3 ms·
It’s not just direct military action by the US it’s also that we support a lot of the current dictators around the world while claiming to be the beacon of demo
by gcheong 4y ago
It’s not just direct military action by the US it’s also that we support a lot of the current dictators around the world while claiming to be the beacon of democracy. But the whole point of whether we are passive or aggressive is besides the fact that we don’t care properly for the people who are paying for the military that it’s supposedly defends.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago> we don’t care properly for the people who are paying for the military that it’s supposedly defends Close to a century of no war on the homeland, close to two on the mainland; not too shabby. Yes, we have problems. But enemy tanks aren’t one of them.
- gcheong 4y agoHow much of a problem would they be if we just spent a bit less?
- pkaye 4y agoif we go that route I think we would have to allow some time for other countries to arm themselves because they rely on US assurances, bases, weapons for their security. Right now a whole bunch of small countries are asking the US to have bases troops, nuclear weapons in their countries because all the conflicts going on.
- ThrowawayR2 4y agoFalse economy. The problem with letting predators get the impression that they can take you down is that they start trying to do so (as current events illustrate), causing you to have to spend more on defense anyway.
- gcheong 4y agoFalse assertion. Does deciding to spend less on military on more on social services give these supposed predators the idea they can take you down when your military is still the largest in the world? Seems like we could probably divert a significant chunk before anyone thinks we're an easy target.