Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism

Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

audioguy58 -> Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 3:55:49 AM)
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/feb2007/nib1-12.shtml http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/feb2007/nib2-f13.shtml << Increasingly, US policy assumes a form of madness in which every military intervention creates new problems and more enemies, which then have to be eliminated by increased military force. This madness, however, is not simply the product of the members of the Bush administration. It is lodged within the crisis confronting world capitalism as a whole, and the United States in particular. >>

meatcleaver -> RE: Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 4:38:29 AM)
I would accept the view that there are military solutions to everything is a sign of decadence. Countries don't achieve economic success through military action but through a dynamic economy (and luck of circumstance in many cases), they them keep it by the same dynamism. Military action to maintain economiuc hegemony is an admission of a poverty of thinking and an acceptence of decline. In regard to the US, investing in what the world needs most (renewable energy?) would give it more chance of remaining in its current lone superpower position than investing in its military. Though Bush and co's love affair with oil (which is personal self interest) while there is a desperate need to ween the US off that need is a sign of decadence.

Aubre -> RE: Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 6:18:22 AM)
I wonder why they didn't mention the comparitive results of the Soviet Union's expansionistic military policies. That worked out so well for them. Oh wait.

meatcleaver -> RE: Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 6:22:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aubre I wonder why they didn't mention the comparitive results of the Soviet Union's expansionistic military policies. That worked out so well for them. Oh wait. The Soviet Union doesn't exist anymore precisely because of its military expansion! Actually, your point doesn't make sense.

farglebargle -> RE: Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 6:25:21 AM)
What's my tagline say again?

UtopianRanger -> RE: Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 6:52:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver I would accept the view that there are military solutions to everything is a sign of decadence. Countries don't achieve economic success through military action but through a dynamic economy (and luck of circumstance in many cases), they them keep it by the same dynamism. Military action to maintain economiuc hegemony is an admission of a poverty of thinking and an acceptence of decline. In regard to the US, investing in what the world needs most (renewable energy?) would give it more chance of remaining in its current lone superpower position than investing in its military. Though Bush and co's love affair with oil (which is personal self interest) while there is a desperate need to ween the US off that need is a sign of decadence. Yes...this imperial-militaristic policy that we can now behold is cannibalizing the infrastructure of our society. It's a paradigm designed to feed the status of perpetual war and continued military outlay. The debt incurred by this type of thinking will cripple any type of potential social progress in the areas of higher-education and healthcare; which can only lead to a greater separation of classes. Frankly, with the Democrats voice of opposition only coming in the form of a meaningless non-binding resolution......the only thing left to do is await the construction of the Death Star and prepare for Darth Vader's arrival. - R

popeye1250 -> RE: Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 7:27:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: UtopianRanger quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver I would accept the view that there are military solutions to everything is a sign of decadence. Countries don't achieve economic success through military action but through a dynamic economy (and luck of circumstance in many cases), they them keep it by the same dynamism. Military action to maintain economiuc hegemony is an admission of a poverty of thinking and an acceptence of decline. In regard to the US, investing in what the world needs most (renewable energy?) would give it more chance of remaining in its current lone superpower position than investing in its military. Though Bush and co's love affair with oil (which is personal self interest) while there is a desperate need to ween the US off that need is a sign of decadence. Yes...this imperial-militaristic policy that we can now behold is cannibalizing the infrastructure of our society. It's a paradigm designed to feed the status of perpetual war and continued military outlay. The debt incurred by this type of thinking will cripple any type of potential social progress in the areas of higher-education and healthcare; which can only lead to a greater separation of classes. Frankly, with the Democrats voice of opposition only coming in the form of a meaningless non-binding resolution......the only thing left to do is await the construction of the Death Star and prepare for Darth Vader's arrival. - R Ranger, I think you hit that nail on the head! Just like "foreign aid" there are too many people and companies making too much money off of this. And it's the same people and companies making that money year after year! We've had Troops in S. Korea, Germany and Japan in excess of FIFTY YEARS now! And look at Bosnia and Kosovo, there hasn't been any fighting there for years now and we STILL have Troops there! We never should have been involved in those countries in the first place!

meatcleaver -> RE: Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 7:31:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 And look at Bosnia and Kosovo, there hasn't been any fighting there for years now and we STILL have Troops there! The US is in the process or maybe it has already of building a military base in Bosnia and its not for keeping the peace in Bosnia, that's for sure.

popeye1250 -> RE: Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 7:41:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 And look at Bosnia and Kosovo, there hasn't been any fighting there for years now and we STILL have Troops there! The US is in the process or maybe it has already of building a military base in Bosnia and its not for keeping the peace in Bosnia, that's for sure. Meat, thanks, I'll definately call my senators and congressman and tell them not to fund that. How much longer are we going to have Troops in S. Korea? I think we've been there way too long already!

Aubre -> RE: Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 8:35:43 AM)
My point was that they were associating military involvement with capitalism while ignoring that socialist/communist states have been doing it for years, and the most aggressive state to do that in the socialist/communist world doesn't exist anymore. You won't find them criticizing military operations that further the socialist/communist agenda. To review: -military actions for economic aims are clearly not limited to capitalist nations -socialists conveniently forget the failings of socialists governments, and want you to forget as well -the shining star of socialism, the USSR, doesn't exist anymore, and socialists should examine why this is - primarily it is because their economic system was not viable

meatcleaver -> RE: Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 8:53:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aubre My point was that they were associating military involvement with capitalism while ignoring that socialist/communist states have been doing it for years, and the most aggressive state to do that in the socialist/communist world doesn't exist anymore. You won't find them criticizing military operations that further the socialist/communist agenda. To review: -military actions for economic aims are clearly not limited to capitalist nations -socialists conveniently forget the failings of socialists governments, and want you to forget as well -the shining star of socialism, the USSR, doesn't exist anymore, and socialists should examine why this is - primarily it is because their economic system was not viable No one mentioned capitalism or communism. What socialist/communist state has been expanding militarily around the world? The USSR kept what it won after WWII, as did the USA. Both were guilty of using client states as pawns in the cold war. The USSR collapsed because it tried to keep pace with US militarism and it couldn't. After that one would have expected the US to reap the benefit but it seems that their perceived victory in the cold war has made people in Washington believe every problem has a military solution. Let's get away from the cold war, just look at the French, British and Spanish empires, their growth and demise. While history doesn't repeat itself, there is a pattern to the expansion and decline of empires. I know people point to Rome and say that lasted for hundreds of years but Rome had somewhere to expand to like the USA did in its infancy and by its demise it had mutated into something unrecognisable to the 1st BC Romans. Now the US hasn't got anywhere else to expand to, it has to compete with other rising powers which are investing in commerce rather than their military. Something interesting on the news just now, Daimler-Chrysler is in trouble and it is the American end of the partnership that is the problem because of its inefficiency and making the wrong products. When Europeans can point to America and say they are inefficient, you know you are in trouble.

Aubre -> RE: Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 11:00:01 AM)
WSWS is a socialist entity.

caitlyn -> RE: Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 1:32:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver Countries don't achieve economic success through military action but through a dynamic economy (and luck of circumstance in many cases), they them keep it by the same dynamism. I would love to see you back that up, with something from history. Please limit the responses to those that sustained a dynamic economy for a long period ... for instance 1930's Czechoslovakia would be a bad example, considering what happend a few years later.

meatcleaver -> RE: Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 2:30:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver Countries don't achieve economic success through military action but through a dynamic economy (and luck of circumstance in many cases), they them keep it by the same dynamism. I would love to see you back that up, with something from history. Please limit the responses to those that sustained a dynamic economy for a long period ... for instance 1930's Czechoslovakia would be a bad example, considering what happend a few years later. If I understand you point you are pointing out my lack of clarity. I should have said regional or superpowers. If you are a small country you are always going to be at the mercy of a big neighbour. However, wars bankrupted the Spanish Empire, seriously wounded the French Empire and while the British Empire flourished after what Churchill called the first world war, war killed of the British Empire. All achieved peaks where it was difficult to perceive their decline but when the end came it came fast and no amount of militarism would have saved any of them because their economies couldn't sustain them. Once an empire starts paying to be an empire rather than earning from its empire its days are numbered which was why the fall of the USSR was only a matter of time, Russia had a crap economy and had to pay for its empire too.

seeksfemslave -> RE: Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 2:58:40 PM)
To maintain the success of an economy that has risen to World prominance and influence requires hard work, sharp practice, application and ingenuity. What seems to happen in such economies is that a parasitical offspring of the original elite develops with an aversion to creative work, which is difficult, but a love of "public service" which is relatively easy but economically draining and basically self serving. You therefore see a massive increase in such vested interest enterprises and bingo real wealth production declines but the number of bean counters or administrative experts increases exponentially. This happened to the UK and it seems is happening now to the US.

juliaoceania -> RE: Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 3:03:36 PM)
The book American Theocracy ties in US militarism, Christian Fundamentalism and the oil economy's decline.. it is an interesting read if you are interested in these things.

HydroMaster -> RE: Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 3:07:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver quote: ORIGINAL: Aubre I wonder why they didn't mention the comparitive results of the Soviet Union's expansionistic military policies. That worked out so well for them. Oh wait. The Soviet Union doesn't exist anymore precisely because of its military expansion! Actually, your point doesn't make sense. Sarcasm just sails right over your head doesn't it? Anyway, the success rate for any country's economy drops to zero over a long enought time line. What exactly is your definition of a substantial amount of time? England is prime example. They used military power to build and hold a vast empire for quite some time. In that time they enjoyed a flourishing economy. Eventually, yes, that empire basically collapsed due to what?....military power. The decline of their's and growth of others. So to say a country relying on military power to grow will fail is a little short sighted. The examples probably balance on both sides. All empires will eventually fail, the reasons are legion though. The US economy is a becoming a failure mainly because work that can be done here is being outsourced to anyone willing to provide cheap labor. People are out of work but still expected to buy everything they need, which is lack of responsibility on the part of the individual companies...decadence, I agree there. But not on the part of the government. Besides, the current administrations is almost irrelevant at this point. We've got the campaign season starting. A chance for a whole new group of morons to get in and take us down the opposite extreme of action.

caitlyn -> RE: Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 3:31:39 PM)
Well, those are examples of decline, bacause the nation in question was lacking one of the two factors ... valid, but not exactly related to the point you were making. Looking at history, most very powerful nations gained economic strength through the application of military power. Not a popular view, but a reasonably accurate one. You also have powers like the Byzantines, that absolutely rebuilt and revitalized their economy, through warfare. Justinian rebuilt his empire, by sending Belisarius and Narsus off to war. Basil II inherited an almost bankrupt empire, and within five years of the start of his conquest of the Bulgars and Magyars, rebuilt Byzantium into a world power. After Manzikurt, the Comnenan dynasts used the same formula. My real question had to do with supporting your claim that: "Countries don't achieve economic success through military action but through a dynamic economy (and luck of circumstance in many cases), they them keep it by the same dynamism." What country are we talking about? The only one that even slightly comes to my mind, is ancient Egypt, and that's some pretty serious spin to get there.

meatcleaver -> RE: Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 3:38:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HydroMaster England is prime example. They used military power to build and hold a vast empire for quite some time. In that time they enjoyed a flourishing economy. Britain didn't build a vast empire through military power, it was built in many ways similar to the American empire, private enterprise and merchant adventurers and finding itself the sole superpower left after a long drawn out war (The Spanish Empire having been destroyed and the French having to retire injured.) rather like the US after the fall of the USSR. Britain at its height held India with 40,000 men, 20,000 of which were civil servants. It did eventually use its military power (mainly navy power) to keep the sea lanes open and commerce flowing which maintained the empire. The world has changed but in many ways equivalent to the way America does today. Britain floundered because it believed its own publicity, thought it could hold onto its empire with military power rather than commerce and fought a war (WWI) it thought it couldn't lose but which it would have best not taken part in. In actual fact the world had changed and Britain would have declined anyway because of increased competition.

Griswold -> RE: Economic Decline of United States, Eruption of US Militarism (2/14/2007 7:25:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: audioguy58 http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/feb2007/nib1-12.shtml http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/feb2007/nib2-f13.shtml << Increasingly, US policy assumes a form of madness in which every military intervention creates new problems and more enemies, which then have to be eliminated by increased military force. This madness, however, is not simply the product of the members of the Bush administration. It is lodged within the crisis confronting world capitalism as a whole, and the United States in particular. >> What are you trying to say? Say it. Spell it out.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.320313E-02