Have we got the us military wrong?

Remove this Banner Ad

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
44,679
40,633
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
I think seeds thinks the US military could of used their power for more evil than they actually have.

Not that I necessarily agree, but that’s his point i believe.
You don’t think they could of used it for more evil? You don’t think they could of stolen lands or ended democracy like military’s have done everywhere else? In a dominant power there has never been a military that has shown as much restraint as the US military in the history of our planet.
 

Brunswick Trap King

Lord Mayor of Melbourne
Jun 1, 2009
13,870
19,038
Brunswick
AFL Club
West Coast
You don’t think they could of used it for more evil? You don’t think they could of stolen lands or ended democracy like military’s have done everywhere else? In a dominant power there has never been a military that has shown as much restraint as the US military in the history of our planet.
So we should be congratulating the US for only invading several nations not more? Bet the Iraqis feel some kind of way about that.
 

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
44,679
40,633
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
The military would never perform a coup on behalf of Trump to stop Biden. Biden's not going to resist the military's wishes, he's not a threat to them, so why would they coup him (especially on behalf of Trump, who was said to have frustrated intelligence agencies because of his inability to concentrate on foreign policy, including interrupting a CIA briefing to order milkshakes (God I love this story).

If the Democrat had been Sanders then maybe they'd have been tempted, but Biden's never stood in the way of the war machine.



How old are you that you were predicting in 1945 the American military would conquer Japan, Europe and Latin America?

The American Empire has differed from the old European empires in that they've not set to expand into colonies and territorial conquests and all that (notably, their first war post-1945 with an old colonial outpost was an absolute disaster in Vietnam). Instead they've installed pro-American Governments in a range of nations around the world, often via coups (eg. Chile, Indonesia, Brazil, Iran) and often training paramilitaries in these countries who have committed genocide (eg. Indonesia again, and Operation Condor, with the reminder that US-backed death squads in Central and South America murdered more people from 1960 to 1991 than were killed in Eastern Europe by communist regimes).
Vietnam wasnt the first post 1945 war. And part of the reason Vietnam and Korea were failures is they didn’t round up all the civilians and take their land. They would of easily won if they did.

you make it sound like a bad thing that they would try to leave countries behind with pro American supportive governments. What an odd thing to say in a world without any global order. Do you think any other country has operated differently in history? Well usually they just install their own people as leaders rather then just find supportive leaders.

They definitely picked the wrong groups some of the time. Not that they always had a choice. And I never said they hadn’t done terrible things. Where do you get your stats on death squads in Latin America cs deaths caused by communism in Eastern Europe from?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
44,679
40,633
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
So we should be congratulating the US for only invading several nations not more? Bet the Iraqis feel some kind of way about that.
We should be congratulating the military for not installing themselves as rulers. For not stealing land for themselves like the european powers before them and like the Chinese intend to do going foward.
 

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
57,001
66,125
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Such is the politics of division preached by the wings.
I don't think we need to dial them up much for it to fall off the edge like dealing with China has.

The modus operandi is that evidence is presented that accuses China of something, they immediately accuse you of doing that exact thing and the discussion ends.

So I wonder, what would have taken for the people talking about the military being used, insert Pelosi airing her thoughts on this in front of a camera in the most calming way, being the group that are now guarded by the military after they ensured power transition to them to have been the ones utilizing them the entire time. One of the first actions taken by the new administration was to send forces back into Syria. The keystone pipeline is binned, oil prices climbing internally. Media begin linking Iran to missile strikes in Syria.

There is significant power in the US military behind the scenes, not as a spear to protect the American way of life but in propping up and maintaining their economic power across the globe. It's been a long time since the US needed to buy significant hardware for a war and I think the pockets might be getting itchy.

There's nothing but circumstantial there but I won't be surprised if, in thirty years, the NYT expose on the Iranian War comes out that conditions were set to manufacture the conflict so support the massive money and power in the military industry that fell in line with their chosen political party.

Building public support for a conflict will take something special though. They will need an attack on home soil again.

---

On the general topic, the US has expensive toys but it's military is mostly jarhead grunts who are trained to the lowest common denominator such that you can have two groups moving through a valley that both know the other is there, one sees movement and opens fire, his team open fire in the same direction, the other team return fire before they are on the radio calling in that they have engaged the enemy. This happened with Australian forces embedded in these groups.

This is part of the reason why Australians didn't want to be under US command, would prefer to spend an extra week on a freezing mountain and call in air support for the US grunts than move in with them.

I think another nation with enough warm bodies that can hold a gun will be able to compete with them just fine.
 

Sweet Jesus

The Lord of the Dance
Dec 20, 2014
26,316
21,423
Hong Kong
AFL Club
West Coast
How does the world work without such a force? How do we all get along?
Huh?

Tell me, who would be in charge of this "global military force"?

We should be congratulating the military for not installing themselves as rulers.
Really?

Would you also like to be congratulated for not shitting your pants today?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
44,679
40,633
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
Huh?

Tell me, who would be in charge of this "global military force"?

Really?

Would you also like to be congratulated for not shitting your pants today?
Do most adults sh**t their pants? If not then it’s a bad comparison.


the world is not ready yet to agree on a government ideology that a global government can be based around. Science is pretty close (although it to hasnt drawn the dots yet) but the broader population of the world is still far away. Religion and nationalism is still a major obstacle. Thus a global military that acts upon the laws of a global government is still not possible.

A partial approach based around a UN framework rather then an actual global government is most likely to be the first approach to a global military. We actually didn’t get all that far from it with UN peace forces only being one step away. But alas with the rise of China and the worlds political ideologies becoming split we are now moving further away. Science and a couple of lucky accidents in China will hopefully bring them back together.
 
Last edited:

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
44,679
40,633
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
Yeah, I probably won't be doing that lmao
And you don’t have to. But you need to be aware that a different military in charge of a country as dominant as the US is, based on history, would be far more destructive to human life and well being then what the US military has been. That’s the story history teaches us. Humans are garbage. But there are different levels of garbage. the ned’y one that comes a long is likely to be much worse.
 

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
57,001
66,125
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
yes to protect US democracy from a Trump backed coup.
It would be a very different narrative if people who were attempting to protest government action today were kept from demonstrating by military occupation of the capital.

It wouldn't be protecting US democracy, it would be protecting US Democrats.

Seen any protests in DC lately?
 

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
44,679
40,633
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
It would be a very different narrative if people who were attempting to protest government action today were kept from demonstrating by military occupation of the capital.

It wouldn't be protecting US democracy, it would be protecting US Democrats.

Seen any protests in DC lately?
And that would be true if we didn’t just have a president try to inspire a coup attempt by telling all his fanatical supporters the election was rigged and they should stand up and fight. But we did.

protesting and rioting cos you don’t like a government policy is a completely different thing to protesting and rioting about overthrowing the government. Do you understand this?
 

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
57,001
66,125
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
And that would be true if we didn’t just have a president try to inspire a coup attempt by telling all his fanatical supporters the election was rigged and they should stand up and fight. But we did.

protesting and rioting cos you don’t like a government policy is a completely different thing to protesting and rioting about overthrowing the government. Do you understand this?
Can you protest in DC right now?

Or is there currently a military between the people and the politicians?
 

Sweet Jesus

The Lord of the Dance
Dec 20, 2014
26,316
21,423
Hong Kong
AFL Club
West Coast
Do most adults sh**t their pants? If not then it’s a bad comparison.
I assume you'd still want congratulations.

the world is not ready yet to agree on a government ideology that a global government can be based around. Science is pretty close (although it to hasnt drawn the dots yet) but the broader population of the world is still far away. Religion and nationalism is still a major obstacle. Thus a global military that acts upon the laws of a global government is still not possible.

A partial approach based around a UN framework rather then an actual global government is most likely to be the first approach to a global military. We actually didn’t get all that far from it with UN peace forces only being one step away. But alas with the rise of China and the worlds political ideologies becoming split we are now moving further away. Science and a couple of lucky accidents in China will hopefully bring them back together.
How would this global government be elected?
 

Blue1980

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 9, 2011
14,965
17,459
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
This might be better served being in the conspiracy board with the other crackpots.
I really don’t think it’s a very big stretch from what we know Trump was up to (persuading Georgian officials to “find” votes, wining and dining Michigan electors, listening to Powell/Giuliani double act etc).

Why is it so unbelievable to you that you are totally certain that Trump never entertained the idea of using the military?
 

Kwality

Hall of Famer
Aug 14, 2011
35,303
13,200
Trafalgar
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Mclaren Mercedes F1
I really don’t think it’s a very big stretch from what we know Trump was up to (persuading Georgian officials to “find” votes, wining and dining Michigan electors, listening to Powell/Giuliani double act etc).

Why is it so unbelievable to you that you are totally certain that Trump never entertained the idea of using the military?
There are no shortage of nutters on both sides of this circus.
 

spinynorman

Premiership Player
Dec 1, 2014
3,045
6,143
Sydney
AFL Club
Richmond
Vietnam wasnt the first post 1945 war. And part of the reason Vietnam and Korea were failures is they didn’t round up all the civilians and take their land. They would of easily won if they did.
I said their first war with a post-colonial state. Granted Korea was a Japanese colony for a couple of decades, but I think there’s a difference between that and a long-standing European colony in the case of Vietnam. Splitting hairs anyway, this line that the US could have annihilated both countries if they wanted to. Arguable, but either way one third of all North Koreans were killed in the Korean War and the North Vietnamese were likewise slaughtered, but yes, Goldwater didn’t get his way of dropping the bomb in Vietnam.

you make it sound like a bad thing that they would try to leave countries behind with pro American supportive governments. What an odd thing to say in a world without any global order. Do you think any other country has operated differently in history? Well usually they just install their own people as leaders rather then just find supportive leaders.
Yes, the US has opted to outsource its authoritarian leaders rather than generally provide themselves. But yes, it’s a bad thing that they’ve installed pro-American governments when those governments have slaughtered the people of the country they’ve ruled over and stolen their wealth on behalf of corporate overlords.

They definitely picked the wrong groups some of the time. Not that they always had a choice. And I never said they hadn’t done terrible things. Where do you get your stats on death squads in Latin America cs deaths caused by communism in Eastern Europe from?
When have they ever made the right choice? I think there’s a strange strain of political thinking of “Oops I Did It Again” (solidarity with Britney, btw) where the US want to do the right thing but keep accidentally selecting allies who accidentally turn out to be awful. It’s awfully naive, and there’s only so many times they can get the benefit of the doubt before you figure human rights are indeed not a concern for American hegemony.

As for my source, it’s in the fantastic Vincent Bevins book The Jakarta Method, which looks at American misdeeds in the name of anti-communism. A rare book that made the 2020 Book of the Year lists for both Communist Party USA and the Financial Times, surely the first time that’s ever happened. A very solid recommendation, and an excellent book.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad