posted on Aug, 3 2014 @ 07:20 PM
I believe it has a lot to do with how fear has been instilled to many people. There are people who actually believe we need to be spending more on
"defense," which is utterly ridiculous. America has proven that even in the past it could mobilize quicker than any other country in the world.
Hitler said he didn't expect the US could threaten Germany militarily until at least 1970, yet the US basically created an entire military industrial
complex from scratch, extremely quickly. This could be done even faster today if our nation was truly threatened.
All of the recent wars had absolutely nothing to do with national defense. Yet despite the fact that the US has not been threatened with a realistic
war since WWII, we are spending more and more on the military every year. I mentioned fear because the majority of citizens have been scared into
thinking that all this is necessary to sustain their way of life, and nothing could be further from the truth. And massive standing armies are no
longer necessary in today's high tech world, but let's say that a war breaks out between actual nations, and the US feels it needs to get involved.
And let's say this war is not a nuclear war, but a traditional war. Okay, so the US will recruit and maybe even draft the soldiers necessary. They
can be trained and mobilized quickly, while the actual standing army is mobilized beforehand. We could cut our military spending significantly yet
still retain our readiness with what we have already got.
There are certain areas that would need to maintain spending, aircraft projects included, but we do NOT need to be churning out 5th generation
aircraft at millions of dollars a pop, considering the majority of them will never be involved in conflict anyway. Our civilizations have progressed
to the point that war is no longer inevitable. Diplomatic solutions can be reached much more easily today, mainly because of the co-dependence of
varying nations. Most of the nations that could pose a serious threat to the United States are allies of the United States. China and Russia both
would avoid an all out war with the US at all costs, because the costs of such a conflict will be too high. Leaders of those nations would have to
worry about direct attacks on themselves in this day and age, when a missile could hit any building you are in without anyone even seeing it coming
until it was too late.
So we spend more money on "defense" than any nation, yet we have little to defend ourselves from. And if the US would stop interfering with other
nations, there wouldn't be so many people who hated the US to begin with, and few would be willing to attack them. Since 9/11 there has been no
large-scale attack by terrorists on the United States, yet measures get more and more draconian, without any proof that these measures have helped one
bit. People are allowing these things to happen because they are afraid. They believe they are in danger of being directly attacked, but this is not
the case. It is not worth spending all this money to prevent something that is not going to happen anyway.
You can spend money in actual defense, but the amounts of money being spent are not necessary until a time of war. And I mean a war that the US cannot
avoid. And considering there are few nations who could attack us to the point of justifying the spending of all this money, why are we doing it? We
are creating more problems overseas by interfering with other nations, while we could be instead eliminating problems at home. America needs to go
back to its isolationist perspective. It is impossible to be truly isolated in today's world, but we are taking things way too far. Bush invades Iraq
and for what reason? There were no WMD's, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, and now ISIS has been indirectly created. Someone tell me how we have
protected American interests and increased our safety? It seems to me that we are making things even more dangerous. And Obama is criticized for
pulling the troops out. I suppose these people think we should just become a permanent fixture in Iraq. It is impossible, and the problem was created
when Hussein was eliminated. Once that occurred it did not matter when we pulled out, the results would be the same. A power vacuum was created.
So knowing what we now know, how many of you still think that all that money we spent, and all that money being spent today as a direct result of
those horrendous policies, was better than spending that money at home on a problem that can actually be solved? If someone believes that then I
don't know what to say to you. It just defies logic.