Categorical Moral Imperatives

[jcm]

There are nations that do not have a military force to speak of or have a very weak military, however, as long as they leave everybody else alone, they are usually left alone too.

You mean like Kuwait.

No, Not necesserilly. Look at Sweden and Iceland for examples.

Do you honestly think that Sweden or Iceland would stand by and allow their country to be invaded without asking for help? I doubt these countries are worried that the world would turn their backs on them if it happened.  

I think a strong military is a good deterent, that is why nations will never attack the US. US's foreign policy is a different issue.

I was more talking about how taxes help the country in a number of ways including a strong military. The cia, fbi, nsa, military and local law inforcement all aid the security of the country. Paying taxes is what helps fund these organizations. I'm sure sweden and iceland have their share of criminals and security problems.

[Will]

Nations will not attack the US (until China decides it's strong enough to stand the US's economic collapse...), however we're surprisingly susceptible to guerilla tactics. Something as overt as 9/11 wouldn't be necessary to cripple us. We're already pretty damned afraid of everything. Can you imagine if militant separatists or "trrists" parked truck-bombs in front of malls or sports arenas? Can you imagine someone setting off a bomb on the Golden Gate Bridge or under the St. Louis Arch? Worse still, can you imagine someone attacking a small US town in the middle of nowhere? No one would feel safe and the country would likely collapse under it's own fear and paranoia. Look at the US since 9/11, which only claimed 3,000 lives (I say only because compared to other places that's low).

[jcm]

Nations will not attack the US (until China decides it's strong enough to stand the US's economic collapse...), however we're surprisingly susceptible to guerilla tactics. Something as overt as 9/11 wouldn't be necessary to cripple us. We're already pretty damned afraid of everything. Can you imagine if militant separatists or "trrists" parked truck-bombs in front of malls or sports arenas? Can you imagine someone setting off a bomb on the Golden Gate Bridge or under the St. Louis Arch? Worse still, can you imagine someone attacking a small US town in the middle of nowhere? No one would feel safe and the country would likely collapse under it's own fear and paranoia. Look at the US since 9/11, which only claimed 3,000 lives (I say only because compared to other places that's low).

I think it would take many successful bombings on the US to make a difference. But, if dem' dang ol' trrists created and released deadly biologicals across the country, then all would be over.

[Asmodean]

Do you honestly think that Sweden or Iceland would stand by and allow their country to be invaded without asking for help? I doubt these countries are worried that the world would turn their backs on them if it happened.

Sure they would ask for help. And maybe together with their allies they will repel whoever might march into their lands. And you know the best part of it? They don't spend a fifth of their budget on guys in green, so that they can spend that much more on infrastructure, healthcare and so on and so forth  

I think a strong military is a good deterent, that is why nations will never attack the US. US's foreign policy is a different issue.

NEVER?? I wouldn't use such strong words. They tend to be wrong in the end.

I was more talking about how taxes help the country in a number of ways including a strong military. The cia, fbi, nsa, military and local law inforcement all aid the security of the country. Paying taxes is what helps fund these organizations. I'm sure sweden and iceland have their share of criminals and security problems.

Yes. Still they manage to cope with it in a way, much cheaper than the US government's. You know, if the USA kept its nose where it belongs in stead of policing the world and playing superpower and only offered help to its allies or under directions fron the United Nation, then maybe you'd have less security problems. And maybe the same measures would do something about the other more domestic shady eliments of society as well.

[jcm]

Sure they would ask for help. And maybe together with their allies they will repel whoever might march into their lands. And you know the best part of it? They don't spend a fifth of their budget on guys in green, so that they can spend that much more on infrastructure, healthcare and so on and so forth.

Would you want the US to aid Sweden or would that be too much policing? I guess all the money spent on the military would pay off then.

NEVER?? I wouldn't use such strong words. They tend to be wrong in the end.

No, I’m pretty good with never

You know, if the USA kept its nose where it belongs in stead of policing the world and playing superpower and only offered help to its allies or under directions fron the United Nation, then maybe you'd have less security problems.

Playing superpower and not allowing nukes to get in the hands of terrorists is pretty fair in my opinion. Do you really think flipping the switch to neutral will have any affect on organizations like al qaeda or hamas? These people want a world ruled by their religion. Peaceful relations with other religions are not on these people’s radar. Maybe Israel should start focusing on infrastructure like roads, parks and healthcare. They will need to from all the bombings that will start.

Hey I would love to live in a world that looks nothing like the world we live in today. But we don’t live in that world yet. The world is a dangerous place and I do feel safer having a strong defense system in place. Putting our nose where it belongs will not make US threats just go away.

Well when Obama is elected I’m sure we will have a better relationship with the UN.

[Asmodean]

Would you want the US to aid Sweden or would that be too much policing? I guess all the money spent on the military would pay off then.

Sweden has enough friends to fare well enough in a war without the US aid if need be. As for the money paying off then, no, it would still be wasted.

No, I’m pretty good with never

*snort*

Playing superpower and not allowing nukes to get in the hands of terrorists is pretty fair in my opinion. Do you really think flipping the switch to neutral will have any affect on organizations like al qaeda or hamas? These people want a world ruled by their religion. Peaceful relations with other religions are not on these people’s radar. Maybe Israel should start focusing on infrastructure like roads, parks and healthcare. They will need to from all the bombings that will start.

The state of Israel should not exist at all.

That said, how exactly are you going to prevent someone from selling nuclear weapons, construction matherials and technology to "terrorist" regimes/organisations/whatever?

Hey I would love to live in a world that looks nothing like the world we live in today. But we don’t live in that world yet. The world is a dangerous place and I do feel safer having a strong defense system in place. Putting our nose where it belongs will not make US threats just go away.

It will not. Mostly because it's too late. The US have already pissed off too many people with generations-long memories. Unless you wipe them all out (good luck with that), you'll not be safe for a long, long time. Stirring the embers does not help either.

Well when Obama is elected I’m sure we will have a better relationship with the UN.

Good luck with that.

[Tom62]

I always wondered why the USA still keeps such a huge army since the end of the cold war. Does the USA perhaps fear a canadian or mexican invasion?  Maybe it is to fight terrorism? But that is rather unlikely, because you can't fight terrorists on a battlefield and history shows that the USA has sponsered many terrorists themselves (like supplying weapons to Osama Bin Laden to fight the ruskies in Afhganistan). My assumption is that even if the USA would lower their military expenditure from 583,283,000,000 USD (source: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy08/ ... efense.pdf )to 100,000,000,000 USD they would still remain the leading military world power.

[Will]

The military is a tool of corporations in order to gain profits. I'm sure we've all heard Eisenhower's farewell address, in which he warned of a military industrial complex. That complex is now a mechanism of economy, without ethics or morals or even rule of law. It has nothing to do with protection and everything to do with profit.