Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Americans Addicted To War?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 07:48 AM
link   
I'm very concerned about the current state of American opinion.

It seems from the US news I see and US posters on here that Americans have become addicted to war. If it's not Iran and China who must be opposed and threatened then it's NK and Russia.

We seem to have people on here now who state with absolute certainty that Russia is a threat, China will attack us etc etc. They openly discuss WW3 despite no concrete evidence of any real threat to the US's existance.

If they do provide any evidence / links they're inevitably from partisan sources quoting lots of opinion and very few facts.

What has happened to America, and its critical faculties?

The land of hippies, green issues and feminism seems to have transmogrified into an isolationist, bullying, war-addicted, expansionist aggressor that sees threats everywhere.

Perhaps this is what the NWO wanted? perhaps it's the only way GWB can retain power? but the current stance of America, its readiness to bomb, invade and threaten anyone and everyone who critcises it in any way is a damning betrayal of previous generations

The implications for the World are deeply worrying.

RIP the America the World admired




posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 08:15 AM
link   
Americans aren't addicted to war, but we are addicted to freedom.

America isn’t threatening or attacking anyone or country that criticizes us. If we did, dopes like Castro Chavez would be dead by now. We do threaten and will attack persons / countries that threaten us.

NK launching missiles without ANY notice, is a dangerous and provocative act. They need to be dealt with.


[edit on 6-7-2006 by Number23]



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 08:19 AM
link   


Americans aren't addicted to war, but we are addicted to freedom.


PLEASE tell me you are being sarcastic.

Americans are addicted to War, the vast majority of the population are against the war.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 08:23 AM
link   
What you're seeing is a small slice of America (and the rest of the world.)

Quite often the noisiest are assumed to hold the majority's opinion, but this isn't always true. Take a look at the recent Pew Research polls and you'll see a country that is NOT happy with the President and is increasingly unhappy with the war.

Here on ATS you're also seeing a small population being very noisy. If you'll notice, it's the same set of about 30-40 of our members that keep these issues going. We get others slipping in for a comment or two, but in the main there's just a few energetic posters keeping that going. I think that a direct poll would show a very different picture.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 08:28 AM
link   
America was founded by old English money, and is still run by the old money. England's political history is nothing but war and conquest. Since the same families are still running things, then I believe it's in the blood.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 08:33 AM
link   
Indeed it would....

We are not addicted to war, but the powers that be are trying very hard to convince us that we just might need to be. Those of us who hold conversations about things other than Bud Light or Nascar or shotguns see through the fog. I personally understand the reasons we need to be hardline with people like NK, or Iran, or Venezuela. For this same reason I am ashamed that we are constantly lied to and mislead about the reasoning for our involvement in other countries affairs.

NK has gotten away with their shennanigans for this long because they offer us nothing other than to keep quiet. The missle launches were little more than temper tantrums for a bigger allowance. While it does go a long ways to further isolate NK, it also goes a long way to get Kim a bigger check on paydays also.

Like a friend said-
Threaten to build missles: 50 million dollars
Threaten to build Nukes: 100 million dollars
Actually fire a missle: Priceless.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 08:40 AM
link   
Are we addicted to wars? Maybe. Is the opposing sides that we fought against for the last half century that are addicted to wars as well? Maybe also.
If you get my meaning.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by aelphaeis_mangarae



Americans aren't addicted to war, but we are addicted to freedom.


PLEASE tell me you are being sarcastic.

Americans are addicted to War, the vast majority of the population are against the war.
If the vast majority of the population is against war; how then are we addicted to war? Please explain.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 09:46 AM
link   
Easy, the vast majority of Americans aren't in control of the military.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Easy, the vast majority of Americans aren't in control of the military.

Then shouldn't your statement be the American military is addicted to war?



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
Are we addicted to wars? Maybe. Is the opposing sides that we fought against for the last half century that are addicted to wars as well? Maybe also.
If you get my meaning.


In addition, a superpower always needs an enemy to measure its power with. During the Cold War it was the USSR (and the other way around).

The fact remains the majority of the American people supported Bush, elected him, and support(ed) the war in Iraq.

In my opinion the real cause, besides of the statement I made earlier on, is to fight a battle in order to maintain the position of the US as superpower. I think it's a useless war, a war that cannot be won, a war that will end up in a much bigger war, and finally leads to the end of the US as superpower.

History teaches that an empire should go to war for one of two reasons: (1) to defend itself or (2) benefit from war; if not, as Paul Kennedy illustrates in his magisterial The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, a military overstretch will drain its economic resources and precipitate its collapse. Economically speaking, in order for an empire to initiate and conduct a war, its benefits must outweigh its military and social costs. Benefits from Iraqi oil fields are hardly worth the long-term, multi-year military cost. Instead, Bush must have went into Iraq to defend his Empire. Indeed, this is the case: two months after the United States invaded Iraq, the Oil for Food Program was terminated, the Iraqi Euro accounts were switched back to dollars, and oil was sold once again only for U.S. dollars. No longer could the world buy oil from Iraq with Euro. Global dollar supremacy was once again restored. Bush descended victoriously from a fighter jet and declared the mission accomplished—he had successfully defended the U.S. dollar, and thus the American Empire.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 10:06 AM
link   
Addicted to Freedom? That's laughable, considering the fact that most Americans still think they're so free. Ever see those bumper stickers that say "Freedom isn't free"? Well it's true, problem is Americans haven't paid that bill in a long, long time. The sheeple are ignorant of the conditioning taking place. The war on terrorism is nothing more than a method of coaxing society into complacence, as civil liberties are revoked, one by one. Americas biggest threat is America itself. The complacence of its population is paving the way for the Police State.

Sooner or later however (most likely much later), Americans will wake up. They will remember things like the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence, etc., and wonder where the hell they went. The complacence the powers that be bred so successfully will give way to dissent, and we will take our country back. Maybe then we'll stay out of everyone elses business, and the world can be a better place.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 10:18 AM
link   
Hey,
Im american, and right now I am addicted to mountain dew which i need to read all these general/broad/speculation posts on ATS/BTS.
Next !......



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 10:25 AM
link   
Unit.....

What freedoms have been lost?

It is amazing that people still complain about freedoms being lost......and yet they can never name them........


Why is that?



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 10:27 AM
link   
Oh, I can name at least a dozen, but I think we already have a thread on that

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 10:42 AM
link   
Well you should name a 'dozen' then....because no rights have been lost....and in typical fashion (just like I mentioned in my previous post) the people who spread this BS can not name any rights they have lost.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 10:51 AM
link   
Personally, I lost the right to an attorney
The right for a speedy trial,
My phone calls
Freedom of assembly
Rights to privacy
.....
Yadda yadda yadda,

As was brought up in the other thread, if you don't use your rights, and only care about having a cold mountain dew in your hand, then you won't miss anything. But for me, I demand the right to voice my opinion in an appropriate public arena without fear of being arrested. I know first hand that we've lost those rights.

Once again I will say, Ferret, if you never used them, you'll never miss them.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Oh, I can name at least a dozen, but I think we already have a thread on that

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Started re-reading that thread and still only found a few vague references to so-called freedoms lost. Most of the posts seemed to be more about (an irrational?) fear that some freedoms might be lost.

We keep seeing refrences to the U.S. being a dictatorship and/or a police state, but where is the real evidence? You know like silence from the opposition because they've all been rounded up.

The simple fact that so many keep posting the foulest diatribes against the U.S. is proof to me that the freedoms are still there.

Now, U.S. addicted to war? The U.S. got where it is through over 200 years of our own blood, sweat and tears. To all the people in other countries that through circumstances within (your own poor governments and militaries) or outside (geo-location/resources) your control have not and never will match what the U.S. has accomplished, lose your envy-based reasoning and just make the best of what you have in your country. Like any living creature on this planet, we will fight if we have to to maintain what we feel is ours to defend.


[edit on 7/6/2006 by centurion1211]



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 11:09 AM
link   
I don't think it's just the US - it's the species that is addicted to war.

However due to the US's WW2 and Cold War involvement, I think the US has developed a habit of interfering in the affairs of others that gets us in trouble in this respect.

Plus there does seem to be a strong strain of the "tough guy" mentality in the US - there is a whole subculture of armchair warriors that seem identify a little too strongly with the US's military strength and prowess - almost as if they were overcompensating for something


Add a little braindead hypernationalism, and you have a recipe for disaster. Fortunately it seems to me the unfolding failure of the "get tough" mentality as exemplified in Iraq has pulled the rug out from under this crowd to some extent.


“All nationalists have the power of not seeing resemblances between similar sets of facts,” said Orwell. “Actions are held to be good or bad, not on their own merits but according to who does them, and there is almost no kind of outrage-torture, the use of hostages, forced labor, mass deportations, imprisonment without trial, forgery, assassination, the bombing of civilians-which does not change its moral color when committed by ‘our’ side.… The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.”


[edit on 7/6/06 by xmotex]



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 11:20 AM
link   
This is not a post about internal US issues about loss of personal freedoms (real or imagined) it's about the US peoples' apparent addiction to war.

Can we not debate the wider issue without descending waters aleady well-stirred?

centurion1211 - I'm not sure where you get this 'envy' concept, do you really think the World envies you? That all the people of Europe would willing give up what we have in return for what you have? Sorry to tell you this isn't the case.

Re you defending 'what we feel is ours to defend' - where does this stop? The perception given is that the US will decide that anything on the planet is 'ours to defend' and do so with threats or force and yet choses to regularly ignore other viewpoints on the planet (Kyoto, the UN etc etc) - doesn't this strike you as hypocritical?





new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join