ignatius Posted October 18, 2018 Share Posted October 18, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ignatius Posted October 18, 2018 Share Posted October 18, 2018 USA blew it during the cold war. in the 80s if we even just spent half on infrastructure and education of what we spent on defense to "keep up" w/soviet union we'd have one helluva a set up these days. but that's not how defense spending works especially with republicans rolling over everything in their path Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dingformung Posted October 18, 2018 Share Posted October 18, 2018 I think the US could easily halve their military expenses and would probably still have the strongest army. European countries collaborate actively (France, UK) or passively (Germany) with the US army in controversial military interventions partly for the same ideological reasons as the US (in watered-down form) and partly out of the pressure to be on good terms with the US as the dominant economical and military force in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ignatius Posted October 18, 2018 Share Posted October 18, 2018 yeah.. agree. usa so overspends on military it's absurd.. offensive really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squee Posted October 18, 2018 Share Posted October 18, 2018 SOoooo... Muhammed bin Salman transferred $100 million to the US the day he met with trump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YangYing Posted October 18, 2018 Share Posted October 18, 2018 (edited) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-45888176 https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/16/us/politics/npc-twitter-ban.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/npc-meme-right-wing-trolls-liberals-donald-trump-twitter-insults-republicans-a8588036.html this is so stupid flol Edited October 18, 2018 by MIXL2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
may be rude Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ambermonk Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 The murder (not just "disappearance", for the record) of Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul is really starting to making me question the morality of the relationship between the Saudi and US governments over the last two decades. To me it basically seems like a mafia alliance at the highest echelons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ignatius Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 The murder (not just "disappearance", for the record) of Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul is really starting to making me question the morality of the relationship between the Saudi and US governments over the last two decades. To me it basically seems like a mafia alliance at the highest echelons. except worse and weirder. consider wahhabism, the way we set up the country as detailed in "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" etc etc etc etc etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caze Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 wut? the US didn't 'set up' Saudi Arabia, nor wahhabism (which dates back the 18th/19th centuries, and has literally zero to do with the US, the US only got involved in the 40s when they found oil). that guy is talking out his arse also (he's an idiot and a conspiracy theorist, lol at him thinking Saddam wanted to nationalise Iraqi oil for the betterment of the Iraqi people). the west didn't respond to the seventies oil crisis by forcing OPEC to lower prices via payoffs, it diversified the supply (via the North Sea, Alaska and the Caspian Sea, etc.) and within a decade OPEC was no longer the majority producer of oil in the world, so it had to lower its prices because of competition, also due to reduced demand from a move away from oil in electricity production, the price declined from $40 a barrell to $10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshuatxuk Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 (edited) I think the US could easily halve their military expenses and would probably still have the strongest army. European countries collaborate actively (France, UK) or passively (Germany) with the US army in controversial military interventions partly for the same ideological reasons as the US (in watered-down form) and partly out of the pressure to be on good terms with the US as the dominant economical and military force in the world. As bloated and inefficient in spending the US is, not mention recruitment pifalls in recent years, you are right. The US still dwarfs all other countries in terms of weapon capability, especially in terms of logistics and the number of high-tech equipment. They always were in the cold war too - it's a huge misconception that the USSR was on par - instead they outclassed the US with missiles and sheer volume of troops whereas the US had more high-tech units and deployment capability. Russia has one aircraft carrier that could barely deploy jet whereas the US has 10 that can literally field air assets bigger than most air forces. What is incredible is that historically the US military is the smallest it's been in decades. An example of US hegemony is their air mobility aspects. The US military has hundreds of massive cargo jets that can deploy worldwide whereas Russia has maybe a hundred via contractors and NATO collectively has a few squadrons. When France deployed to Mali a few years ago they flew on US C-17s. Back in the Congo crisis in the 60s and Indochina war in the 1950s the USAF lended planes for airborne ops because France and Belgium didn't have any. China and Russia are catching up a lot faster, China especially via tech developments whereas Russia is spending record levels of GDP to update its equipment and expand special ops and better arm their private military contractors. Interesting the other country besides Russia that spends more per GDP than the US is Saudi Arabia, though this partly has to do with the tendency of Arab countries to constantly throw cash at new equipment and not maintain it, give royal families perk jobs as officers, and use their vehicle fleets for personal use. 20 years ago Russia was in post-Soviet shambles and China had a huge but obsolete fleet of 50s and 60s era tech. Now one is deploying military personal in the middle east and the other is flying stealth fighters. wut? the US didn't 'set up' Saudi Arabia, nor wahhabism (which dates back the 18th/19th centuries, and has literally zero to do with the US, the US only got involved in the 40s when they found oil). that guy is talking out his arse also (he's an idiot and a conspiracy theorist, lol at him thinking Saddam wanted to nationalise Iraqi oil for the betterment of the Iraqi people). the west didn't respond to the seventies oil crisis by forcing OPEC to lower prices via payoffs, it diversified the supply (via the North Sea, Alaska and the Caspian Sea, etc.) and within a decade OPEC was no longer the majority producer of oil in the world, so it had to lower its prices because of competition, also due to reduced demand from a move away from oil in electricity production, the price declined from $40 a barrell to $10. this also the pivot to Sauds as allies has a lot to do with post-1979 Iran, once they became an adversary the Sunni Gulf states fell into our favor with Saudi Arabia being given the most preferential treatment. Their alliance in the first Gulf War sealed it. Hell they are so favored that despite being the far biggest country geographically we have minimal military personal there (CIA/spec op drone bases mostly), they kicked them out prior to the 2003 Iraq invasion. Most bases ironically are clustered in the small states of Kuwait, Bahrain, and Qatar. Edited October 19, 2018 by joshuatx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshuatxuk Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 (edited) America has spent the money to prevent places like Russia from expanding. We've lost out on things like public services and infrastructure because of it. Now with Trump, Europe is getting antsy and I'd be nervous if I was European and you had to start spending shitloads on military to keep status quo. I suspect a bit of a US-bias in the way you say and you had to start spending shitloads on military to keep status quo.. Because, who says you have to spend shitloads to keep status quo? Which status quo? Why spend shitloads? And keeping status quo is done with military force? Why military force? You're from the US, right? Spend a couple of years and Europe and you'll understand we see things differently. From the US it might look like Europe is leaning on the US to use military force. From Europe it looks like the US is creating more problems with their use of military force. Europe tries to settle things through diplomacy and politics. (US as well, btw. At least, in the good old days) And diplomacy and politics is a lot less media-sexy than violence perhaps, but hey, being boring can be a good asset! You'll not see Europe violently enforcing some kind of status quo even if the US dropped their entire military force overnight. Not going to happen, as military force is simply not seen as something necessary to keep status quo. I'm trying to think of some kind of status quo Europe would be fighting for and can't really think of one. World peace perhaps? Or do you expect an invasion of the UK because the EU likes to keep the status quo? You realize that European countries (and of course any countries) could kick the US military out at any point in time if they wanted to, right? Not saying it would be easy or smart for them to do, but it's very much possible: and the fact that in general they don't (to my knowledge) is my point. If they're allowing American forces to keep bases and operations there, there's a reason for it. I'm not going to pretend to understand the complex reasoning for any of the particular choices of these countries, but it's obviously not as simple as "US aggressive and dumb and they're the real enemy!" that you're implying. tl;dr America is aggressive and dumb in lots of places around the world but those places allow us to stay there so it's partly their own fault :) Thanks for addressing this, it's a mutual decision and a lot more nuanced and complicated than most realize. Hell, look at how much the former Warsaw Pact has switched to NATO. IIRC I remember at one point for example the Czech government actually insisted that the US keep deploying anti-ballistic missile sites when Obama was weighing the decision to remove them. It's all about detente. It's all about strategic collateral for countries like Germany and Japan, especially the latter. Granted I'm talking about the governments and not the populace. It's been this way since 1945. That's partly why the War On Terror and Iraq War were so divisive and disruptive - the opposition wasn't just moral or diplomatic - it was a pragmatic concern that the US military forces tasked with defense and detente were now preoccupied with a literally endless war outside of Europe and Asia. It's still the case now. Ask any top brass and the Pentagon and they'll tell you Russia and China are still the main potential adversaries yet billions are spent to deploy, supply, and arm forces perpetually fighting a few thousand militants in far-flung parts of the world. Edited October 19, 2018 by joshuatx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squee Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Member Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 Yup, that's how science works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Braintree Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ignatius Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 (edited) wut? the US didn't 'set up' Saudi Arabia, nor wahhabism (which dates back the 18th/19th centuries, and has literally zero to do with the US, the US only got involved in the 40s when they found oil). that guy is talking out his arse also (he's an idiot and a conspiracy theorist, lol at him thinking Saddam wanted to nationalise Iraqi oil for the betterment of the Iraqi people). the west didn't respond to the seventies oil crisis by forcing OPEC to lower prices via payoffs, it diversified the supply (via the North Sea, Alaska and the Caspian Sea, etc.) and within a decade OPEC was no longer the majority producer of oil in the world, so it had to lower its prices because of competition, also due to reduced demand from a move away from oil in electricity production, the price declined from $40 a barrell to $10. Didn’t say we set up Wahhabism just to consider it as part of the weirdness in USA Saudi relations because it’s counter to all the USA “goals” in the region. That guy is not a conspiracy theorist. He is actually the guy who went into countries and set them up with USA interests. He wrote a book about it later in life to expose it all. If you take a minute to google him and his book you’ll understand he’s not some wacko talking about gay frogs but someone who was once in the inner circle of USA international affairs working with large companies like bechtel and Halliburton etc. Also he wasn’t talking about Sadam wanting to nationalize the oil but the leader before saddam. Did you even listen? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Edited October 19, 2018 by ignatius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ignatius Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 When I say “set up” I’m talking about modernization. Big money contracts for us companies to build all kinds of infrastructure as part of a larger deal for better or worse. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zero Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 Fight fire with fire, brothers! Priests team up to battle witches looking to further condemn fugly ol'Kavanaugh's soul to hell: https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/412114-catholics-and-exorcists-pray-for-kavanaugh-to-counteract Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chenGOD Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 Fight fire with fire, brothers! Priests team up to battle witches looking to further condemn fugly ol'Kavanaugh's soul to hell: https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/412114-catholics-and-exorcists-pray-for-kavanaugh-to-counteract Damn it, you beat me by 5 minutes. A hex on you! This shit is incredible. Seriously! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zero Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 Hell yeah! Now if only we could get the rest of the wiccans, werewolves, and satan worshippers to do battle against the evil orange leader and his reptilian MAGA army we'd have a show on our hands! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chenGOD Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 You forgot druids! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Braintree Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 And once again the catholic church sides with the rapist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brisbot Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 (edited) America has spent the money to prevent places like Russia from expanding. We've lost out on things like public services and infrastructure because of it. Now with Trump, Europe is getting antsy and I'd be nervous if I was European and you had to start spending shitloads on military to keep status quo. I suspect a bit of a US-bias in the way you say and you had to start spending shitloads on military to keep status quo.. Because, who says you have to spend shitloads to keep status quo? Which status quo? Why spend shitloads? And keeping status quo is done with military force? Why military force? You're from the US, right? Spend a couple of years and Europe and you'll understand we see things differently. From the US it might look like Europe is leaning on the US to use military force. From Europe it looks like the US is creating more problems with their use of military force. Europe tries to settle things through diplomacy and politics. (US as well, btw. At least, in the good old days) And diplomacy and politics is a lot less media-sexy than violence perhaps, but hey, being boring can be a good asset! You'll not see Europe violently enforcing some kind of status quo even if the US dropped their entire military force overnight. Not going to happen, as military force is simply not seen as something necessary to keep status quo. I'm trying to think of some kind of status quo Europe would be fighting for and can't really think of one. World peace perhaps? Or do you expect an invasion of the UK because the EU likes to keep the status quo? Yes, as someone who lives in the US I'd say we're pretty er...opposite of worldly. It makes sense considering where we live. (we are really the one's 'across the pond'. People generally don't know what's going on in the world which makes it EASY AF for propaganda of kinds to fill in the gaps. In general we don't know what is going on politically if it isn't from the perspective of the US and I'll admit I am one of these people to an extent. For instance I hear from friends and acquaintances outside the US how it's viewed as a threat to world stability, and honestly I just can't see it, though it seems like it might be true due to the frequency of the belief. I know the US doesn't like to listen to the UN for instance, and surely something must be wrong when the budget for our military is like 8x larger than the second highest military budget. (no wonder we don't have a decent healthcare/military) Eh sorry I'm just ranting. I don't know WTF is going on here. Seems like a lot of misplaced morals and values. Edited October 19, 2018 by Brisbot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marf Posted October 20, 2018 Share Posted October 20, 2018 The citizens think that way, but your leaders don't. You've been dining out on USA military protection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ignatius Posted October 20, 2018 Share Posted October 20, 2018 “Worldly“. I don’t know how we compare to other nations but I’ve met plenty of people who never leave their own neighborhood who are educated and wealthy enough to take a trip once in a while but never do. The idea that there’s a world out there that thinks differently than them in any way is unfathomable or something. And of course there’s plenty of people who just don’t aspire to engage the world except from their living room via tv it internet. Lots of people think the American way, in whatever context, is the right way. But there’s plenty of worldly Americans. I don’t think many of them voted for trump though. I’m sure there’s statistics on all this stuff somewhere. So I don’t know about worldly Americans. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts