E
- Status
G
gilliam
Guest
Elaine’s Cross said:
Sorry, Elaine, but the President of the United States is Commander in Chief of the armed forces (that is established in the Constitution of the United States) and it isn’t him, nor the neocons that declare war, but congress (also in the Constition). Iraq was no different.
If you want a different congresss, stop loosing elections.
E
Elaine_s_Cross
Guest
Congress did not vote to go to war. They abrogated their duties by voting to “allow” the president to go to war if and when he saw fit, IMO a very dangerous concept. Even if it is construed that Congress approved it, that doesn’t make it right.
E
Elaine_s_Cross
Guest
Gilliam, you must not have read the entire article as its major thrust has to do with the acceptance of militarism by average citizens of this country, not simply the military brass. The author believes that this is dangerous for our nation, and I happen to agree.
When our defense budget is a large as all the rest of the world combined, I think that is a bit much. Perhaps we should scale back.
When our defense budget is a large as all the rest of the world combined, I think that is a bit much. Perhaps we should scale back.
G
gilliam
Guest
Elaine's Cross:
From what I can tell we are not a militant nation (at least not compared to so many others out there). Anyway, I would seriously suggest you read The Pentagon’s New Map if you want to know what the ‘military brass’ are thinking. They are not thinking about rampent militarism.
G
gnjsdad
Guest
Elaine's Cross:
Those of us who oppose the growing militarist trend sometimes get slandered here as America-hating liberal leftists, but the author of the article you posted cannot be attacked as such. He’s a West Point graduate, Vietnam veteran, and a former contributor to The Weekly Standard and National Review.
I had thought about posting this article myself, but you beat me to it
Those of us who oppose the growing militarist trend sometimes get slandered here as America-hating liberal leftists, but the author of the article you posted cannot be attacked as such. He’s a West Point graduate, Vietnam veteran, and a former contributor to The Weekly Standard and National Review.
G
gilliam
Guest
I don’t think I ever accused you of hating Americans.I had thought about posting this article myself, but you beat me to it
Those of us who oppose the growing militarist trend sometimes get slandered here as America-hating liberal leftists, but the author of the article you posted cannot be attacked as such. He’s a West Point graduate, Vietnam veteran, and a former contributor to The Weekly Standard and National Review.
Not caring about Iraqis, yes, hating Americans no.
M
mpav
Guest
I don’t know that the U.S. military is too large. Last I heard, the criticism was that current U.S. engagements have stretched us too thin, and we would be unable to respond to a military threat from another quarter.
“…major thrust has to do with the acceptance of militarism by average citizens”
I think polls show U.S. citizens deeply divided over the action in Iraq. Even those who supported it seem anxious to get it over and to avoid further engagements. We are cetainly not a militaristic people. No American war has ever been entered into without strong factions of dissent. On many US campuses military recruiters met with protests or on some, are not allowed at all.
9/11 changed the mood of the country. The military and intelligence cutbacks of the 90s (remember the debate over how to spend the ‘peace dividend’?) were maybe premature. The world remains a dangerous place. Our friends around the world reduce their military spending as a matter of choice. China, meanwhile is bulking up. Korea spends its limited resources on its military. The Islamic world continues to seek nukes. I don’t think I’m overly militaristic in wanting my nation to be prepared to defend itself and its interests.
Of course, while history never repeats itself we might recall the 1930s when the Western democracies spurned military preparedness, even in the face of arms build-ups by their foes.
If our defense budget is too large, maybe its because we’re picking up the slack for those who, once again, don’t want to spend on the military. Let America handle it, is their mantra. In Kosovo the U.S. military was the force behind effective NATO action to stop a genocide. The world sits on its hands watching genocide in Africa. When the tsnunami struck it was the US military which had the capability to provide immediate aid while the UN debated and many other countries rushed to find transport to act on their good intentions.
As for Congress, it appropriated the funds necessary for the military action in Iraq. We haven’t declared a war since 1941, yet we keep using our military overseas in military engagements. If Congress doesn’t want us to be there, the members can do something about it.
“…major thrust has to do with the acceptance of militarism by average citizens”
I think polls show U.S. citizens deeply divided over the action in Iraq. Even those who supported it seem anxious to get it over and to avoid further engagements. We are cetainly not a militaristic people. No American war has ever been entered into without strong factions of dissent. On many US campuses military recruiters met with protests or on some, are not allowed at all.
9/11 changed the mood of the country. The military and intelligence cutbacks of the 90s (remember the debate over how to spend the ‘peace dividend’?) were maybe premature. The world remains a dangerous place. Our friends around the world reduce their military spending as a matter of choice. China, meanwhile is bulking up. Korea spends its limited resources on its military. The Islamic world continues to seek nukes. I don’t think I’m overly militaristic in wanting my nation to be prepared to defend itself and its interests.
Of course, while history never repeats itself we might recall the 1930s when the Western democracies spurned military preparedness, even in the face of arms build-ups by their foes.
If our defense budget is too large, maybe its because we’re picking up the slack for those who, once again, don’t want to spend on the military. Let America handle it, is their mantra. In Kosovo the U.S. military was the force behind effective NATO action to stop a genocide. The world sits on its hands watching genocide in Africa. When the tsnunami struck it was the US military which had the capability to provide immediate aid while the UN debated and many other countries rushed to find transport to act on their good intentions.
As for Congress, it appropriated the funds necessary for the military action in Iraq. We haven’t declared a war since 1941, yet we keep using our military overseas in military engagements. If Congress doesn’t want us to be there, the members can do something about it.
G
gilliam
Guest
They did more than appropriate funds, they authorized action, which constitutionally only they can do. Ref: Joint Resolution Authorizing the Use of Military Force Against Iraq
E
Elaine_s_Cross
Guest
- Status