Neo-Con War Addiction Threatens Our Future

Ron Paul forgets that the Democrats supported the war in Iraq. At any rate, the neo-cons have been out of power now for several years and are not likely to return to power anytime soon. One could hardly call Obama's trip to Israel a neo-con idea. Libertarians can always decline to volunteer for the military, and if they invest their wealth in oil commodities, Libertarians can protect themselves from inflation.

 

When people like the Clintons and John Kerry agreed with the GOP that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and the Democrats had passed a resolution calling for the overthrow of Saddam, the butcher of Bagdad, they you can hardly call the resultant fiasco the work of the neo-cons and their doctrines.

The real root of the problem is that the Democrats under the leadership of Idaho US Senator Frank Church gutted and dismantled the CIA under the liberal doctrine that spies caused wars and that the USA didn't need spies with space satellites and when we had backward allies that would pass information from their ungentlemanly spy systems that would not be demolished as enlightened liberalism was doing in 1972 to the US system.

Poncho, Libertarians like to blame the GOP but give liberal Democrats seem to get a pass from Libertarians. As I posted before, Libertarians can evade the war policy of the USA by declining to volunteer in the military and they can protect their wealth by speculating in oil commodities, perhaps the true currency of the world.

Poncho, the tension between the GOP and Libertarians does not deal with neo-con doctrines on war. It stems from the fact that the GOP has always taken stands on social issues, such as calling for an amendment to the US Constitution to protect the life of the unborn child--an idea suggested by President Reagan but rejected by Libertarians such as Ron Paul. On social issues, the Libertarian Party in the majority agrees more with the Democrats, just as they agree with the liberal Democrats on the neo-con war policy--the Democrats, who were for it before they were against it.

 

Poncho, Ron Paul doesn't care for Reaganism and he doesn't like the Iraq war. What is his complaint with the Democrats? The Democrats agree with Ron Paul that there should not be an amendment to the US Constitution to protect the life of the unborn child, and the Democrats agree with Ron Paul and you about the neo-cons. All I have been saying is that Libertarians are closer to Democrats in some respects.

As a Republican, I am not worried about corporations (that's a Dem thing to worry about). I think that the Saudis are a spent force and are laughable in allowing the Dems to bow to them. As for Israel, President Harry Truman was a Southern Baptist, as you know, so the Evangelical connection to Israel goes back to 1948 when Truman became the first world leader to extend diplomatic recognition to Israel. I hate to admit it publically here on the Baptist Board, but I am more like Hal Lindsey on Israel than any of the three parties--GOP, Dem, or Libertarians. They have had a bad deal in that they are entitled to more land. They are the 4th strongest military force in the world and they do not particularly need American money but it is useful to them. They certainly hold the Arab world in check for us because they have enough nukes to take out every Arab oil well in the middle east and therefore I sleep well at night, Poncho. Jews tolerate me--Moslems do not tolerate me.

 

Looks like to me that any time the stock prices of the industrial military complex needs a boost, the war drums begin banging against someone.

 

The industrial military complex is a myth created by conspiracy theorists to gain sympathy for whatever wacko nut case fear they want to create. They need a clear boogy man, couldn't find one and then created one.

 

I'll make sure and tell president Eisenhower who referenced just such a boogie man in his farewell speech

http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html

Boogie man indeed

 

There is no money in war. Usually, the money is borrowed by the government. The payments to veterans and their survivors go on long after the war is over. When I was a teenager, the last of the civil war veterans and their spouses passed away. When I was an adult, the same was true for the World War I soldiers. I remember when Ike said that, and he was in a position to know, but that was over 50 years ago. It just doesn't work that way anymore and hasn't for a long time. Ike merely noted that we now had industries geared solely for weapons, etc., which we had not had in the past. Ike was concerned that these industries might egg us into a war for their profits. But Ike was slightly exaggerating. We had had gun manufacturers since the 19th century. DuPont made gun powder and explosives for a living and only later got into chemicals. The situation in Europe was much the same.

Ike and MacArthur both made idealistic statements on peace. Yes, we should work always for peace, but, no, our efforts will not bring worldwide peace. Ike's motto during his administration was Peace Through Strength, and I believe that Ike stated the proper role of our military in the world. I think that we could use another tough General as President. In the 19th century, our Presidents frequently had military experience. Recently, they seldom have had military experience. Our military, like our healthcare, is the finest in the history of the world.

 

Yes, there is money in war, go look at the defense sector of the various stock markets, there is lots of money in war.

No money in war for the government perhaps, but for the contractors making the bullets, jeeps, guns, uniforms, etc... there is lots of money.

 

Maybe you are right but I still don't think that the military industrial complex causes wars. Our economy in Indiana is moribund and to me it is very sad. And I know that some sections of the country are suffering more than Indiana. As for West Texas, I lived 7 years in El Paso, but if I could move back, I think that I would check out Amarillo. One of my teachers was Haldeen Braddy. A few years ago, I read his book Mexico and the Old Southwest: People, Palaver, Places and learned the Big Bend was where the expression originated "Out west where the men are men and the women are glad of it." I also was a student of C. L. Sonnichsen.