[U184]

America is, by all accounts, a war machine.

Our Government, infrastructure, economy, educational system, largest corporations, vast amounts of our labor force.... all were built on the Military–industrial complex. Today is no different as all of those things are still true.

Yet we stand idle and conflicts rage across the globe. We sit idle because of bleeding hearts and others who have no clue as to why the conflicts are happening.

So should the most capable military force in the world sit idle and let our economy falter, because others see it as politically correct?

Or


Should we lend our arms to the UN in every and all instances to our fullest abilities and capitalize on our Military–industrial complex abilities?

America has the power to throw a choke hold on every nation not conforming to International law, are currently at war and or committing all kinds of crimes against humanity.

Peace, real peace, can be achieved by superior fire power.


I am not suggesting world domination, just that America become what we already are, just more so and in full force, without apologies.


Where do you stand and why?

[Oxymoron]

I think we should care about protecting American interests, and everyone else should look out for themselves/

[U184]

A centrist response that says nothing. Where the fuck did that come from?

Speak..I say...speak from the gut boy and tell us what you really think.

[Oxymoron]

OK fine lets Fucking kill every one of them sumbitches!
Murrica

[youtube]GKaYOW9zMoY[/youtube]

[U184]

I did not mean that either, but at least it was honest.

[park]

Attacking crap armies is one thing.But even average armies would be able to hit the US so unless a dictator gets into power current US politicians will not start wars against average forces.

[U184]

What are you even talking about?

[park]

What are you even talking about?

you're talking like the US can crash any nation without being hit.This is true for enemies with a crap army but not for an average one(not even talking about powerful ones)

[U184]

You seem to be taking that stance from the very small amount of forces we have sent in the past. I am not talking small forces I am talking fully committed engagements. The USA can handle 4 to 5 fully committed engagements simultaneously, with any country on earth, without exception.

We just have not committed our forces in full since WWII.

[park]

It's easy against Afghanistan or Iraq.Lots of other armies could have done that.But even average armed forces would be tough and no US politicians want to lose votes for that.So it's not going to happen.

[U184]

Russia was unable to do so, close at hand.... near lines of support and their full forces a few days away, with full engagement, in 10 years and neither could the British or the French.

That was also a ground war. We could use planes and ships and bomb the same area for that same 10 years if needed.

no US politicians want to lose votes for that.So it's not going to happen.

This is the point of the thread. The politicians would get votes for becoming that world militant force. No bullshit, just a new national alignment.

So that argument does not work in this instance.

[park]

Russia was unable to do so, close at hand.... near lines of support and their full forces a few days away, with full engagement, in 10 years and neither could the British or the French.

That was also a ground war. We could use planes and ships and bomb the same area for that same 10 years if needed.

This is the point of the thread. The politicians would get votes for becoming that world militant force. No bullshit, just a new national alignment.

So that argument does not work in this instance.

They wouldn't get votes.

[U184]

Thank you for your input. I disagree.

[park]

Thank you for your input. I disagree.

I don't understand if you are proposing a Nazi operation.Americans are not interested in wars(the people)

[U184]

Only if you think the United Nations are Nazi's.

You must not understand the OP.

Do you understand the concept of a Military–industrial complex?

[park]

Only if you think the United Nations are Nazi's.

You must not understand the OP.

Do you understand the concept of a Military–industrial complex?

the US army doing wars for other nations?Mercenaries?Why?

[U184]

the US army doing wars for other nations?

Yes and no. Fighting for the United nations to ensure peace and to uphold the international laws and dictates. Not waging war for the top bidder.

Mercenaries?Why?

Why? As explained above.


The Military–industrial complex, this IS America. As I explain in the "opening post" OP.

Our Government, infrastructure, economy, educational system, largest corporations, vast amounts of our labor force.... all were built on the Military–industrial complex. Today is no different as all of those things are still true.

Our Government was formed in revolution and became the moving force of the entire world because of our changes during WWI and WWII.

So from top to bottom, inside and out America IS a Military–industrial complex. We are now also a Technological industrial complex as well.

However, we gave our inventions away to everyone and others are stole past copyright by some countries... So, that leaves us to what we were made into, a war machine.

Isoroku Yamamoto was right to fear that the Japanese attack would create a new power on earth, but they attacked and here we are.

[park]

The Military–industrial complex, this IS America. As I explain in the "opening post" OP.

Our Government was formed in revolution and became the moving force of the entire world because of our changes during WWI and WWII.

So from top to bottom, inside and out America IS a Military–industrial complex. We are now also a Technological industrial complex as well.

However, we gave our inventions away to everyone and others are stole past copyright by some countries... So, that leaves us to what we were made into, a war machine.

Isoroku_Yamamoto was right to fear that the Japanese attack would create a new power on earth, but they attacked and here we are.

US marines as mercenaries.What wars would they do?Would they attack all dictatorships for democracy?

[U184]

No, they whole of the US might. All the forces all its abilities, technologies, etc.

Everyone. Institute the draft, use independent contractors, all of it.

mercenaries

No.

The arm of the United Nations peacekeeping force.

What wars would they do?

The ideal would be to, at the command of the UN and guided by International Law, stop all hostile engagements, everywhere on earth and force a ceasefire and a peaceful resolution by the International Court.

Would they attack all dictatorships for democracy?

No.

Any nation that meets their responsibilities to Humanity and to the International Court would not need to be engaged.

Only those that are in war already, or ones that fail to follow International Law and Human rights would need UN intervention.


Understand that the UN is composed by a multi-international body and they would be in control. However I would suggest that the International Law be absolute and that there could be no voting against clear violations.

[park]

No, they whole of the US might. All the forces all its abilities, technologies, etc.

Everyone. Institute the draft, use independent contractors, all of it.


No.

The arm of the United Nations peacekeeping force.


The ideal would be to, at the command of the UN and guided by International Law, stop all hostile engagements, everywhere on earth and force a ceasefire and a peaceful resolution by the International Court.

No.

Any nation that meets their responsibilities to Humanity and to the International Court would not need to be engaged.

Only those that are in war already, or ones that fail to follow International Law and Human rights would need UN intervention.


Understand that the UN is composed a milt-international body and they would be in control. However I would suggest the the International LAw be absolute and that there could be no voting against clear violations.

All dictatorships go against human rights.Could the UN impose the US army to attack Saudis?Or they would have the right to oppose orders but this would make it pointless.As for mercenaries,wouldn't they be paid by other nations then?This is the meaning of mercenaries.