Republicans pushing to increase military spending

>Republicans pushing to increase military spending

>when in reality they should eliminate the military entirly

Explain. That.

>Hard mode: no conspiracy theorys or racism
>Impossible mode: don't just insult me

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_the_Western_Roman_Empire
money.visualcapitalist.com/currency-and-the-collapse-of-the-roman-empire/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

The government's only real job is to protect the people, thus ensuring our freedoms. Freedom don't mean dick if you're dead

>when in reality they should eliminate the military entirly
Most of the technological advancement in the last centure was made thanks to war or risk of war, Almost All of then made by the military.


WE need a new war, so technology can grow again

counterpoint: if the US fought an actual war today we would almost certainly lose

Im not american i dont give a shit

we need a new war to advance technology. Japan was sacrificed last time, if america needs to be sacrificed this time, so be it

1) I'm not talking about war and neither is OP.
>defense spending
>protecting

2) wat?

Not hard mode at all. Do you think we will achieve peace through disarmament or through military deterrence.

All you need to do is look at history. WWII started because Europe weakened its militaries. Vietnam was lost because we disarmed the south Vietnamese.

Peace is only achieved through military might and the threat of being destroyed. If America weakens her military it creates a power vacuum for evil to arise.

Of course if you are an America hating lefty you are probably convinced that America is the evil one, so I guess getting conquered by ISIS would only be just.

You tell me which you prefer.

Are you saying that government research programs are responsible for most technological advancement? Not private capitalist innovation?

"gotta spend money to make money"


there, theres your answer.

Yes and no

we need the governament reseach prograns to invent new shit, but then we need capitalist innovations to make it cheap and smaller so the public can use it

ITs a symbiotic system, one needs the other.

Don't you like being powerful? Do you not think that military might (and the occasional war too) makes all negotiations easier?

Pacifism is for hippies and losers, the sword talks and bullshit walks.

That's not peace, it's domination. No war != peace.

T. Salty loser

>miltary budget isn't just bombs, airplanes, and ammunition
They do tons of research funding which has lead to many advancements that you take advantage of on a daily basis.

...

the world is filled with rational nations.

these nations will act in their own best interests.

the interests of some nations are diametrically opposed to ours

Rationally, the only things topping some nations from attacking us is the threat of force we have through our armed forces

>what is American imperialism
>what is the petrodollar
>what is a corporate plutocracy
Hard mode done. You're a fucking faggot for not knowing these things already. Impossible mode failed.

Yeah we should disarm completely and just spread our assholes for islam

most interesting reason I've heard regarding military spending is that more or less every country aligned with US interests is also piggybacking off american spending.

When america spends it's tax dollars on military other countries are reaping the benefit. In other words, if the US didn't spend like it does on the military, other countries would have to in turn pick up the slack.

So why does the US do this? Generosity? No. Because if the tools of military exist, it's better too own them, and own the majority of them. thereby you maintain control, and can direct that technology to benefit america the most. Thus America invests in something called the internet, and thereby most of the companies that regulate/own the internet (google, apple, etc) are american companies. Therefore without the military spending the US wouldn't have come to dominate the internet as it has come to.

still, there is substantial waste in the military. it needs a real reality check with it's overhead costs. American systems create substantial bloat at the middle of their structures, with a whole lot of useless people in the middle not really doing much.

Kid logic bullshit
Who the fuck would attack the epicenter of world economy?
Who Russia? china? Yeah ok kid.
And do what? Crash the global economy including their own?
And in the case of china kill off one of its biggest debt payers/trade partners.

>"Rush, Rush, Rush, let me be real clear. The number one priority of President Trump is to rebuild our military, to restore the arsenal of democracy" -Mike Pence

All the military done is make more jihadist.
And they do not do shit when it comes to stopping terrorism here in the US.
Law enforcement/intel does that.
Hey what good did our fat fuck military do for the US on 9/11?

Why do you think oil is sold in USD? Because everybody likes you?

>who the fuck would attack the epicenter of the world economy?
>Who the Gauls? The Vandals? The Huns? Yeah ok kid.
And do what? Crash the global economy including their own?
And in the case of the Gauls kill off one of its biggest allies / trade partners.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_the_Western_Roman_Empire

money.visualcapitalist.com/currency-and-the-collapse-of-the-roman-empire/

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_the_Western_Roman_Empire
Before there was a global economy where what effects one country affects the other.

yfw

It's called deterrence.

Who would you choose to fight?
The scrawny, short kid? Or the tall, burly kid?

cuck

the Romans traded with all other developed civilizations of the time. The Romans were part of a global economy. You are a fool and quite possible an edgy child. Furthermore, the fall of Rome, if you had done any reading on the subject, effected the entire world by causing scarcity and inflation of several grain crops of metals once the Romans stopped growing / mining.

>The Romans were part of a global economy.
With no where near the integration/impact of markets we have today.
>Furthermore, the fall of Rome, if you had done any reading on the subject,
No sorry I didn't waste my time learning useless shit. But if I did I would not sit there like a stupid fuck trying to use that in a debate where it has no use at all.

I've been stock trader for the past 6 years.
Trust me little boy you really do not know wtf you are talking about.
Oh but congrats on studying up on useless shit.

One of the only things government should be responsible for is national defense and our defense spending is less than 20% of the budget while social shit programs are more than half

USA! USA! USA!

>With no where near the integration/impact of markets we have today.

of course this was thousands of years ago. 1,500 years from now the world with be far more integrated (assuming no catastrophe - or even with some thrown in as long as it doesn't destroy humanity) and that won't post hoc undue the world as it is today just as the world as it is today does not change the fact that the same fundamental trade mechanisms existed during the Roman times.

>No sorry I didn't waste my time learning useless shit. But if I did I would not sit there like a stupid fuck trying to use that in a debate where it has no use at all.

???

>I've been stock trader for the past 6 years.
>Trust me little boy you really do not know wtf you are talking about.
>Oh but congrats on studying up on useless shit.

Allow me to explain it to you more simply, you seem to have trouble with the nuance.

The interests of traders are often international. This was no different during the Roman times. There were many international traders at the time. While I understand that from the point of view of a trader war makes no sense, you forget that your point of view is firstly, not the only relevant one and secondly not the most important one. Generals are not stock traders, though they may trade stocks. The acquisition of material wealth does not drive humanity, and it does not drive all people in a position to wage wars. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are actually a stock trader. You are out of touch, and this attitude is not a new attitude, successful traders have held your attitude before. It is not unique to you. It has been tried and it lead to disaster.

>it is still trying.

mfw

That depends, has the scrawny kid come to my house to tell me how to live, how to trade, and how to think? This is what domination results in: people who would rather kill themselves, doing as much damage in the process as possible, to take back the smallest amount of control rather than continue living in bondage. This is where phenomena like school shooters and ISIS come from.

>WWII started because Europe weakened its militaries
weird, i could have sworn it started for the exact opposite reason

>Republicans
Democrats are just as hawkish

>C'mon goy, sell all your weapons and open your borders.

Saged.

listen m8t, I'm intellectually charitable. I'll explain a few points about Sup Forums and chan culture in general because you don't seem to understand it:

arguments here stand on their own merits, not the merits of the poster. That is why anonymity is so important. As such, your personal history (and mine) are irrelevant. You being a 'stock trader for the past 6 years' has no bearing on your argument. Now, I realize this may be jarring to you and may seem even confusing or mean, but if you feel more comfortable interacting on a board where people care about you in particular I suggest facebook.

Your views on the military are shallow at best and foolish at worst, you should either consider my points and contradict them, or (and I believe you can not contradict my points which is why you are not) reflect on them.

>All the military done is make more jihadist.
till it hits a tipping point, then the US can finally start the muslim genocide that the world is waiting for

And finally realize a Greater Israel.

>eliminate the military
i really hope your type never gets into power

>we would almost certainly lose
Maybe you jap faggots would because you make excuses to not make a military but we'd be just fine

>no conspiracy theories or racism
Those are good things

This. Hillary was clamoring for war and Obama never exactly tried to avoid military actions. The troop draw down plan was signed by Bush.

Eisenhower warned us a long tine ago to keep a serious eye on the military-industrial complex and we didnt listen. This is what we get. We are the world police.

You dont want conspiracy theories? Well then go to CNN or Fox for your answers, Im sure they have a perfectly plausible explanation that doesnt implicate any sort of under the table scheming. I mean thats just silly, right? Why would a group of wealthy families with histories spanning hundreds of years and constant presences in a number of secretive orders even consider using that power to their advantage? Only a crazy conspiracy theorist would think that.

>when in reality they should eliminate the military entirly
>How to stop being the worlds sole superpower with one simple trick!

We need to privatize our military

you deserve no better response.

sorry
Was meant for you autistic rambling ass.

>Hillary was clamoring for war

He says, ignoring that Trump is arming Kurdish troops, which is likely to piss of Turkey, which is by now a close ally of Russia.