Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

War Is a Racket (1933)

man.fas.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 235 posts

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#171

Post by einpoklum »

pirate787 wrote: post #61
the-dude wrote: post #28

We can clearly hear the drums beating from across the Atlantic. A new adventure was already expected with the change of administration.

It's worth noting Trump was the first US President to not start a war in half a century.

Well, that's not for lack of trying. He subjected Iran to a strict regime of (illegal) sanctions, then assassinated Iranian general Qassem Soleimani. That could easily have started a war.

Now, I should perhaps qualify the above, since there are reasons to believe that Trump was not really able to get his way, foreign-policy-wise, due to military-intelligence-industrial complex objections, plus his defense secretary, head of the CIA etc (poor staffing which is mostly on him).

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#172

Post by School-Cotton »

friedturkey wrote: post #165
scyzoryk_xyz wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

*some clueless young guys have to go and kill untold numbers of innocent people in another country. It never ceases to amaze me how citizens of the USA place the vast majority of sympathy to their beloved “troops” and barely any on those who actually get invaded.

Yep. About 5000 American soldiers died in the Iraq War. A tragic loss, undeniably. Iraqi deaths? Estimated to be between 400,000 and 1,000,000. That doesn't include deaths that will follow for decades from lasting damage and the instability that followed in the region and continues to this day.

People everywhere care more about people like them than about foreigners. German people were more upset about the 200 people killed in the 2021 floods than about the hundreds of thousands killed in the Indian Ocean Tsunami.

It’s sad, but not specifically American.

(That said, I always use the number of Iraqi deaths when arguing that GWB is the worst president of all time.)

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#173

Post by fuoqi »

drran wrote: post #81
fuoqi wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you call the verifiable facts in my comment "Russian propaganda"... "The worse for the facts", am I right?

Yes, it's Russian propaganda. See facts at https://euvsdisinfo.eu/

So instead of pointing to at least single false fact in my comment you point me to a website which quite aggressively translates the official Western stance and does not even tries to look as independent (it's an EEAS outlet), which I should blindingly trust? For reference, I do know both Russian and Ukrainian (the latter to an extent of being able to understand news), so I built my opinion based on Ukrainian media and social networks.

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#174

Post by einpoklum »

solatic wrote: post #133

Please read your military history. Soldiers who have never fought are less capable in battle. It doesn't really matter how much they train or how many drills are run. Nothing really prepares you for the trauma of watching your friend of many years die by getting his head blown off next to you, or worse, bleeding out while crying for his mother. There are two kinds of people who witness that: those who curl up and pra…

> But in the world we live in

Read: The world the USA maintains

> there are too many military and paramilitary actors who are not guided by such Enlightened ideals.

A majority of which being: US forces per se, forces of US allies (NATO etc.), and forces of states which the US has paid off, extorted, or otherwise manipulated.

> What will we do if we are not prepared and they come knocking on our door?

But what will "they" do when _you_ come knocking on _their_ door? And they can never 'prepare' to fend off the leading military power in the world.

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#175

Post by fuoqi »

drran wrote: post #80
fuoqi wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

> Have you heard about almost all opposition media in Ukraine being closed by simple executive orders without any courts being involved? s/opposition/Russian/g

So it's all right to close media just because it's "Russian"? Ok...

You know, Ukraine has media control agency and laws which regulate quite strongly what can be and can not be said and shown by media. Opposition media was regularly pressured by this agency (while handling of "pro-Western" media was much more lenient), but in the end they were unable to close them using this legal channel, so instead Zelensky simply used unconsitutional executive order.

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#176

Post by 7952 »

hilbert42 wrote: post #147
SturgeonsLaw wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't help that each new generation gets a barrage of propaganda pushed onto them equating military service with heroics, honour, patriotism, and so forth. We could teach the next generation that war is bad, if we wanted to, but since the decision to go to war is made by the same government that sets the educational curriculum, well, odds are slim.

"It doesn't help that each new generation gets a barrage of propaganda pushed onto them equating military service with heroics, honour, patriotism, and so forth." I certainly agree. In my opinion, the basic principles are simple but in practice things get complicated very quickly. If I'm not careful here I'll be quoting everyone from pacifists through to Clausewitz and we will all be bogged down in a mire of detail.…

History is a problematic subject because it creates false dichotomys all over the place. When actually sacrifice for your country, your community, or your friends is admirable. It is also an utterly pointless waste. A waste that can be justified at some levels of abstraction but not at others. These points are not inconsistent. But people want to take one simple truth away from the complexity. History has obvious lessons in hindsight and can be turned into trite propaganda in the moment.

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#177

Post by verisimi »

scyzoryk_xyz wrote: post #153
spaetzleesser wrote: post #51

I started paying attention to this when I lived close to DC around 2002. Bush was cutting the top tax brackets while ramping up for the Iraq invasion, the defense contractors made record profits (I remember one CEO making around 30 million) and the DC metro was plastered with ads touting the patriotism of the defense contractors. I thought "these guys are making record money, are getting their taxes reduced, try to l…

*some clueless young guys have to go and kill untold numbers of innocent people in another country. It never ceases to amaze me how citizens of the USA place the vast majority of sympathy to their beloved “troops” and barely any on those who actually get invaded.

"It never ceases to amaze me how citizens of the USA place the vast majority of sympathy to their beloved “troops” and barely any on those who actually get invaded."

Yes - but don't confuse average people in the street with the ra-ra'ing media. Especially in war situations, it is the media's job to propagandise the populace, and ensure that 'the people' are behind whatever it is they are doing. Dissenting opinions will not get any air.

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#178

Post by AussieWog93 »

mikewarot wrote: post #134
missedthecue wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do conventional businesses, of which there are far more than defense contractors, lack lobbying ability of their own?

They don't have a budget from a Trillion dollars per year of revenue at higher than average profit margins to defend.

Did the defense industry have this huge budget back in the pre-WW1 days, though?

(Genuine question, I honestly have no idea)

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#179

Post by 7952 »

hilbert42 wrote: post #131
anm89 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you believe there is some objective thing called "just"?

Pretty simple really. If you are being invaded without provovation and every attempt at diplomacy has failed, and going past form, you know that if your enemy succeeds in overrunning you, then your women wiil be raped and you and your children killed then you've no option other than to fight with all your might. That's the extreme case, at what point on a sliding scale the options change is moot and subject to vigouo…

The justice of the case does not tell you how much suffering will be caused by a particular course of action. People chose to run away, do nothing, comply, or collaborate all the time. And that may be the best way to protect your family. Talking about "just war" is a way or moralising a practical decision.

Re: War Is a Racket (1933)

#180

Post by ljm »

scyzoryk_xyz wrote: post #153
spaetzleesser wrote: post #51

I started paying attention to this when I lived close to DC around 2002. Bush was cutting the top tax brackets while ramping up for the Iraq invasion, the defense contractors made record profits (I remember one CEO making around 30 million) and the DC metro was plastered with ads touting the patriotism of the defense contractors. I thought "these guys are making record money, are getting their taxes reduced, try to l…

*some clueless young guys have to go and kill untold numbers of innocent people in another country. It never ceases to amaze me how citizens of the USA place the vast majority of sympathy to their beloved “troops” and barely any on those who actually get invaded.

Considering how those same troops are treated (or, more aptly, not treated) after they become veterans, that sympathy isn't exactly worth much either.
Post reply on HN