A life wasted

[KevinTheOmnivore]

No, my point is if you're going to argue that spending $3 billion on warplanes gets you a new vaccine for AIDS or something, is that a strong enough argument to keep spending that much on the military, or is it a sign that we should be spending more on disease research?

[Geggy]

NASA, cure for disease, poverty, better education, etc, spend money on things that gets the civilization to move forward, grow and evolve. Everytime we go to war the process of civlization slows down to numbers of years depending on amount money that's been wasted and number of people killed in the war. Seems like everytime a Bush gets elected, America goes into recession, if not falling behind, and for what? Their own interest?

[El Blanco]

You don't invent something until you need it. No one was just sitting around thinking "wouldn't it be cool if computers could instantaneously communicate with each other". It was some lab geeks in the Pentagon going "shit this work is hard. If the machines could just talk to each other, it would cut our workload in half".

These innovations usally have some pressing need surrounding them, and since when is there a more pressing need than life and eath, which is pretty much what the military deals in?

Don't get me wrong, there have been tons of non-military pushed advances, but it just seems thats where the most of them come frome, funding or not.

Of course, we humans also have this wierd tendency to put most of our creativity into finding new ways to kill each other. All the cool toys are by-products.

[ziggytrix]

You can say I'm nuts, but I think the internet would have come along even without our government's fear of a centralized missle command being taken out by a Soviet nuke.

The banks, or the phone companies, or the universities (and ARPANet was created at universities, even if it was military research) each could have come up with wide area networking, based solely on the need for data communication over distances.

[Kulturkampf]

Originally Posted by KevinTheOmnivore

No, my point is if you're going to argue that spending $3 billion on warplanes gets you a new vaccine for AIDS or something, is that a strong enough argument to keep spending that much on the military, or is it a sign that we should be spending more on disease research?

I definitely see and sympathize with your point, I agree with it on very fundamental grounds.

I think, surprising to some, that the US has such a monopoly on modern war technology that there should be no reason to continue to invest in such extremely expensive equiptment when we can accomplish the job with simpler tools our enemy do not even have -- and by simple, I mean simple.

Our enemy can barely fight us, and the idea that we need billion dollar gadgets to blow them up is absurd.

I think that what we need to do is support a system that allocates more funding towards general protection of the foot soldier, and less in the way of funky explosives that all too often hit civilians (an infantryman can discriminate between a baby and a terrorist, but a bomb cannot).

We should use more money for tax breaks to fuel a better economy and growth throughout the world, and some money should definitely be redirected to providing proper medical care and education to the nations that are failing.

In a roundabout way, we even degree.

[Geggy]

Japan spends somewhere in the vincinity of 30 billion a year on defense yet they're far more technologically advanced than the united states...

Russia and china spends around 110 billion a year on defense combined and they've formed a space alliance and aiming to land on the moon...

United states alone spends 420 billion a year on defense and what do we get...? 9/11...

[El Blanco]

Originally Posted by Geggy

Japan spends somewhere in the vincinity of 30 billion a year on defense yet they're far more technologically advanced than the united states...

In what way? Because most of the stuff you bought was made there? Its not their technological means that makes them such a world economic power, its their bussiness sense.

They don't innovate anything (besides the occasional robot). They are incredible managers, though.

Russia and china spends around 110 billion a year on defense combined and they've formed a space alliance and aiming to land on the moon...

And if this were 1968, I'd be concerned.

Were they to build a long term research center or some sort of colony, that would be impressive.

United states alone spends 420 billion a year on defense and what do we get...? 9/11...

A fluke. A perfect storm of circumstances and years of planning that paid off for a short time.

It wasn't the tech that let us down that day.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Everybody knows Al Gore invented the internet anyway.

Originally Posted by Kulturkampf

I think that what we need to do is support a system that allocates more funding towards general protection of the foot soldier, and less in the way of funky explosives that all too often hit civilians (an infantryman can discriminate between a baby and a terrorist, but a bomb cannot).

I agree entirely, particularly since the state vs. state concept of war at least seems to be a fading notion. I'd rather see a smaller, more skilled, and well equipped military. Ya know, like universal soldier or something....

Don't get me wrong, I am not against military spending. I just think arguing about why we should support it because it cures cancer and makes improvements in technology is sort of weak. We should spend money on our military because we need to defend ourselves.

Regarding earlier themes in this thread, like jingoism (heh...jingo), nationalism, etc.

I think we need to be careful with nationalism and patriotism. As a U.S. citizen, I want the soldiers who defend me to be patriotic to the point of nausea. I want them to be the types who cry during the national anthem. I know to a certain degree you need your soldiers to have that psychological buy-in in order to do what they are asked to do. I don't care that they tend to be ideologically different than me, and on average, conservative Republicans. I can live with that trade off.

With that being said, I think the average citizen needs to be careful with their patriotism.

" I would prefer people who have more of an inclination to be loyal to their own states and to understand the pespective of their own nation than to fall victim to vain exoticism and perceived intellectual thinking "

Sure, however we should be careful not to fall in to the constant trap of arrogance, because arrogance leads to laziness, which IMO, leads to defeat. I think it's perfectly rational (AND patriotic) to constantly question your government and nation. How else will you constantly improve and strive to remain the best?

[ziggytrix]

Only godless commies and nazis think it's wrong to question your own government.

[kahljorn]

"Don't get me wrong, there have been tons of non-military pushed advances, but it just seems thats where the most of them come frome, funding or not. "

Yea, like the wheel. That was obviously designed with military intentions; roll a giant stone wheel down a hill and you've killed like half their army.
How about electricity? You know when he was flying that kite it was ACTUALLY a stealth bomber he was electrically charging for devestating firepower?
Or how about the humble lightbulb we use to destroy subterranean aliens who are light sensitive?
Or icecream. We all know what icecream is for.
How about steel? In this 20th century we need high quality steel for our swords.

I think the idea that the military pushes out lots of "Innovation" is fucking ridiculous. Which republican asshole gave you that stupid idea? Or the, "War creates good economy" idea. Yea, cause, look at this economy. Fucking fantastic. Let's go kill korea.

[Immortal Goat]

Originally Posted by Kulturkampf

Our enemy can barely fight us, and the idea that we need billion dollar gadgets to blow them up is absurd.

They can "barely fight us"? I am willing to bet that there are thousands of soldiers who would disagree with you on that one.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by Immortal Goat

They can "barely fight us"? I am willing to bet that there are thousands of soldiers who would disagree with you on that one.

Yeah, you'd just have to pull them out of the holes they're hiding in in order to ask them.

[ziggytrix]

I think Goat's referring to any of our soldiers, Kev.

And they enemy is clearly able to fight, albeit fighting dirty. The point I think Kult's gettin at, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that no one can stand up to the US in conventional warfare, so we'd do better to spend a billion dollars on counter guerrilla fighter training rather than building billion dollar warheads.

[Immortal Goat]

I understand that part of it, and completely agree. What I am saying is that the phrase "they can barely fight us" seems to be underestimating the enemy.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

I think it's arguable that they aren't doing too well at the dirty warfare, either. They haven't pushed us out of iraq, they haven't stopped elections, and ultimately, they probably won't be able to thrive in Iraq.

Of course they will always be able to take cheap shots, but as for any of their desired goals, I'd say they've pretty much failed to achieve those.

[Immortal Goat]

I guess it's just semantics then. You think being able to fight means accomplishing goals. I think being able to fight means causing a mortality rate in our troops numbering into the thousands.

it doesn't matter if they accomplish their goals. They will never go away, because you can't kill an idea. These people are like roaches. Exploding roaches.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

But you can kill an idea. You do it with better ideas.

I think eventually, as we start to withdraw our troops, and average Iraqis begin to get used to these election things, as well as the lack of totalitarianism and torture chambers, they will probably have less tolerance for this tiny fraction of "insurgents".

[Immortal Goat]

More than likely these insurgents have children. And more than likely, these children have been brough up to believe the same as their parents. I doubt that a "better idea" is going to make up for the fact that these kids saw their parents killed by the very people they have been brought up to hate.

Think of it in American terms. I white child is brought up to hate black people. His father is a member of the KKK. Most of the country has moved on to the "better idea" of racial tolerance, but if a black man kills this child's father in a riot, that kid will grow up to hate black people just as much (if not more than) his father. And though the KKK may be a small group, the ammount of trouble they can cause is still significant, and people still die from it.

Insurgents will never go away, and that is the harsh reality that we as a nation need to face.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by Immortal Goat

More than likely these insurgents have children. And more than likely, these children have been brough up to believe the same as their parents. I doubt that a "better idea" is going to make up for the fact that these kids saw their parents killed by the very people they have been brought up to hate.

And if they continue to do the things their father did, they will end up dead just like him. The one exception might be that it'll be an Iraqi soldier who does it instead of an American. You can't make these kinds of excuses for blowing up cars and kidnapping aid workers. There will be consequences, and eventually, Iraqis will grow tired of this crap.

Think of it in American terms. I white child is brought up to hate black people. His father is a member of the KKK. Most of the country has moved on to the "better idea" of racial tolerance, but if a black man kills this child's father in a riot, that kid will grow up to hate black people just as much (if not more than) his father. And though the KKK may be a small group, the ammount of trouble they can cause is still significant, and people still die from it.

I think this is a great example, because the KKK is a tiny, meaningless, antiquated, marginalized, and insignificant organization. Sure, maybe one drunk and regressive redneck will shoot a black man, but what's important is that society condemns this person, not only for the crime, but also for his absurd beliefs.

I think this is a good comparison to the so-called "insurgents" in Iraq.

Insurgents will never go away, and that is the harsh reality that we as a nation need to face.

So what? You said it yourself, they're more like roaches. Roaches are annoying and unpleasant, but they don't bring life to a screaching hault. Another important thing to remember is that these roaches won't simply be our problem in the future, but ideally, that of a free and democratic Iraq. The Iraqi people can decide how to deal with these people eventually.

[Immortal Goat]

Sure, they are outdated and antiquated, and sure, they don't bring nations to a screeching hault, but my point is that as long as the ideal still exists, Bush will not let up. He has declared war on Terror. As long as insurgents exist, and as long as we have this war, they WILL be significant, because we are the ones making it so.

[sadie]

bush won't be in the white house forever, and the ideals that he has set forth won't be kept forever.

[Geggy]

Originally Posted by El Blanco

In what way? Because most of the stuff you bought was made there? Its not their technological means that makes them such a world economic power, its their bussiness sense.

They don't innovate anything (besides the occasional robot). They are incredible managers, though.

In what way? Reliability, for one thing. American businesses care more about the packaging deal and the price of the product while the Japanese businesses focus more on the quality (and the trendiness) of the product. Take Playstation(japan) and Xbox(us) for instance...which would you buy for the quality of it? How about Ford and Toyota...which would you rather own?

I can't agree with you that Japaneses don't innovate anything. I'm betting you every cell phone device you've ever owned (if you do own one) was made in Japan but the service and the program is American.

I would like to own most of Japanese products but their export wouldn't allow it (or something like that)...

And if this were 1968, I'd be concerned.

Were they to build a long term research center or some sort of colony, that would be impressive.

That could happen if they continue to avoid getting involved with the war and increase military spending...

A fluke. A perfect storm of circumstances and years of planning that paid off for a short time.

It wasn't the tech that let us down that day.

You're right about the tech that didn't let us down that day but sorry, I'm having a hard time believing it was all a fluke when they've received numorous warnings that al-Qaeda was planning to strike the US. I'm also having hard time believing that al-Qaeda was responsible for the NORAD standdown simply by switching off the radar...

[El Blanco]

Originally Posted by kahljorn

Yea, like the wheel. That was obviously designed with military intentions; roll a giant stone wheel down a hill and you've killed like half their army.

Oh, you were there? So, tell me,how did it happen? Tell me how and why it isn't how you just sarcastically described.

How about electricity? You know when he was flying that kite it was ACTUALLY a stealth bomber he was electrically charging for devestating firepower?

Who invented electricity? Refresh my memeory.

Or how about the humble lightbulb we use to destroy subterranean aliens who are light sensitive?

Did I say all inventions were of military design? Did I? Or did I say many inventions were not?

Or icecream. We all know what icecream is for.

Ah, yes, the very lynchpin of civilization. By the way, care to know how the refrideration system as we know it came about?

How about steel? In this 20th century we need high quality steel for our swords.

When was steel invented?

I think the idea that the military pushes out lots of "Innovation" is fucking ridiculous.

I find the notion that you think rediculous.

Which republican asshole gave you that stupid idea? Or the, "War creates good economy" idea.

True life? Fact? History?

Yea, cause, look at this economy. Fucking fantastic. Let's go kill korea.

Unemployment is down and home ownership is up. As for Korea.....I think its time for your ritalin now.

[El Blanco]

Originally Posted by Geggy

In what way? Reliability, for one thing. American businesses care more about the packaging deal and the price of the product while the Japanese businesses focus more on the quality (and the trendiness) of the product.

Thats business sense, numbnuts, not technological innovation. Which I just said.

Take Playstation(japan) and Xbox(us) for instance...which would you buy for the quality of it?

Dumbass, the X-Box has way better speciffications. Sony just used better business sense and made the PS and PS2 more accessible to third party programers.

How about Ford and Toyota...which would you rather own?

I'm looking to buy a Camry because Toyota is a better run company that puts out a more reliable and fuel efficient car with a better warranty. It has nothing to do with any type of innovations in the car.

I can't agree with you that Japaneses don't innovate anything. I'm betting you every cell phone device you've ever owned (if you do own one) was made in Japan but the service and the program is American.

The cell phones we use trace their lineage back to the portable radio units from WW2. Ericsson and Nokia also happen to be Scandenavian (I forget which of the three countries).

Tell me, what is one Japanese innovation?

I would like to own most of Japanese products but their export wouldn't allow it (or something like that)...

Do you have any idea how much total crap is pumped into that market? Talk about a consumer culture, they make us look Amish.

But, if you want to look like a 15 year old Japanese girl, thats your bag.

That could happen if they continue to avoid getting involved with the war and increase military spending...

You do realize that our own space program was a direct result of the Cold War, right, as well as the Soviets? I agree that a shooting war would slow down any progress there, but onyl the need to compete and the fear of another threat is going to propel them toward that sort of goal.

You're right about the tech that didn't let us down that day but sorry, I'm having a hard time believing it was all a fluke when they've received numorous warnings that al-Qaeda was planning to strike the US. I'm also having hard time believing that al-Qaeda was responsible for the NORAD standdown simply by switching off the radar...

I'm not going through this shit again. How many threads do you want locked because you want to ramble on about the evil Zionist Illuminati?

[kahljorn]

"Oh, you were there? So, tell me,how did it happen? Tell me how and why it isn't how you just sarcastically described."

Tell me how war innovated it.

"Who invented electricity? Refresh my memeory. "

Abraham lincoln.

"Did I say all inventions were of military design? Did I? Or did I say many inventions were not? "

No, but you said war and innovation are having a homosexual affair.

"By the way, care to know how the refrideration system as we know it came about? "

So we could freeze the battlefield before we triumphantly march over frozen corpses?

"When was steel invented?"

I'm not exactly sure, 1600's maybe? Iron working has been around for a while, I remember that from jr. high, however the high-quality steels that are produced today have been inovated for a very long time and isn't the same type of steel you'd find in the 1800's.

"True life? Fact? History?"

As far as I know there's no republican politicians by those names.

"Unemployment is down and home ownership is up."

Where the fuck did you get that idea from? Unemployment was at a record low, remember the big controversy over ohio?
The economy's great though, you're right. Let me go buy some 2.50 a gallon gasoline now.