CDZ Why is USA so pro-military?

[M14 Shooter]

I've seen Americans go out of their way to thank their soldiers for "risking their lives for the country", but I don't really understand this sentiment.
It doesn't seem like America would be at war if they did not send their armies to places like the Middle East... and they're not really protecting Americans while they're stationed overseas. It almost seems like they're instigating a war, rather than protecting the American citizens.
I don't understand also this military worshiping culture. Why do you call them heroes?

1965-1973, American liberals happily spit on US soldiers, called them baby killers, criminals, animals etc.

Since then they've grown up (a little) and (usually) understand that we should appreciate those who go into harms way in our name, regardless if we agree with why they went.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

We have not had a war to defend the nation since WWII.

Every military operation since then has been to insure corporate profits or to insure campaign donations. We are more defenders of totalitarianism than defenders of freedom.

But it's easy to sell the idea that we are doing this for the benefit of freedom.

That line of reasoning might work as to why the US attacked Japan.

It does not explain why the United States threw the first punch at Germany in two world wars.

*****SMILE*****

Hitler declared war on us what we supposed to do send him flowers and a box of chocolate's ?

Defense or offense?

The progressive line of thought says we should wait until the other side throws the first punch.

Why did the United States feel it necessary to throw the first punch at Germany in both those World Wars?

If it was simply a matter of Germany having declared war on the United States then...

Iran declared war on the United States in 1980, and never rescinded that declaration, so it would seem we have justification to turn them into a parking lot if all it takes is someone declaring war against us.

So what were we defending in both those World Wars? We hadn't been attacked by Germany. Why were we there?

*****SMILE*****

 

[Mad Scientist]

I appreciate anyone willing to fight to defend freedom, but I haven't seen that done in MY lifetime. In fact, all I can see are people wanting to bring the whole thing down.

 

[kwc57]

I've seen Americans go out of their way to thank their soldiers for "risking their lives for the country", but I don't really understand this sentiment.
It doesn't seem like America would be at war if they did not send their armies to places like the Middle East... and they're not really protecting Americans while they're stationed overseas. It almost seems like they're instigating a war, rather than protecting the American citizens.
I don't understand also this military worshiping culture. Why do you call them heroes?

History of the USA

You're welcome.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

I appreciate anyone willing to fight to defend freedom, but I haven't seen that done in MY lifetime. In fact, all I can see are people wanting to bring the whole thing down.

The military only goes where they're told to go.

So who are you blaming about wanting to bring the whole thing down?

*****SMILE*****

 

[Teddy Pollins]

It's an obvious thing to me. Military is one of the largest and prosperous businesses in the USA. Yup, it kills and destroys. But it brings and allows to earn huge money. Is this country bad which makes money on wars and blood?

 

[frigidweirdo]

I've seen Americans go out of their way to thank their soldiers for "risking their lives for the country", but I don't really understand this sentiment.
It doesn't seem like America would be at war if they did not send their armies to places like the Middle East... and they're not really protecting Americans while they're stationed overseas. It almost seems like they're instigating a war, rather than protecting the American citizens.
I don't understand also this military worshiping culture. Why do you call them heroes?

Asks the guy with the Poland flag. Our troops are here and there. If they are there, fewer terrorists are here. If they were all here, then terrorists would multiply like rabbits there and start taking over free countries, genocide would be the rule of the day, trade would be disrupted, American babies would starve to death, etc, etc, etc. It's really not rocket science.

US soldiers being in Iraq increased the number of Islamic Extremists MASSIVELY.

Who tells people these lies that US soldiers are stopping Islamic extremists?

 

[easyt65]

I've seen Americans go out of their way to thank their soldiers for "risking their lives for the country", but I don't really understand this sentiment.
It doesn't seem like America would be at war if they did not send their armies to places like the Middle East... and they're not really protecting Americans while they're stationed overseas. It almost seems like they're instigating a war, rather than protecting the American citizens.
I don't understand also this military worshiping culture. Why do you call them heroes?

Ummm because it is our military that has kept this nation storng, free, and protected.

You seem to be confusing the military with out politicians. The military does NOT pick and choose who our enemies are, where we go around the world to fight, when we are used, and what our role will be. (If we did, the nex twar would be in the Bahamas - we would have a prolonged invasion and covert mission of blending in with the 'enemy' natives to do some covert recon by wearing bathing suits, getting sun tans, and riding some waves... THAT was a joke, btw).

The military is a TOOL and is supposed to be the 'last resort' of a nation when all other means to achieving a national goal has failed. The military is SENT to fight wars the politicians usually get us into or wars we are forced to fight when we are attacked.

The military has also been mis-used. We are not 'nation-builders'. That's for the state department, the UN, Peace Corp, etc. The military has one goal, one mission - to defeat the enemy, also known as 'breaking shi'ite' and killing people'...to the point where the other 'team' either surrenders or leaves us the hail alone. WE DON'T CALL THE SHOTS...WE SERVE. ,,,and no one - NO ONE - prays for peace more than the military does...because WE are the ones who have to fight the wars!

 

[easyt65]

It's an obvious thing to me. Military is one of the largest and prosperous businesses in the USA. Yup, it kills and destroys. But it brings and allows to earn huge money. Is this country bad which makes money on wars and blood?

YOU are confusing the 'Industial Military Complex' - guys like Ratheon, Alion, etc - who get paid billions of dollars to build weapons, armor, vehicles, etc with the military. The military, the guys who use those expensive tools to fight the wars they are sent to fight, struggle to pay for housing, many are on food stamps, and get lesser medical care than illegal aliens in this country do. Politicians, businessmen, and even GENERALS make money off of it (I don't consider those generals to be 'military' so much).

By the way, we - the military - still go to war and risk our lives with equipment made by the LOWEST BIDDER.

 

[easyt65]

I've seen Americans go out of their way to thank their soldiers for "risking their lives for the country", but I don't really understand this sentiment.
It doesn't seem like America would be at war if they did not send their armies to places like the Middle East... and they're not really protecting Americans while they're stationed overseas. It almost seems like they're instigating a war, rather than protecting the American citizens.
I don't understand also this military worshiping culture. Why do you call them heroes?

Asks the guy with the Poland flag. Our troops are here and there. If they are there, fewer terrorists are here. If they were all here, then terrorists would multiply like rabbits there and start taking over free countries, genocide would be the rule of the day, trade would be disrupted, American babies would starve to death, etc, etc, etc. It's really not rocket science.

US soldiers being in Iraq increased the number of Islamic Extremists MASSIVELY.

Who tells people these lies that US soldiers are stopping Islamic extremists?

What helped to increase the number of Islamic extremists massively was:
1) Running Weapons to Syrian Rebels who eventually becamse ISIS
2) Taking ISIS lightly, calling them a 'JV Team'
3) Choosing to do NOTHING as they poured across the border and drove their mile-long convoys on desolate desert roads without striking the shi'ite out of them like the military wanted to do, reducing their forces / numbers to near nothing before the ever got to the 1st Iraqi city
4) Allowing them to spread across Iraq, taking over much of what our military had liberated at great cost, before deciding to take action.

 

[DrDoomNGloom]

Interesting that Germany declared war on the US on Dec 11th 1941 and the US declared War on them THE SAME DAY.

Looks like Germany declared first and it had long been expected.

The University of Oklahoma College of Law A Chronology of US Historical Documents Declaration of War against Germany


US Historical Documents
US Declaration of War against Germany
December 11, 1941

The President's Message
To the Congress of the United States:

On the morning of Dec. 11 the Government of Germany, pursuing its course of world conquest, declared war against the United States. The long-known and the long-expected has thus taken place. The forces endeavoring to enslave the entire world now are moving toward this hemisphere. Never before has there been a greater challenge to life, liberty and civilization. Delay invites great danger. Rapid and united effort by all of the peoples of the world who are determined to remain free will insure a world victory of the forces of justice and of righteousness over the forces of savagery and of barbarism. Italy also has declared war against the United States.

I therefore request the Congress to recognize a state of war between the United States and Germany, and between the United States and Italy.

Franklin D. Roosevelt

The War Resolution
Declaring that a state of war exists between the Government of Germany and the government and the people of the United States and making provision to prosecute the same.

Whereas the Government of Germany has formally declared war against the government and the people of the United States of America:

Therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that the state of war between the United States and the Government of Germany which has thus been thrust upon the United States is hereby formally declared; and the President is hereby authorized and directed to employ the entire naval and military forces of the government to carry on war against the Government of Germany; and to bring the conflict to a successful termination, all of the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the Congress of the United States

 

[kaz]

I've seen Americans go out of their way to thank their soldiers for "risking their lives for the country", but I don't really understand this sentiment.
It doesn't seem like America would be at war if they did not send their armies to places like the Middle East... and they're not really protecting Americans while they're stationed overseas. It almost seems like they're instigating a war, rather than protecting the American citizens.
I don't understand also this military worshiping culture. Why do you call them heroes?

It's not the military's call where they go. It's the politicians, they are the ones failing us. It's the job of the military to do the best they can when sent there while their hands are tied by the politicians who sent them there. But we have no reason to do anything but thank the people who go there on our behalf

 

[Damaged Eagle]

"Diplomats are just as essential in starting a war as soldiers are in finishing it."
Will Rogers

*****SMILE*****

 

[quorthon]

"Diplomats are just as essential in starting a war as soldiers are in finishing it."
Will Rogers

Unfortunately he died before the US started to conquer the world. In most conflicts including the war in Vietnam which the photo is linked to soldiers were used as cannon fodder, rabid wasted punishers to prolongate the war, not to finish it.

 

[easyt65]

I've seen Americans go out of their way to thank their soldiers for "risking their lives for the country", but I don't really understand this sentiment.

It doesn't seem like America would be at war if they did not send their armies to places like the Middle East... and they're not really protecting Americans while they're stationed overseas. It almost seems like they're instigating a war, rather than protecting the American citizens.
I don't understand also this military worshiping culture. Why do you call them heroes?

'WAR' is an option, supposedly the LAST option a government has to achieve desired goals when all others, such as diplomacy, fail. There are many different options a nation can take prior to war. Sanctions, such as those imposed on Iran is one. Maritime blockades, such as the one JFK imposed on Cuba, is another. The military is 'the mechanism' used to execute the option of 'war'. The soldier is the 'implement' that makes up 'the mechanism'. The 'implement' has no more say in how, why, or where it will be used than a hammer used by a contruction worker. The military goes where they are told and does what it is told.

Many 'UN-informed' Americans, like yourself, have demonstrated they do not comprehend this.

Viet nam was a perfect example. Kids who should have been at proms and getting ready for college or to step out into the world to get a job were drafted, trained, and sent off to war by the government / politicians to fight a war over political objectives. Once there they faced an adversary none like the U.S. had ever had faced before and certainly nothing like these 18yo kids had ever faced - a 'radical' determined enemy that was willing to die / sacrifice anything to win. Our 18yo soldiers were faced with CHILDREN walking up to them with grenades and weapons trying to kill them...and were forced t defend themselves. Our soliders were also betrayed by ploiticians who tied their hands by refusing to allow them to strike critical military targets, politicians who tried to run the war once they sent the military to war. (The military are the professionals, train constantly - the politicians had no business trying to run the war once they committed the military to fight it...a problem we still face today.) The politicians lost that war...and when our military returned home...when these KIDS who were forced to fight in that d@mn war - while hippies and others protested at home - returned home they were spat upon, called heinous names, and treated like the enemy. Again, the REAL focus of the anti-war protestors' ire should have been the politicians, NOT the military!

If POLITICIANS, who made the decisions to go to war, were forced by law to be the 1st ones into combat - leading the way, we would have a LOT fewer wars!

 

[Damaged Eagle]

"Diplomats are just as essential in starting a war as soldiers are in finishing it."
Will Rogers

Unfortunately he died before the US started to conquer the world. In most conflicts including the war in Vietnam which the photo is linked to soldiers were used as cannon fodder, rabid wasted punishers to prolongate the war, not to finish it.

You're absolutely correct the rabid wasted punishing diplomats who probably haven't ever served in the military do tend prolongate wars.

"There is no such things as an inevitable war. If war comes it will be from failure of human wisdom."
Andrew B. Law

*****SMILE*****

 

[The Professor]

I've seen Americans go out of their way to thank their soldiers for "risking their lives for the country", but I don't really understand this sentiment.
It doesn't seem like America would be at war if they did not send their armies to places like the Middle East... and they're not really protecting Americans while they're stationed overseas. It almost seems like they're instigating a war, rather than protecting the American citizens.
I don't understand also this military worshiping culture. Why do you call them heroes?

The problem is that you need an Army before you really need an Army. When a serious need arises you can't possibly wait to acquire a substantial armed force with the necessary skills and equipment to wage war. When I was in the Marine Corps my weapons were an M1 rifle, a 45 pistol and a radio (I was a radio-telegraph operator and forward air controller) and even those rather basic skills took months to acquire. Today's military is far more technical than it was when I served about half a century ago and requires much more training.

It is obvious that one must have an existing competent military to protect the country against all aggressors. It is also obvious that every member of the military is oath-bound to obey the orders of his Commander In chief. A battlefield soldier cannot determine which conflicts he will participate in and which ones he will sit out.

That, folks, is the problem: How do you keep the military from engaging in what you perceive – and even soldiers perceive - to be an unjust war? If you have a solution you're a hell of a lot smarter than I am. A good soldier signs on not knowing what will happen to him but accepts every possibility. Therein lies courage and honor.

 

[TThurtle]

every country after ww2 comes to us whenever something bad happens so we need to have the military to send to those places

 

[JaredS98]

because we need a way of defending our self

 

[RedTeamTex]

If it's permissible to quote myself from a different thread, I'd like to repost this excerpt:

"Since 1950, the U.S. has deployed over 30 million troops overseas. Technically, we should call this 30 million troop-years: one troop in one country for one year is a troop-year. Ancient Sparta is remembered by history for the bravery of its 300 warriors fighting at Thermopylae. I often wonder if Americans will be remembered by history for the bravery of its 30,000,000. Here is why (from the abstract of a paper I am in the process of revising):

"For over six decades, the U.S. military has shaped international economic development, notably by way of 30 million U.S. troop-year deployments since 1950. Worldwide, life expectancy increased by 10 years between 1970 and the present. The mortality rate of children dropped from 132 per 1000 live births to 55. The number of telephone lines per capita quadrupled from 48 to 196 per thousand. And since 1990, the average country score on the human development index (HDI) increased by 7 percentage points. In each case, the improvement was faster in countries with a heavy U.S. troop presence and slower in countries with zero U.S. troop presence. These relationships stem from a very large dataset on U.S. deployments across the globe from 1950 to the present matched with World Bank data on indicators of social well-being since 1970 across 148 countries. The positive relationship between American forces and social development holds in econometric regressions even when controlling for initial income levels and initial social indicator levels.

"Here is a chart showing the increase in life expectancy, in years, from 1990-2007 with countries sorted by the number of U.S. troops hosted during 1990-2009 and by level of development (as defined by the World Bank).

View attachment 48999

"
from an article by Tim Kane, Growthology

The attached chart: