quote:

ORIGINAL: BoiJen

How more likely do you get than a boat sitting outside of Cuba aiming it's weapons at us and daring us to make "one wrong move"?

And this...
"Had I been forced to bet I of course would have bet you would have refused- or been unable- to answer the q."
...is a shitty disposition.

boi

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoiJen

I had no idea that a decedent of Washington was among us...wow.

Back to reality...

OUR freedom is not what is at stake with our abroad missions and deployments. Other people in other countries who are responsible for their own freedom...those people are who are stake. And frankly, we fought for our freedom, they need grab their balls and fight for theirs. I'm tired of American lives being lost in countries where not one of those people will remember the person that just died for them. OUR brothers and sisters and daughters and sons and husbands and fathers and mothers and wives deserve better.

We are not thanked for the efforts that we take to help other countries and quite often we take political heat for it. fuck it...I'm tired of of seeing American hands being held out to help people and American dollars being spent elsewhere. Bring them home. All of them. Now.

boi

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoiJen

quote:

ORIGINAL: slaveboyforyou

We can do that, but be careful what you ask for.  Cutting back the military means downsizing troop strength.  All those ex-military personal are then faced with finding jobs. 

Now that being said, whether you like it or not, we have reasons for maintaining overseas military installations besides helping out foreign people.  Our economy is tied to the rest of the world.  Our strength abroad is an intricate part of protecting our economic and political interests around the globe. 

The military is not a club for people to join for a paycheck and benefits.  It's a job, and it's voluntary.  I feel for families that have members overseas, but the simple fact of the matter is that it's voluntary. 

Yes because our people spending money else where right now has helped us SO much economically. Yep... I can see it now.

The reality is this...you bring them to enforce our borders and OUR primary military needs and troop strength doesn't diminish. Our "interests" around the globe are actually minimal at this rate. Part of what has driven us into our current economic mess is spending (something like) 8 million dollars a day on another country. And a great deal of that is spent through our military resources who could be giving our own country that kind of boost.

Yeah it's voluntary. It's a voluntary position that is practically handed to people from communities that enduring poverty. This is often the best job any of them could ever hope for and have been fed that their entire lives. Now... NOW their countrymen (civilians) and their leadership throw their lives away because their lives are expendable. That voluntary is taken with the understanding that their lives are supposed to be cared about and the value of their lives will be considered before taking military action. Repeated occupation of countries that will do just fine without us and sacrificing their lives is not taking into consideration their lives and their value.

And besides when the fuck did it become our military's job to take care of economic and political interests? I thought it was their job to take our physical and strategic safety and guarantee tomorrow for Americans. I thought it was their job to stand on a wall at night so that a civilian didn't have to. I did not think it was their job to go around kissing babies and rebuilding other people's countries because they were dumb enough to harbor  terrorists or pick fights with their neighbors.

boi

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

The Sheriff's Department is expensive too.....

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoiJen

How more likely do you get than a boat sitting outside of Cuba aiming it's weapons at us and daring us to make "one wrong move"?

And this...
"Had I been forced to bet I of course would have bet you would have refused- or been unable- to answer the q."
...is a shitty disposition.

boi

PS- as a matter of fact, she still has declined to answer the question, really.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

Oddly enough, the article that you linked specifically states that, after UN forces pulled out, it was the rebels who ended the internal problems of the country.  So, like boiJen said, because we weren't there, they fought for their own rights without American lives having to be lost.  Plus, we didn't spend this country's resources into a country that doesn't benefit us anyway.

The nice attempt to get the bleeding heart angle wasn't bad, but it didn't work to support your argument. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: slaveboyforyou
The "guard our borders" argument is a popular one, but it's a bogus one.  Who are they going to guard it from?  The military are not customs agents or immigration officers.  We have a problem with illegal immigrants crossing our southern border looking for work.  Do you want to put soldiers trained for warfare down on the border to stop poor Mexicans sneaking across looking for a job?  We aren't in any danger of Canada or Mexico invading us, so it's an absurd idea. 

The REALITY is that our interests around the world are rather large.  We depend on other regions of the world for our fuel, for one thing.  You can scream for alternative fuels all you want, but we don't have that capability yet.  We depend on our military to secure shipping lanes.  We'd be in deep shit if we were at the mercy of other nation's navies. 

quote:



People join the military for a variety of reasons.  It's not all people from impoverished communities joining out of desperation.  Even the folks that do what your describing have other choices.  Pell grants, scholarships, working while going to school, or just plain moving to another area are all among them. 

quote:

You're being melodramatic when you say that their lives are being thrown away.  The military's purpose is warfare.  We are not taking in recruits, giving them a rifle, and then throwing them into the trenches.  Recruits are given extensive training, the best equipment in the world, and every effort is made to protect them.  Unfortunately death and injury are uncontrollable results of combat.  I don't know what repeated occupation of countries you're talking about.  We are occupying two countries right now.  We will be leaving one next year.  We are not occupying Germany, Japan, or South Korea.  We have military installations there as a result of our treaties with those nations.  We haven't "repeatedly" occupied any nation.

quote:


When?  Since this country's inception.  Our first overseas military intervention was to protect American shipping; look up the Barbary Wars.  You can also study the Mexican War, which was fought solely to secure more territory for American expansion.  What do you think the reason for that expansion was?  I'll answer that question for you, it was economics.  If you want further examples, the Indian Wars were fought completely for territorial expansion in the pursuit of profit.  The Spanish-American War was fought under the guise of humanitarianism in order for us to grab up colonial holdings from the Spanish.

quote:


I don't write any of this to be heartless.  I am an Army brat.  My father is a retired Colonel in the U.S. Army.  I do care about our people overseas.  But I am not for isolationism.  We tried that before, and it was a mistake.  We'd be living in a completely different and very scary world had we not dropped that philosophy in the 20th Century. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterShake69

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2007/12/bill_clinton_hi.html
Bill Clinton: Hillary was right on Rwanda
Posted by Scott Helman, Political Reporter December 10, 2007 06:47 PM
NEWTON, Iowa -- The question to Bill Clinton was a good one: What decisions that you made as president did Hillary Clinton disagree with? At first, the former president, stumping for his wife before several hundred people at a YMCA here today, talked about things he had done wrong on health care and briefly discussed welfare reform. And then, using a more somber tone, he explained that she had wanted the United States to intervene in Rwanda in 1994, when hundreds of thousands of people died in a genocide that lasted just a few months. Clinton has often said that not acting in Rwanda was one of his biggest regrets. It's a decision, he said, for which he continues to try to make amends. Had he listened to his wife, Clinton said, things might have been different. "I believe if I had moved we might have saved at least a third of those lives," he said. "I think she clearly would have done that." He went on to explain how America, which did intervene in the former Yugoslavia, could only take on so much at once. But not acting in Rwanda, he suggested, was a mistake his wife wouldn't make.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

Oddly enough, the article that you linked specifically states that, after UN forces pulled out, it was the rebels who ended the internal problems of the country.  So, like boiJen said, because we weren't there, they fought for their own rights without American lives having to be lost.  Plus, we didn't spend this country's resources into a country that doesn't benefit us anyway.

The nice attempt to get the bleeding heart angle wasn't bad, but it didn't work to support your argument. 

quote:

So your position is that we continue to have military installations in places like South Korea and Okinawa because we're protecting shipping lanes?  I find that highly improbable.

quote:

You're mistaken.  The fact of the matter is that we have no treaty with North Korea.  What we actually have is a cease fire.

quote:

Not one bit of this thinking applies to South Korea.

quote:

For an Army brat, your attitude surprises Me.  Actually, for those of us with family members/friends serving active duty, the world's already a pretty scary place all on it's own.  I'm surprised you don't remember that.   

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave
BTW, it's neither unusual or in many cases particularly difficult to to trace yourself back to some famous person or other. If you go back very many generations in the Va area you probably can trace back to GW or TJ. Many in the NE trace back to one or more of the Founding Fathers.
Six of my great-grandparents were born in WV, with seven of them tracing back to Va before that. I know of two connections to Gen Gates, one to Pres Washington, and I'm close to proving one to Thomas J.
Shawnee, Cherokee, Chinese, and African as well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
You cannot have a blood connection to President Washington. He had no offspring of his own.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave
BTW, it's neither unusual or in many cases particularly difficult to to trace yourself back to some famous person or other. If you go back very many generations in the Va area you probably can trace back to GW or TJ. Many in the NE trace back to one or more of the Founding Fathers.
Six of my great-grandparents were born in WV, with seven of them tracing back to Va before that. I know of two connections to Gen Gates, one to Pres Washington, and I'm close to proving one to Thomas J.
Shawnee, Cherokee, Chinese, and African as well.

You cannot have a blood connection to President Washington. He had no offspring of his own.

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967
I said from day one we were fighting the wrong type of war, it should have been the black ops shooters going after the Mullas who preach hatred....EVERYWHERE. No borders, no politics, find the Preachers, and their brainwashed masses and take em out.
But since Bush decided to go the conventional route, I'd hope Obama would be smart enough to pull the troops out of Iraq before opening a third front in Pakistan, but alas, he's already attacking Paki villages.

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave
BTW, it's neither unusual or in many cases particularly difficult to to trace yourself back to some famous person or other. If you go back very many generations in the Va area you probably can trace back to GW or TJ. Many in the NE trace back to one or more of the Founding Fathers.
Six of my great-grandparents were born in WV, with seven of them tracing back to Va before that. I know of two connections to Gen Gates, one to Pres Washington, and I'm close to proving one to Thomas J.
Shawnee, Cherokee, Chinese, and African as well.

You cannot have a blood connection to President Washington. He had no offspring of his own.

True enough, which is why I tried to use the more accurate "connection" (as opposed to "descendant", which I used in my earlier post).  Our tie is to JA Washington, and by marriage at that.

quote:

 Are you aware of the claims he (GW) had a child by his sister-in-laws slave Venus?

quote:

ORIGINAL: slaveboyforyou

quote:

So your position is that we continue to have military installations in places like South Korea and Okinawa because we're protecting shipping lanes?  I find that highly improbable.

What large, immerging, economic superpower with over 6 billion people armed with nuclear weapons are those countries near?  China already tries to claim the entire South China sea as it's territorial waters.  It has clear intentions to completely dominate East Asian economics.  It is spending it's new found wealth heavily on military infrastructure.  You need to think about the possible future implications of that now.  It's very probable that we may have to protect our interests in that part of the world in decades to come. 

quote:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I'm remembering correctly the United States spends far more on its military than any other nation on earth.

quote:

The Chinese also have a right to develop their military, especially in relation to their influence within their region of the world (the Vietnam War was in some respects a proxy war between the U.S. and China). But more importantly, only one nation has ever dropped a nuclear bomb, and that nation - the United States - has threatened nuclear retaliation on nations ever since. John Foster Dulles encouraged the President (Eisenhower I believe) to use nuclear weapons on China during the Korean War. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

UPSG-

It's my understanding that we have threatened 1 nation and 1 nation only with nuclear weapons- Japan. We told them we would keep dropping bombs we didn't have. Otherwise we have:
1. Pledged "no first use" and
2. Nuclear attack will be met with nuclear response

I pretty much agree about China. In a conventional war they are surprisingly vulnerable- 6 cruise missiles can drown up to half the Chinese population and starve half of what's left within 6 months.