Let's go to war

[anthrax]

In most companies if your department doesn't use its annual budget it won't as much the next year
So you have to spend your $ even if it doesn't make any sense

So how can the Department of Defense and its big contractors justify the billions spend on some new toys?
Wars and fear of terrorism are obiously very efficient to do that
Wars are also good to test the equipment (simulations have their limits)

Besides all the people working for the army would get demotivated without some good evil enemies to fight
(and it's good for employment)

 

[Phenom78]

LOL

What company do you work for?

 

[anthrax]

Finance now

When I was working for a big pharma company we renewed all the PCs, laptops etc which were brand new just to be sure we keep our budget

 

[anthrax]

What about you?

The Weekly Standard?

 

[Phenom78]

Wow

It irks me to see companies mismanaged so blatantly. I think most nowadays are on the ball, and most department heads aren't struggling for ways to spend cash. Just the opposite.

The only entity that operates that way on a large scale is the government.

But to answer your question peeps have been making that whine since Eisenhower gave his speech. Different time, and different situation. He wasn't even completely right in his day. Part of the problem he was addressing was the reality that many weapons programsd are not decided by necessity, but by whose constituency they benefit. In that respect the Pentagon and its needs are often on the shit end of the stick, and they get stuck with systems they neither want nor need, and left short of others that they do.

But there is no need to invent enemies when they actually exist. Perhaps instead of searching for conspiracies you might analyze the reality instead.

 

[anthrax]

But there is no need to invent enemies when they actually exist. Perhaps instead of searching for conspiracies you might analyze the reality instead.

Do those ennemies justify those hightech planes, to take an example?

The B-2 Spirit costs around $2 billions
Are they useful for some street shooting in Baghdad or Kandahar?

 

[anthrax]

BTW, I'm well aware that the overall defense budget now absorbs roughly 4 % of GDP which is low compared to some other countries.....

 

[Phenom78]

Do those ennemies justify those hightech planes, to take an example?

The B-2 Spirit costs around $2 billions
Are they useful for some street shooting in Baghdad or Kandahar?

You may have forgotten, who could blame you since it was over so quickly, but there was an army in place that had to be dealt with before they could occupy the cities and worry about suicide bombers.

Nor was the Iraqi army the only or even greatest threat facing the world.

Maybe Canada can get by with second hand diesel subs bought from some other Navy's scrapyard, but that is largely because we don't.

Someone is going to be the superpower. Soemone always is throughout human history. Who of the likely alternatives do you prefer in that capacity?

If it seems Im being smarmy Im not. Just annoys me when people give me cotton candy logic in place of hard facts or analysis. Rather than whine about US military spending you shoul;d be grateful for it. It allows a lot of other countires to spend their budgets elsewhere with no diminshment of security.

American tax payers would be more than happy to have Canada take over the job, provided you actually do it

 

[anthrax]

The good ol' B-52 were still used in Afghanistan and Iraq (They were first used 50 years ago)

But I know that a military superiority is necessary whether it is used or not (even China who claims to be a peaceful country is building a hoooge military force)
The question is in what extent?

But let's go back to my original post:
How useful and effecicient are wars nowadays to stimulate the economy?

 

[Phenom78]

The good ol' B-52 were still used in Afghanistan and Iraq (They were first used 50 years ago)

But I know that a military superiority is necessary whether it is used or not (even China who claims to be a peaceful country is building a hoooge military force)
The question is in what extent?

But let's go back to my original post:
How useful and effecicient are wars nowadays to stimulate the economy?

They really aren't absent large scale unemployment or other incongruent factors.

Right now its probably costing us more in increased energy costs alone than we would benefit by any imagined increase in weapons spending.

It worked in WWII because the build up was so massive and we were providing weapons to other nations as well. Not to mention all the draftees. Its not as if we drafted 5 million men to fight this war. troop levels are pretty much the same except for pulling reserves out of their day jobs.

 

[anthrax]

There was a Nobel prize-winning economist who estimated that the federal government’s total cost for the Iraq war will be over $1 trillion....

On a side note I'm wondering if the imaginative or real Chinese threat will trigger an increase in US military spending like during the cold war
They will be the next big vilain in 10-20 years (military speaking since they already have this role when it comes to the economy)

 

[Phenom78]

There was a Nobel prize-winning economist who estimated that the federal government’s total cost for the Iraq war will be over $1 trillion....

On a side note I'm wondering if the imaginative or real Chinese threat will trigger an increase in US military spending like during the cold war
They will be the next big vilain in 10-20 years (military speaking since they already have this role when it comes to the economy)

China is a genuine threat, especially as it seems they appear intent on pursuing their historical China (read all of the rest of Asia) as their true and natural border.

But in a larger sense they are simply because it is a country ruled my a mafia.

On the outside looking in it always appears sedate and under control. The simply truth is it isnt that easy nowadays to keep large populations under totalitarian control with resorting to massive military coercion. All democratic countires become a threat to that form of rule, and a natural enemy in as much as they represent alternatives their people need to be kept away from. censorship can only go so far in todays world.

So like China they try to make problems and fight proxy wars. China does it now with the arab nations and N Korea. They create bargaining positions by first causing trouble, and to hell with who gets harmmed. Its the kind of imperial type politics that caused so many problems in Europe. So in that sense we are dealing with regressively thinking nations.

And they are actual problems. As a Catholic I have a certain affinity with the "blessed are the peacemakers" sect. But rationally I can also see that for the most part they are just nuts lol, with no grasp on reality or the seriousness of what is transpiring.

 

[anthrax]

If China ever invades Taiwan first then Vietnan and other SE Asian countries there won't probably be more than diplomatic protests

But I can't really see China being militarily threatening the Western World

Why would they?

Japan has had imperialistic ambitions much more than China

and Chinese economy is so much dependant on the US and Eruope's economies that it wouls make any sense
Besides they are neither religious nor major ideological differences between those two blocks

 

[Phenom78]

If China ever invades Taiwan first then Vietnan and other SE Asian countries there won't probably be more than diplomatic protests

But I can't really see China being militarily threatening the Western World

Why would they?

Japan has had imperialistic ambitions much more than China

and Chinese economy is so much dependant on the US and Eruope's economies that it wouls make any sense
Besides they are neither religious nor major ideological differences between those two blocks

Why does anyone bra.

You discount the impetu of being a true believer. Which is why ithink you (general) discount the threat of countries like Iran and Iraq.

Why are they doing so now?

 

[anthrax]

Why does anyone bra.

You discount the impetu of being a true believer. Which is why ithink you (general) discount the threat of countries like Iran and Iraq.

Why are they doing so now?

Iran (and in some extent Iraq now) has some ideological/dogmatic/religious reasons to "destroy Western Infidels"

Not China which is both secular and as greedy as any Western capitalist country

"The twenty-firth century will be religious, or it will not be."

 

[Phenom78]

Iran (and in some extent Iraq now) has some ideological/dogmatic/religious reasons to "destroy Western Infidels"

Not China which is both secular and as greedy as any Western capitalist country

"The twenty-firth century will be religious, or it will not be."

Im saying why do they help them now?

Why sell them advanced destabilizing weapons systems? Why continue to pour gasoline on the fire.

The answer to that is the same answer to your question why are they a threat and not just a greedy trade partner.

 

[EnderJE]

American tax payers would be more than happy to have Canada take over the job, provided you actually do it

1) Let's be real here. Canada ain't going to do shit. We're too busy being everyone's friend and loaning people $5 for every damned country who asks.
2) True, someone has to be the guy with the big guns around. Let's not pretend that we give a shit about world peace, safe heaven and that all people are created equally. Like true communisim, peace - love are nice ideas but don't really play out on the world stage.

What's that saying...if you want peace...prepare for war.

 

[needtogetaas]

Do those ennemies justify those hightech planes, to take an example?

The B-2 Spirit costs around $2 billions
Are they useful for some street shooting in Baghdad or Kandahar?

are you saying you dont ant the us to have the best defance it can.

 

[Phenom78]

1) Let's be real here. Canada ain't going to do shit. We're too busy being everyone's friend and loaning people $5 for every damned country who asks.
2) True, someone has to be the guy with the big guns around. Let's not pretend that we give a shit about world peace, safe heaven and that all people are created equally. Like true communisim, peace - love are nice ideas but don't really play out on the world stage.

What's that saying...if you want peace...prepare for war.

And all Im saying is clueless peeps should stop whining to the hand that feeds them.

People are silly creatures. They see things a certain way and consider it a natural outcome, ignoring all the factors that have gone into making it the way it is. The world would be a far different, and less desirable place, without US. I dont say that as a citizen or a patriot, but as a realist.

And as I realist I also recognize that what is won't always be. Perhaps even in my lifetime. And when it happens that American is no longer willing or able to pick up that burden, I suspect y'all will really have something to cry about. Us as well.

 

[EnderJE]

And all Im saying is clueless peeps should stop whining to the hand that feeds them.

People are silly creatures. They see things a certain way and consider it a natural outcome, ignoring all the factors that have gone into making it the way it is. The world would be a far different, and less desirable place, without US. I dont say that as a citizen or a patriot, but as a realist.

And as I realist I also recognize that what is won't always be. Perhaps even in my lifetime. And when it happens that American is no longer willing or able to pick up that burden, I suspect y'all will really have something to cry about. Us as well.

It reminds me of those in college vs those in the working world. What's that say...

In college, if you're not an idealistic liberal where everyone is free and equal -- then you're a Nazi who is a slave to the "machine".

In the working world, if you're not a conservative who believes in only paying in their fair share of taxes, private healthcare, and education -- then you're an idiot.