The people who eat up the yellow ribbons and blue flags propaganda and blindly enlist in the tyrannical American empire are a big part of the reason why American corporations have the ability that they have to corrupt the system with their money. How many civilians do they have to kill and see killed before they realize they aren't protecting anybody, just destroying?
I'm just saying there are good guys there and not to chastise all of them because of a uniform. Then again I consider myself to be fair. Otherwise though, yea I agree. They reap what they sow. As for ReturnFire... that's pretty much what I was saying, loosely. I'm not defending the military industrial complex, just individuals.
Oh I read it as referring to the higher ranking officers being concerned only for medals and ribbons... my bad. I get what you're saying now. I do agree, to an extent. I personally don't think we need a standing military of our magnitude. If at all. Still, I think the military is the least of our concerns as a people. That's a separate discussion though.
Yup, without them the whole mess wouldn't exist. The nationalism, militarism, and so-called patriotism of modern America are driving it. Also, the military entices people to join with all the bennies, retirement, etc. ALL DONE WITH MY FUCKING MONEY. If people want to go destroy other people's property, commit mass-murder, and whatever other immoral acts with their own money then go ahead. The fact that I am FORCED to FUND IT ALL really grates on me.
I like to see the hate on this forum. (Sarcasm).....the whole reason you see today the whole "support our troops" is because we royally fucked our Vietnam vets from a war they didn't want to fight either but where sent off to that fucked land...I guess I'm the minority on this forum by actually serving my country for six years (just got out) and was actually proud in the shit I did.....you don't have to like the wars we have been in I know I didn't but you need to realize the grunts on the ground didn't wage this war it was the mindless government sending us off..sorry maybe I have seen to many of my military buddies die for you to comprehend but it's not the military you should be turning your back to it's the goverment
Btw I get it these last 2 wars really weren't for the security of our nation but I would live to see you guys say "we don't need a military force" when another country actually invades us with there military. Then what will you be crying for? That's right fucking tanks, A-10's and m240's
Nobody was forced to join. The military *IS* -- by definition -- part of the government. It exists to enforce government policy. Politicians make up the rules and policies, and armed government employees enforce them -- whether it's domestic or foreign policy.
That statement right there shows your nesciance, you need to do some research of the kind of weaponry and surveliance that the U.S. Russia, and China have.
I mean we've got the largest domestic invasion deterrent in the world (US civilians). If we actually had a real militia being trained to pilot, drive, and operate it'd be more than effective. I'd loooove to fly an Apache... beautiful machine.
Actually, our most effective deterrents are our ICBMs, other missile systems, and our surveillance grid, imo atleast. There is no method of transporting troops that would be able to get over here without being blown up first. Submarine, airplane, boat, nothing would make it over here, theoretically atleast.
Well yea that's true too lol you know what I'm getting at though. There isn't really another force that could transport an invasion party. We dominate the air and sea 100 to 1, every time. 'Murica. Lol
Yup. Jets, bombs, tanks, etc. are great for destroying or subduing a government -- but not so much for subduing a populace. Just look at how well it worked in Vietnam, Chechnya, Iraq, Afghanistan twice, and countless other small wars over the globe. It's not about firepower, and it's not about the size of the dog in the fight, it's about the size of fight in the dog. As one of the founders said, a standing army "is the bane of liberty." This was the whole reason behind an armed populace, so a standing army wouldn't be necessary.
I'm pretty sure I know more about what they have then you..they may have outdated equipment BUT they have 2-10 times the number of soldiers waiting for something to happen. That's like a drone of ants invading your moms cherry pie
Problem with our civilians is that the government doesn't want us to have any weaponry in our homes do we will resort to throwing rocks at our invaders when the time comes
And we've got the missiles waiting to blow every last one of them out of the sky and water before they within 2,000 km of us.
Subs? It was a singular sub. Not too many troops can fit can fit on one submarine, granted they could get a warhead on there. They would have to bring in a fleet, which would be detected. They've only done it one other time, with a couple subs patrolling off the east coast.