If we used our defense budget exclusively for defense, what kind of defensive technology might we have? Wouldnt we be a lot safer?
Well, defense is only one side of the coin. If America still uses things like economic sanctions and monetary support for oppressive governments i.e. Israel, then citizens of other countries are still not going to like America. However, I think it can be safe to assume that if America stopped putting military bases across the globe, stopped invading other countries etc, the hostility would decrease. Edit: Idk about technologies, I would imagine it would be actions like increased border security, maybe tighter immigration policy, increased port screenings, high-tech cyber security, etc.
define defense. Its impossible to expect the masses to be informed of everything that goes on in the world. We cant vote on every military decision Consider this. Many consider the infiltration of enemies that mean us harm, a form of defense. Its our job to vote for who we trust to best defend us. And if we need to question their motives, we vote them out. -yuri
I guess what I'm trying to say, is that one would argue our current military decisions are ultimately made to protect us (America) in the end. -yuri
Goober, so you mean if the US stopped policing the world it would have to heavily police within its borders? Yuri, i meant passive/defensive. Instead of using the money for pre-emptive/aggressive action, wouldnt diverted funds for better defensive technologies make it safer? And would we goober be right that it would have to turn into a hyper-security/police state? Could any technology allow it to be passive-defensive and safe without a police state?
No. I didnt say police state, I was just trying to think of things that make it safer without actually using instruments of war, like having missiles ready to intercept fighter plans everywhere, so to me that seems like protecting its borders, and cyber threats, both of which I think could be accomplished without having a police state.
Too damn bad peasant! You already got one and fuck you if you don't like it. You have no opinion in Amerika.
The best defense is NOT to have a standing army. If you have a standing army it will always be used and in most cases not for the right reasons. A standing army gives idealist power over people through violence. A standing army insights other armies. And besides nations with standing armies and the most economic and social structure are always the easiest to conquer.
Okay, well the US is a surveillance state with the largest domestic policing budget, largest global prison population, largest military budget, huge expenditures of suveillance/cyberwarfare (cybercrime) technology (co-opted by Isreal), and has extrajudicial executions and suspension of Constitutional Rights without trial.
Very good points! Would a shift in foreign policy toward passive/defensive effect authoritarian methods here? Seems like it would be hard to justify those things without the boogie men attitudes.
Its true though if you think about it. Protecting our way of life. Cheap oil? Cheap goods? The entire American way of life is protected by enslaving the world Cutting our "defense" budget would be cutting our way of life -yuri
If we used our defense budget for only defense who would we be defending against exactly? People who hate freedom? (Thats a joke) most of our wars imo come from the U.S. publics thirst for protecting the New American way of life. One in which people feel entitled to high paying jobs and at the same time cheap products. You know the crowd, the ones who fight for 15 dollars a hour for a McDonalds employee but wants a 99 cent cheese burger. We are taxed and extorted to the point where freedom seeking people who's lives are at stake are shunned away at the borders because they are a drain on the welfare state America is fast becoming. Money is the real issue here. Ever since our government high jacked the worlds currency our money has increasingly loss value. From this minimum wage, harmful union protections that hurt the population, subsidies that help farmers, and prop up factory prices against market forces. This is a money and a cultural philosophy problem that exists largely because the general public is ignorant about the value of their money and how it's retained. In the dark about increasing purchasing power vs a increase of a diminishing dollar. All these things lead to a defensive country that's foreign policy was to stay nutral, to the worlds police and the petro-dollar mafia. So I say unless we shift back to sound money we will continue to be offensive.
The 'boogie man' exists for exactly this purpose. Defense spending needs to be justified to prop up the war economy, just like draconian drug laws and nanny state laws need to be justified to prop up the prison complex. I don't see a shift towards passive/defensive/isolationist foreign/domestic policy really having much of an effect here - all of the hardware, tactics, and psyops will just come home and be focused inward towards the citizenry. Of course, an unintrusive foreign policy would help with relationships abroad, but the effects of war will just come home. America needs to be hit hard with another MAJOR financial collapse before things will truly change, as the elite's economic system is currently the only thing propping up false economy. However, a major financial collapse will likely trigger a multi-national or global collapse of the financial system and there will be much turmoil as a result. It depends on the resilience of foreign economic systems and gold reserves and access to capital and resources outside of American owned/controlled networks. I don't see America's ways changing in any significant way until its superpower status is revoked in a major way and can't afford to sustain hundreds of trillions in unfunded liabilities and suffering foreign relations. Who knows, but the way I'm looking at it so far is that militarization of police forces and mass surveillance is just in its infancy. There is way too much money to be made and power to be held onto for things to change any time soon.