Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
The Co$t of War
Page <<first <prev 3 of 5 next> last>>
Nov 4, 2014 12:19:05   #
dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho
 
magicray wrote:
3. Will we inform the enemy of our intentions so that they may take the proper precautions to defend themselves and retaliate effectively.


We only do that when we have a recent POTUS from the Democratic Party. Republicans take war seriously and try to win.

Dennis

Reply
Nov 4, 2014 12:56:15   #
richosob Loc: Lambertville, MI
 
magicray wrote:
.


That's a good one!

Reply
Nov 4, 2014 14:21:36   #
fbluhm Loc: San Antonio, TX
 
Texcaster wrote:
I didn't think the quote needed an explanation. War is good business for a very cynical class of businessmen, always has been.


Our country usually doesn't go to war unless big business can profit from it.

Reply
 
 
Nov 4, 2014 14:24:32   #
fbluhm Loc: San Antonio, TX
 
dennis2146 wrote:
We only do that when we have a recent POTUS from the Democratic Party. Republicans take war seriously and try to win.

Dennis


Really? Since when? They take war seriously alright. Maybe that's why they get us into so many of them.



Reply
Nov 4, 2014 15:09:51   #
dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho
 
fbluhm wrote:
Really? Since when? They take war seriously alright. Maybe that's why they get us into so many of them.


As I recall it was JFK, a Democrat, who got us into Vietnam. He was a Democrat then but would be a good Republican now.

Our current POTUS pushes for giving people everything they need. JFK wanted people to do for their country, not to have the country do for them. Remember that?

Dennis

Reply
Nov 4, 2014 16:00:23   #
travelwp Loc: New Jersey
 
magicray wrote:
3. Will we inform the enemy of our intentions so that they may take the proper precautions to defend themselves and retaliate effectively.


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
Nov 4, 2014 16:12:00   #
wings42 Loc: San Diego, CA
 
jerryc41 wrote:
Before a country goes to war, it should put it to a vote. The total cost of the war should be presented, along with how long it will take to pay for it, and how much it will increase taxes. And if you think politicians don't know how much a war will cost, think again. Many of them probably experience financial or political gain from a war. The voters should also be told how many of the military will be killed and maimed.

Of course, when Hitler invaded Poland, the world didn't have much choice, but so many military operations seem to be optional.

We all know that people suffer and die in wars, but we think that when the war is over, it's over. A guy I went to school with lost a leg in Vietnam, and that leg is still gone. Another schoolmate was killed, something his family has to deal with daily.
Before a country goes to war, it should put it to ... (show quote)

Great ideas but the cost of wars is far more than politicians would estimate publically. The costs of the Vietnam War destroyed the War on Poverty, froze domestic spending boosts for health, education, and infrastructure, and traumatized and polarized a generation, here and in Southeast Asia. It is still deeply polarizing for people who were alive then. We still have Vietnam War vets with grievous injuries, PTSD, and people who were raised without a father. If I recall accurately, that war was never declared, and the precipitating event, the Tonkin Bay incident didn't actually happen. Halliburton Construction made billions of dollars.

More recently, if my memory is accurate, Rumsfeld estimated the total cost of invading Iraq would not exceed 8 billion dollars and the war would be over in a few months. George W. Bush stated that he was not interested in nation building, but after 9/11 we got bogged down in nation building in Iraq and Afghanistan using the full power and commitment of our people and military, without success. We're still involved with both countries in what looks like perpetual conflict. The majority of the population in North Africa, the Middle East, Pakistan and Afghanistan hate us and blame us for all their troubles. That's in spite of our human and economic sacrifice and the massive squandering of our national wealth. Has an occupying foreign military ever not been hated, anywhere or at any time? Halliburton Construction made billions in those wars.

History is awash with great countries and empires that became weak and then failed because of war bleeding their resources. I think we're right on the edge of joining that group.

We need the wisdom, leadership, and political will to work together and compromise for the common good, to get us to first tend to our own affairs, our welfare, our infrastructure, to reconfigure our military to be powerful enough to prevent and/or defeat invasion from Canada or Mexico, defend our coasts and trade routes, and to make a proportional contribution to common defense in Southeast Asia and with NATO.

I think George Washington had it right when he warned us to avoid foreign entanglements. That's an example of what I mean by wisdom and leadership.

Reply
 
 
Nov 4, 2014 16:45:43   #
shangyrhee Loc: Nashville TN to Sacramento CA
 
jerryc41 wrote:
Before a country goes to war, it should put it to a vote. The total cost of the war should be presented, along with how long it will take to pay for it, and how much it will increase taxes. And if you think politicians don't know how much a war will cost, think again. Many of them probably experience financial or political gain from a war. The voters should also be told how many of the military will be killed and maimed.

Of course, when Hitler invaded Poland, the world didn't have much choice, but so many military operations seem to be optional.
Ditto !!!
We all know that people suffer and die in wars, but we think that when the war is over, it's over. A guy I went to school with lost a leg in Vietnam, and that leg is still gone. Another schoolmate was killed, something his family has to deal with daily.
Before a country goes to war, it should put it to ... (show quote)

Reply
Nov 4, 2014 16:52:42   #
shangyrhee Loc: Nashville TN to Sacramento CA
 
wings42 wrote:
Great ideas but the cost of wars is far more than politicians would estimate publically. The costs of the Vietnam War destroyed the War on Poverty, froze domestic spending boosts for health, education, and infrastructure, and traumatized and polarized a generation, here and in Southeast Asia. It is still deeply polarizing for people who were alive then. We still have Vietnam War vets with grievous injuries, PTSD, and people who were raised without a father. If I recall accurately, that war was never declared, and the precipitating event, the Tonkin Bay incident didn't actually happen. Halliburton Construction made billions of dollars.
Ditto !! Nothing more I could add !!
More recently, if my memory is accurate, Rumsfeld estimated the total cost of invading Iraq would not exceed 8 billion dollars and the war would be over in a few months. George W. Bush stated that he was not interested in nation building, but after 9/11 we got bogged down in nation building in Iraq and Afghanistan using the full power and commitment of our people and military, without success. We're still involved with both countries in what looks like perpetual conflict. The majority of the population in North Africa, the Middle East, Pakistan and Afghanistan hate us and blame us for all their troubles. That's in spite of our human and economic sacrifice and the massive squandering of our national wealth. Has an occupying foreign military ever not been hated, anywhere or at any time? Halliburton Construction made billions in those wars.

History is awash with great countries and empires that became weak and then failed because of war bleeding their resources. I think we're right on the edge of joining that group.

We need the wisdom, leadership, and political will to work together and compromise for the common good, to get us to first tend to our own affairs, our welfare, our infrastructure, to reconfigure our military to be powerful enough to prevent and/or defeat invasion from Canada or Mexico, defend our coasts and trade routes, and to make a proportional contribution to common defense in Southeast Asia and with NATO.

I think George Washington had it right when he warned us to avoid foreign entanglements. That's an example of what I mean by wisdom and leadership.
Great ideas but the cost of wars is far more than ... (show quote)

Reply
Nov 4, 2014 17:03:28   #
fbluhm Loc: San Antonio, TX
 
dennis2146 wrote:
As I recall it was JFK, a Democrat, who got us into Vietnam. He was a Democrat then but would be a good Republican now.

Our current POTUS pushes for giving people everything they need. JFK wanted people to do for their country, not to have the country do for them. Remember that?

Dennis


Sorry, Dennis, but it was Ike who started the momentum to get us into Vietnam. We were getting involved with advisors when Kennedy took over. He actually;y was trying to get us out before he was killed.

Reply
Nov 4, 2014 17:20:05   #
shangyrhee Loc: Nashville TN to Sacramento CA
 
! think it is an excellent idea for us to put it on a national vote if we should go to a war. It will also let the enemy know what is our resolve.

Reply
 
 
Nov 4, 2014 17:25:43   #
fbluhm Loc: San Antonio, TX
 
shangyrhee wrote:
! think it is an excellent idea for us to put it on a national vote if we should go to a war. It will also let the enemy know what is our resolve.


When our government is entertaining the idea of going to war, there is a great deal of information the average citizen is not aware of; information that is highly classified. Therefore, voting on should we go to war or not, would not be a good thing, considering that there is much needed information that the average person will not be privy to - info that one would need to cast his or her correct vote.

Reply
Nov 4, 2014 17:37:51   #
travelwp Loc: New Jersey
 
wings42 wrote:
We need the wisdom, leadership, and political will to work together and compromise for the common good, to get us to first tend to our own affairs, our welfare, our infrastructure, to reconfigure our military to be powerful enough to prevent and/or defeat invasion from Canada or Mexico, defend our coasts and trade routes, and to make a proportional contribution to common defense in Southeast Asia and with NATO. .


I'd like your opinion: If we kept hands off ISIS and let them do their bad deeds and did their expansion efforts, would other middle east countries finally take action?

Reply
Nov 4, 2014 17:50:43   #
wings42 Loc: San Diego, CA
 
travelwp wrote:
I'd like your opinion: If we kept hands off ISIS and let them do their bad deeds and did their expansion efforts, would other middle east countries finally take action?


Probably. If not, they'd pay the price. But I can't imagine ISIS continuing like this for long without major backlash from the surrounding countries and peoples.

Meanwhile, I can think of several unsafe bridges here in San Diego going unfixed, and double tracking of the railroad from here to LA unfinished, and lots of kids who can't go to college because they can't afford it, etc., etc.

Reply
Nov 4, 2014 17:54:55   #
shangyrhee Loc: Nashville TN to Sacramento CA
 
fbluhm wrote:
When our government is entertaining the idea of going to war, there is a great deal of information the average citizen is not aware of; information that is highly classified. Therefore, voting on should we go to war or not, would not be a good thing, considering that there is much needed information that the average person will not be privy to - info that one would need to cast his or her correct vote.

I think that is paternalistic view. More often government agenda are dishonest to reveal to the people.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 5 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.