"
Far left types complained about the draft

So after the Vietnam war ended US went to the more expensive volunteer army

Which includes many civilian contractors

Thats just the realities of life
 

harmonica

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
43,080
Reaction score
19,049
Points
2,300
..there's been a problem with governmental over spending in MANY departments for decades--not just the military
..it didn't cause mission failure---we killed Osama and some bad guys.....the failure was thinking we could change Afghanistan
you cannot change a country/culture/etc with the military---unless maybe with TOTAL war--like WW2 was ......
we did not go to war so people could get rich --that's ridiculous
1. aljazeera!!
2.study--they can make up anything they want with a '''study'''.....
 

Votto

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
32,376
Reaction score
18,079
Points
1,905

"A report by Brown University’s Costs of War project and the Center for International Policy shows that the US’s dependence on for-profit contractors for war-zone duties contributed to mission failures in Afghanistan in particular."

"Up to half of the $14 trillion spent by the United States Department of Defense since the September 11, 2001 attacks went to for-profit defence contractors,"

So, Afghanistan last 20 years and $14 trillion was spent, with "up to" $7 trillion going to such companies how much profit did they make?

Well, enough for them to tell everyone it wasn't much. Any time someone's telling you this, you KNOW they're hiding something.


Here's an article trying to hide the profits by showing only the major arms of these companies and saying "hey, they make most profits from this and that, and these weren't used in Afghanistan". A simply ploy.

But anyway.... Iraq was a for-profit war. The whole idea was to reduce the impact of OPEC. Four OPEC countries gave the US cause for concern, when early in Chavez's time in office he had a big OPEC meeting and got them to agree.

Venezuela a few years later had a US supported coup against Chavez, which ultimately failed.
Iraq was invaded in 2003
Libya was bombed in 2011
Iran and Venezuela had heavy sanctions against them

Also Afghanistan, a neighbor of Iran's, along with Iraq, would probably have been staging areas for the "inevitable" invasion of Iran, that simply hasn't happened yet because the US isn't in a position to win easily.

All these lives being destroyed by going to fight, just so some rich people can make a nice tidy profit.
Government hiding where all the money goes?

The hell you say.

Now if you can only do this for the recent stimulus package you can graduate from being a partisan hack.
 

Penelope

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
53,734
Reaction score
10,201
Points
2,060

As Saudi Arabia bombs civilians in Yemen, five Democratic senators joined Republicans in narrowly voting to approve Trump’s weapons deal.​

By Ben Norton / AlterNet’s Grayzone Project

Five Democratic senators joined hands with Republicans to push through the Trump administration’s sale of $510 million in precision-guided missiles to Saudi Arabia, in a narrow 53-47 vote.

Three of these Democrats have received tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from the arms industry, which will be reaping an unprecedented windfall profit from Trump’s record-breaking $110 billion weapons deal with the Saudi monarchy.

---------------------------------------
Saudi Arabia doesn't care who they kill, many civilians have been killed and many children. Boeing is supplying weapon and Raytheon .
 
Last edited:

Penelope

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
53,734
Reaction score
10,201
Points
2,060
“I am embarrassed that people are out here talking about making some money and making a buck while seventeen million people live on a starvation diet and are threatened with famine, I am embarrassed,” Paul thundered. “I am embarrassed that people would bring up trying to feather the nest of corporations in order to sell these weapons.”
(Rand Paul said, me)

Four Democratic senators — Chris Murphy, Al Franken, Jeff Merkley and Elizabeth Warren — joined Paul in co-s
sponsoring the legislation.
---------------------------------------------------------

No worries the defense companies will survive even if they sell weapons to NK.
 

gipper

Libertarian/Anarchist
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
43,771
Reaction score
14,839
Points
2,250
That's the capitalist system republicans
So fiercly defend.
Those contractors paid a heavy price with their lives. I hope it was worth it and the likes of Cheney and Bush gave them their best wishes.

Government hiding where all the money goes?

The hell you say.

Now if you can only do this for the recent stimulus package you can graduate from being a partisan hack.
The D Party is just as much a war party as the R Party. You not knowing this is unsurprising.

And calling someone a partisan hack when you’re a partisan hack, is silly.
 

EMH

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2021
Messages
3,007
Reaction score
2,770
Points
1,918

"A report by Brown University’s Costs of War project and the Center for International Policy shows that the US’s dependence on for-profit contractors for war-zone duties contributed to mission failures in Afghanistan in particular."

"Up to half of the $14 trillion spent by the United States Department of Defense since the September 11, 2001 attacks went to for-profit defence contractors,"

So, Afghanistan last 20 years and $14 trillion was spent, with "up to" $7 trillion going to such companies how much profit did they make?

Well, enough for them to tell everyone it wasn't much. Any time someone's telling you this, you KNOW they're hiding something.


Here's an article trying to hide the profits by showing only the major arms of these companies and saying "hey, they make most profits from this and that, and these weren't used in Afghanistan". A simply ploy.

But anyway.... Iraq was a for-profit war. The whole idea was to reduce the impact of OPEC. Four OPEC countries gave the US cause for concern, when early in Chavez's time in office he had a big OPEC meeting and got them to agree.

Venezuela a few years later had a US supported coup against Chavez, which ultimately failed.
Iraq was invaded in 2003
Libya was bombed in 2011
Iran and Venezuela had heavy sanctions against them

Also Afghanistan, a neighbor of Iran's, along with Iraq, would probably have been staging areas for the "inevitable" invasion of Iran, that simply hasn't happened yet because the US isn't in a position to win easily.

All these lives being destroyed by going to fight, just so some rich people can make a nice tidy profit.



The OP should read


All government spending should be stolen by democrats. Some military spending is not. Fuck the military and let me steal that money....
 

gipper

Libertarian/Anarchist
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
43,771
Reaction score
14,839
Points
2,250
The OP should read


All government spending should be stolen by democrats. Some military spending is not. Fuck the military and let me steal that money....
Oh brother is that silly. Clearly the evidence from the last 20 years is available for all to see. Defense (really war spending) spending is a bi-partisan affair.

Are you unaware the Ds voted to increase war spending when Don was potus, all the while claiming Don was unstable.
 
OP
frigidweirdo

frigidweirdo

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
35,251
Reaction score
4,381
Points
1,130
The OP should read


All government spending should be stolen by democrats. Some military spending is not. Fuck the military and let me steal that money....

What?
 

EMH

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2021
Messages
3,007
Reaction score
2,770
Points
1,918
Oh brother is that silly. Clearly the evidence from the last 20 years is available for all to see. Defense (really war spending) spending is a bi-partisan affair.

Are you unaware the Ds voted to increase war spending when Don was potus, all the while claiming Don was unstable.



"War spending" = all about Israel


Defense spending, the procurement of weapons, has always been seen by the left as money the left could/should steal by cutting and spending on themselves...
 

gipper

Libertarian/Anarchist
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
43,771
Reaction score
14,839
Points
2,250
"War spending" = all about Israel


Defense spending, the procurement of weapons, has always been seen by the left as money the left could/should steal by cutting and spending on themselves...
Wrong. The left supports the war machine just as much as the right. If think supporting the war machine is a good thing, you’re delusional.
 

EMH

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2021
Messages
3,007
Reaction score
2,770
Points
1,918
Wrong. The left supports the war machine just as much as the right. If think supporting the war machine is a good thing, you’re delusional.
Wrong. The left supports the war machine just as much as the right. If think supporting the war machine is a good thing, you’re delusional.


Zionists are overwhelmingly either Dem or faux big spending "republican for Biden"

Rupert Murdoch is the best example.

Nobody truly Zionist is for smaller government. There are no Zionist libertarians, none. There are plenty of Jewish libertarians who are great libertarians, but they do not support Zionism.
 

C_Clayton_Jones

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
63,363
Reaction score
21,198
Points
2,250
Location
In a Republic, actually
Probably not long.

The media has been pumping out things to get people to want to go back to Afghanistan since is all kicked off, before the US had even left.
And if not Afghanistan, somewhere else.

As I noted in another thread, it’s not just military contractors – it’s as if America is addicted to war.

Indeed, as I’m sure you’ve noted, the criticism of the withdraw from Afghanistan isn’t about the withdraw per se, it’s criticism of leaving Afghanistan altogether and an effort to justify staying in Afghanistan.

For militarists and warmongers, military contractors and politicians, Afghanistan was the perfect war, the perpetual war – an endless war of profit and jingoism America could neither win nor lose.
 

gipper

Libertarian/Anarchist
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
43,771
Reaction score
14,839
Points
2,250
That's the capitalist system republicans
So fiercly defend.
Those contractors paid a heavy price with their lives. I hope it was worth it and the likes of Cheney and Bush gave them their best wishes.
The thing you fail to comprehend is the Ds are exactly like the Rs. Maybe when your balls drop, you’ll get it.
 
OP
frigidweirdo

frigidweirdo

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
35,251
Reaction score
4,381
Points
1,130
"War spending" = all about Israel


Defense spending, the procurement of weapons, has always been seen by the left as money the left could/should steal by cutting and spending on themselves...

No, it's not. Israel is a part of US foreign policy, and some decisions will be made with that in mind, but warring for the sake of making money is there too.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$142.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top