Please log in to view images

« prev   random   next »
1   still1bear   ignore (0)   2011 Nov 3, 9:44am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

This is why Europe, Japan, and the Gulf states can afford huge savings on military spending.

The moment US gives up on its military "overreach", they are all toast.

Just a reminder for those claiming US does not produce anything: world policeman is supposed to be paid, and it is.

2   someone else   ignore (0)   2011 Nov 3, 12:40pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

How are we getting paid for protecting all those place? Higher US corporate profits somehow?

3   Â¥   ignore (3)   2011 Nov 3, 1:34pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

still1bear says

The moment US gives up on its military "overreach", they are all toast.

By what threat? Space aliens?

4   don   ignore (1)   2011 Nov 3, 3:40pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

If we are the "world's policeman" than so was Hitler's Germany in the '30s and '40s. Bombing, invading, threatening, interfering, exploiting other countries is what the US does. We are as evil and diabolical as the Third Reich.

5   Dan8267   ignore (3)   2011 Nov 3, 3:52pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Bellingham Bill says

still1bear says

The moment US gives up on its military "overreach", they are all toast.

By what threat? Space aliens?

“Nessuna soluzione . . . nessun problema!„

Space aliens, zombies, robots from the future, Cthulhu. You can never be too prepared.

6   still1bear   ignore (0)   2014 May 7, 6:51am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Dan8267 says

Bellingham Bill says

still1bear says

The moment US gives up on its military "overreach", they are all toast.

By what threat? Space aliens?

“Nessuna soluzione . . . nessun problema!„

Space aliens, zombies, robots from the future, Cthulhu. You can never be too prepared.

Just refreshing an old thread to show that liberal morons never learn from history (or geography for that matter).

Ask West Ukrainians who is attacking them ? Zombies ? Aliens ?

Better yet, open a good map and a history book.

7   Rew   ignore (0)   2014 May 7, 8:16am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

still1bear says

This is why Europe, Japan, and the Gulf states can afford huge savings on military spending.

Garbage. Right now, the only thing keeping Russia from grabbing more in Europe is ... A) they don't want to and really cannot, and B) Germany is there, with the UK and France shortly behind.

Additionally, Japan and South Korea keep both North Korea and China pretty well in check right now. India also helps bottle them up.

To be clear, I'm not saying the US doesn't play a huge role in helping its allies militarily. To my knowledge the highest tech anti-missile defense systems right now are over in Japan as a joint Japanese US venture.

What I am saying though is that this ...

http://www.globalfirepower.com/defense-spending-budget.asp

... is REALLY outspending your opponent. For the short blip I was taking a pay check from the DOD, I heard the stat that 1 in ever 3 dollars is spent on electronics and R&D.

8   curious2   ignore (0)   2014 May 7, 8:33am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        


How are we getting paid for protecting all those place? Higher US corporate profits somehow?

Last question first: yes, higher profits for certain corporations. First question suggests flawed assumptions because (a) most of us aren't getting paid and (b) we aren't necessarily "protecting" all those places, unless in some instances you mean protection in the mafia sense of the word. For example, the Ukraine situation seems to be a local disagreement magnified by international corporations and industries, for their own reasons.

But, even if you add up America's official $500bn military budget and the extras that push the real cost to somewhere between $700bn and $800bn, it still doesn't add up to even the gap between American medical spending and, for example, the UK, where people live longer and the NHS is generally better than what we have. Don't even get me started on how much more we spend than the Mexicans, who spend 90% less and get similar results, sometimes better. Government medical spending alone (Medicare $500bn, Medicaid $400bn, plus insurance for government employees and retirees) dwarfs military spending, and per capita exceeds the UK's total medical spending (both public and private combined) for their entire population. Literally nothing, no other sector, comes even close to the amount Americans overpay for the medical sector. No other country in the history of the world has ever spent as much as we do on that, and I question how long we can continue.

I enjoyed reading The Housing Trap, but the cost of housing in America is not much higher than the cost of similar housing elsewhere in the world. In sector after sector, Americans pay similar or lower prices than almost anywhere else on earth, including retail and even including OTC drugs. There is precisely one exception, where Americans are required to overpay dramatically more than anywhere else, and that gap alone adds up to more than our entire military expenditure. If you object to being made to overpay for things, you should object to that one sector more than all others, especially since your life might literally depend on it.

9   drew_eckhardt   ignore (0)   2014 May 7, 9:25am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        


How are we getting paid for protecting all those place? Higher US corporate profits somehow?

Yup.

Boeing, General Atomics, and other defense contractors sell $140B worth of equipment to the US military each year and probably get some piece of the $280B maintenance and operations pie.

10   still1bear   ignore (0)   2014 May 7, 9:50am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Rew says

still1bear says

This is why Europe, Japan, and the Gulf states can afford huge savings on military spending.

Garbage. Right now, the only thing keeping Russia from grabbing more in Europe is ... A) they don't want to and really cannot, and B) Germany is there, with the UK and France shortly behind.

Nonsense. Neither France nor Germany is capable of standing up to Russia. Strengthening either of them will make the other suspicious. Germany getting militarily stronger will also make the rest of Europe suspicious. All of them prefer the US to take care of this situation. So they all can enjoy peace and security and blame US for excessive militarism.

11   Dan8267   ignore (3)   2014 May 7, 9:56am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

still1bear says

Just refreshing an old thread to show that liberal morons never learn from history (or geography for that matter).

Ask West Ukrainians who is attacking them ? Zombies ? Aliens ?

Better yet, open a good map and a history book.

1. The U.S. is NOT intervening in the Ukraine.
2. The U.S. could not intervene in the Ukraine because we lost all our credibility in Iraq and Afghanistan.
3. So all that money we spent on our military and defense contractors has been wasted. We got nothing for it. The Middle East is still a wreck. Syria committed genocide. And Russia took over Crimea.

Conservatives never learn.

Ironically, the U.S. would be in a far better position to influence the outcome of Crimea if we didn't have any of Bush's illegitimate wars. First, we would still have the moral authority, reputation, and political capital to stop Russia from using its military to annex Crimea. Second, our economic position would be much better, so we could use our economic might to aline most of Europe economically against Russia if they did not withdraw. This would make taking Crimea a bad financial decision for Russia instead of a good one.

It is a well-establish scientific fact that People With Lower IQ's Are Political Conservatives, i.e. liberals are smarter than conservatives, by far.

There was an old thread in which we discussed this. I can go rummaging for it if necessary. Basically, it showed that liberals are genetically more intelligent and courageous than conservatives. Yep, it's in your genes.

Conservatives had larger fear centers, the part of the brain that makes you think all your neighbors are trying to kill you and steal your woman. Although this was useful during the Stone Age when all your neighbors were trying to kill you and steal your woman, it's actually highly counter-productive in modern society.

Liberals, in contrast, use that space for more frontal lobe circuitry. I.e., conscious, logical thinking. Basically, conservatives are dumb cowards, but it's not their fault because they are genetically inferior. What they should do is refrain from reproducing so that this hereditary defect isn't passed down the subsequent generations.

Again, this is just science. I'm more than willing to do my part to help poor conservative women having more intelligent and courageous children by having sex with all the girls on Girls Gone Wild. You know they are all from conservative states from the accents. You never see a Harvard chick on Girls Gone Wild.

Ah, yes, here's the post. I'll copy the relevant section below.

12   Dan8267   ignore (3)   2014 May 7, 9:57am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

MRI study suggests liberal brains understand complexity, conservative minds are associated with anxiety and fear:

Using data from MRI scans, researchers at the University College London found that self-described liberals have a larger anterior cingulate cortex–a gray matter of the brain associated with understanding complexity. Meanwhile, self-described conservatives are more likely to have a larger amygdala, an almond-shaped area that is associated with fear and anxiety.

Study: Conservatives have larger ‘fear center’ in brain:

A study at University College London in the UK has found that conservatives' brains have larger amygdalas than the brains of liberals. Amygdalas are responsible for fear and other "primitive" emotions. At the same time, conservatives' brains were also found to have a smaller anterior cingulate -- the part of the brain responsible for courage and optimism.

If the study is confirmed, it could give us the first medical explanation for why conservatives tend to be more receptive to threats of terrorism, for example, than liberals. And it may help to explain why conservatives like to plan based on the worst-case scenario, while liberals tend towards rosier outlooks.

In summary, ultra-right-wingers are dumb cowards. There is no politically correct way to express this truth. We can explain why this is so, and we can try to help those people get over this defect, but only if those people want our help.

It makes sense that some people with have larger fear centers. It was an evolutionary advantage back in the Stone Age. It kept people from being eaten by lions and bitten by poisonous snakes. But we don't live in the Stone Age anymore. Those disproportional instinctive fears are now manifested as irrational fears about terrorism, Mexicans, gays, and other such conservative issues.

Having fear is a good thing. It's nature's way of making sure you don't do something stupid that gets you killed. However, in the modern world, a person must use frontal lobe thinking to distinguish rational fears from irrational ones. The fact is you are far more likely to be killed in an automobile accident than by a terrorist. You should fear Toyota more than Al Qaeda. But you don't because your Cro-Magnon 1.0 brain was evolved to deal with hunter-gather living and hostile neighboring tribes rather than the reality of modern living.

The good news is that you can override your base instincts with higher-level thinking. The bad news is that you have to want to.

13   Dan8267   ignore (3)   2014 May 7, 9:59am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

And a related thread...
http://patrick.net/?p=1208052

Social conservatism is basically code for racism, xenophobia, and homophobia.

14   still1bear   ignore (0)   2014 May 7, 9:59am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        


How are we getting paid for protecting all those place? Higher US corporate profits somehow?

We print the world's reserve currency and neither our 'friends' nor our enemies don't dare to change this situation. We save tons of money just by selling them phony T-bonds instead of the real stuff .

One of the big reasons we are so privileged is the US military power.

15   still1bear   ignore (0)   2014 May 7, 10:01am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Dan8267 says

And a related thread...

http://patrick.net/?p=1208052

Social conservatism is basically code for racism, xenophobia, and homophobia.

Typical liberal idiocy. No substance, just labeling. BTW moron,
how did you decide, I am a social conservative ?

16   Dan8267   ignore (3)   2014 May 7, 10:03am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The bottom line is that being a liberal doesn't affect how you think, rather the act of thinking about the complexities of the world makes you a liberal. In order to be a conservative, one must not think too much.

The more one thinks, the less Bronze Age morality is able to cope with the intricacies of the modern world. The more one knows about the world, the less one can divide that world into "good guys" and "bad guys", "my tribe" and "their tribe". History is so interwoven, that we are all members of the same, bickering tribe and each of our histories is intertwined with everyone else's. This kind of complication simply does not fit with the conservative rigid classification system.

17   still1bear   ignore (0)   2014 May 7, 10:03am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Dan8267 says

still1bear says

Just refreshing an old thread to show that liberal morons never learn from history (or geography for that matter).

Ask West Ukrainians who is attacking them ? Zombies ? Aliens ?

Better yet, open a good map and a history book.

1. The U.S. is NOT intervening in the Ukraine.

Idiot, they are already in Poland in Lithuania, so any attempt by Putin to stir the situation there will put him in a direct conflict with the US.

18   Dan8267   ignore (3)   2014 May 7, 10:07am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

still1bear says

Typical liberal idiocy. No substance, just labeling.

Assertions with no reasoning or evidence merit no consideration.

still1bear says

BTW moron,

how did you decide, I am a social conservative ?

From
1. Your shitty posts that assert or contradict stuff without any analysis, evidence, or reasoning.
2. Your lousy and lazy grammar indicating a poor education.
3. The fact that you have such a god-damn stick up your ass about liberals.

A fiscal conservative, like myself, has no problems with liberals. Practically every engineer who's a liberal is a fiscal conservative.

Only social conservatives detest liberals as you obviously do. Because liberalism and social conservatism are polar opposites, whereas liberalism and fiscal conservatism are independent and unrelated.

19   NoCoupForYou   ignore (3)   2014 May 7, 10:11am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

still1bear says

Ask West Ukrainians who is attacking them ? Zombies ? Aliens ?

The Poles and Jews their grandfathers butchered come back from the dead a la a Black Sabbath song?

Who IS attacking the West Ukraine? There's no Russian Army or Russian Separatists or Party of Regions Disenfranchised Voters for Federalism (any short term for this?) in Lvov.

Ask yourself this question: Since Maiden, where has the violence been? It's been where-ever Ukrainian Nationalist Zealots have taken buses or APCs or helicopters to where the Russians are, not the other way around. The Odessa Trade Union Building for one. They had been there peacefully protesting in tent camps for weeks - until the day Football Ultras were bussed in from other parts of the Country.

20   Dan8267   ignore (3)   2014 May 7, 10:14am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

still1bear says

Idiot, they are already in Poland in Lithuania, so any attempt by Putin to stir the situation there will put him in a direct conflict with the US.

You can call your intellectual superiors moron and idiot all you want. It just makes you look juvenile when you can't back it up with intelligent writing on the subject matter at hand.

The fact, you sexually frustrated pubie, is that both Poland and Lithuania are NATO countries, whereas the Ukraine is not. Putin is not going to invade a NATO country, but he will invade a former Soviet satellite state. And there's not a damn thing our military can or will do about it no matter how much money we waste on it.

You see, like many liberals, not only am I actually knowledgeable about current world events -- something you get from listening to NPR instead of conservative hate radio -- but I'm also a fiscal conservative who doesn't like big government wasting resources that could go to improving our economy, saving American lives, and improving the quality of life by building 21st century infrastructure.

21   still1bear   ignore (0)   2014 May 7, 10:58am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

thunderlips11 says

still1bear says

Ask West Ukrainians who is attacking them ? Zombies ? Aliens ?

The Poles and Jews their grandfathers butchered come back from the dead a la a Black Sabbath song?

Who IS attacking the West Ukraine? There's no Russian Army or Russian Separatists or Party of Regions Disenfranchised Voters for Federalism (any short term for this?) in Lvov.

Ask yourself this question: Since Maiden, where has the violence been? It's been where-ever Ukrainian Nationalist Zealots have taken buses or APCs or helicopters to where the Russians are, not the other way around. The Odessa Trade Union Building for one. They had been there peacefully protesting in tent camps for weeks - until the day Football Ultras were bussed in from other parts of the Country.

FYI. The West Ukraine is the only region that is consistently and stubbornly anti-Russian (and for good reasons). The rest of Ukraine is wishy-washy (half this, half that). When Ukrainian gov't tried to make Odessa speak Ukrainian, they staged a mini-revolt (not that they speak good Russian in Odessa either).

22   still1bear   ignore (0)   2014 May 7, 11:01am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Dan8267 says

The fact, you sexually frustrated pubie, is that both Poland and Lithuania are NATO countries, whereas the Ukraine is not.

So where are the NATO forces? Why do they need Americans ?

PRIDUROK.

NATO is nothing without the US.

23   smaulgld   ignore (4)   2014 May 7, 11:25am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        


How are we getting paid for protecting all those place? Higher US corporate profits somehow?

I think the US is about to force Europe to buy the treasury bonds that the Fed is going to stop buying in exchange for continued Nato support.

http://smaulgld.com/euro-dollar-way/

24   bob2356   ignore (4)   2014 May 7, 11:54am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

still1bear says

Just refreshing an old thread to show that liberal morons never learn from history (or geography for that matter).

So refresh my memory. When in history since the war of 1812 has there been a threat of invasion to the US?

25   NoCoupForYou   ignore (3)   2014 May 7, 12:12pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

still1bear says

FYI. The West Ukraine is the only region that is consistently and stubbornly anti-Russian (and for good reasons).

Geography is history:

The Ukraine's real size - before the Communists added land to it when it was all one big unhappy Soviet Union. Not out of any niceness, but to demographically swamp it.

26   NoCoupForYou   ignore (3)   2014 May 7, 12:16pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

It's amazing we risk Nuclear War because Politicians hate referendums so much. God forbid any people make a direct and plain choice without the filter of a political party or politician speaking for them.

27   lostand confused   ignore (0)   2014 May 7, 1:25pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The question is not who is attacking West Ukraine. it is who is attacking east Ukraine and burning people alive in Odessa.

28   Blurtman   ignore (1)   2014 May 7, 1:32pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The USA can go all over the world killing people and no one can touch us. Winning!

29   NoCoupForYou   ignore (3)   2014 May 7, 3:38pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

lostand confused says

The question is not who is attacking West Ukraine. it is who is attacking east Ukraine and burning people alive in Odessa.

Word. But Putin just removed... well, I start another threat ... er thread about that.

30   clambo   ignore (5)   2014 May 7, 5:01pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The USA could surely cut military spending by and still survive.

We could also do without several other departments entirely, especially those named after things they do not produce, e.g. Dept. of Energy, Dept. of Education.

Others can be trimmed.

Wars of all kinds are expensive, especially the "war on poverty". We lost that one but nobody is going to surrender.

31   still1bear   ignore (0)   2014 May 8, 8:02am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

thunderlips11 says

still1bear says

FYI. The West Ukraine is the only region that is consistently and stubbornly anti-Russian (and for good reasons).

Geography is history:

The Ukraine's real size - before the Communists added land to it when it was all one big unhappy Soviet Union. Not out of any niceness, but to demographically swamp it.

There is no need to demographically swamp Ukraine. Ukraine is not Estonia. Most Ukrainians in the USSR could not even speak proper Ukrainian. Ukraine joined Russia voluntarily in the 17th century and since then there was no need in 'swamping'. West Ukraine, OTOH, was only annexed by Stalin, just like the Baltic states.

No matter how you slice it Ukraine is toast, neither Russia, nor EU nor US will save it. No need to even try. OTOH, keeping American troops in Poland and Lithuania is a good idea. Luckily we have enough military spending to make it look serious.

For historically-challenged people that want to know about potential threat of invading the US, here is the answer: WWII.

If USSR and Britain were defeated, US would face the whole Eurasian continent controlled by Germany and Japan. In reality everything was hanging by a thread.

US got lucky (and smart) to provide refuge for European nuclear scientists and Werner von Braun. Imagine Germany controlling all of them after WWII. Plus russian rocket technology developed without any help from von Braun.

That would not be pretty...

32   NoCoupForYou   ignore (3)   2014 May 8, 12:23pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

still1bear says

There is no need to demographically swamp Ukraine. Ukraine is not Estonia.

I referred to the Communists' adding land to it: The transfers under Lenin, Stalin and Kruschev as shown in the map.

Lenin and Stalin believed that adding more "Proles" and "Russian Speakers" would balance out the "Kulaks" in the more Western areas (and particularly those perpetually pesky Galicians).

Kruschev simply liked the idea of having all the good vacation spots in the Soviet Union controlled by his home region ;)

still1bear says

Ukraine joined Russia voluntarily in the 17th century and since then there was no need in 'swamping'.

What is today Ukraine East of the Dniepr joined Russia after a rebellion in the 1600s. Orthodoxy vs. Catholicism I believe played a role in the desire to switch to Russia from Poland-Lithuania as well.

The West of the Dniepr Ukraine was part of the Grand Duchy (Sometimes called the Commonwealth) of Poland-Lithuania in the 17th Century. The Western Ukraine came into Russia's hands over the years during the various Partitions of Poland throughout the 18th Century, with pieces going to Austria, Prussia and Russia.

The parts of the Western Ukraine in Russian hands the shortest, and longest as Hapsburg possessions, is the one most Russophobic, Galicia was Hapsburg until the end of WW1, and Uniate Catholicism dominates the region.


The divide lives to this day - the West is least Russian, the East is very Russian, and the Center is "Wishy-Washy" as you said (great term!).

still1bear says

If USSR and Britain were defeated, US would face the whole Eurasian continent controlled by Germany and Japan. In reality everything was hanging by a thread.

Absolutely. The Russians were responsible for the majority of Wehrmacht casualities, starting with the first strategic defeat of the Wehrmacht in Europe at Stalingrad.

still1bear says

US got lucky (and smart) to provide refuge for European nuclear scientists and Werner von Braun. Imagine Germany controlling all of them after WWII. Plus russian rocket technology developed without any help from von Braun.

Damn Right.

still1bear says

No matter how you slice it Ukraine is toast, neither Russia, nor EU nor US will save it. No need to even try. OTOH, keeping American troops in Poland and Lithuania is a good idea. Luckily we have enough military spending to make it look serious.

Bless you sir for saying this. Let's not screw up like with Iraq by insisting that a country that really isn't integrated stay together at all hazards.


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions