US military is a bigger polluter than as many as 140 countries • Hacker News Board

Re: US military is a bigger polluter than as many as 140 countries

#191

Post by yazan94 » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 6:36 PM UTC

manfredo wrote: post #190

Circuits wrote: post #70

Our military (US) and military budget is just another cold war era echo which has been propagating for far too long. There are so many alarmist media outlets in this country who 'make their steak' off of fear mongering (looking at you FOX news) and what's more unfortunate is the general public's seeming endless supply of naive assent too their ideals and tactics. It isn't the US governments fault the military industr…

In the 1960s, defense spending accounted for over 12% of GDP. Today it's between 3-4%. We're not still fighting the cold war, and our defense spending has been reduced by a factor of 3 to 4. It's not very far off from other countries. The UK's is around 2.2% to 2.5%. Russia's is over 4% since the Ukrainian conflict.

without taking into account the changes in purchasing power/inflation, actual budget amount, and changes in GDP, those stats are not really comparing apples to apples.

Re: US military is a bigger polluter than as many as 140 countries

#192

Post by justaaron » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 7:04 PM UTC

Look at all the fake patriots rushing to defend the very thing that is undoing the basic tenets of the USA's founding political philosophies.

The articles point is being wantonly ignored by turning this into yet another debate on whether God appointed the USA to defend the world against itself.

The US military machine pollutes more than 140 countries!

May I suggest that: 1) large powerful countries tend to bully and act pushy and attempt to coerce the smaller and/or poorer countries into doing their bidding

2) nation states as a global system won't likely survive this century, as they are largely squandering what little time we have left to confront the single largest threat humanity has ever faced in it's self-aknowledged history:

human caused climate change.

Hello 45 degree France in 2019 (celsius, my fahrenheit friends... you know: the system the entire rest of the world uses: where freezing of water is 0 and the boiling point of the same is 100... part of the metric system... in which 1 cubic meter of water is 1000 liters, in which you can convert from driving/flying distances to microscopic ones by shifting some zeros... that's another clue that you are actually doing the Devils work rather than Gods, but I digress...)

Re: US military is a bigger polluter than as many as 140 countries

#193

Post by justaaron » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 7:07 PM UTC

justaaron wrote: post #192

Look at all the fake patriots rushing to defend the very thing that is undoing the basic tenets of the USA's founding political philosophies. The articles point is being wantonly ignored by turning this into yet another debate on whether God appointed the USA to defend the world against itself. The US military machine pollutes more than 140 countries! May I suggest that: 1) large powerful countries tend to bully and…

Unilateralism is literally only followed by a singular large country. The entirety of the rest of the world, real-politik-inclusive as it may be (like we aren't LOL) accepts a multi-polar world as a reality.

It's very ironic that this same nation has ANYTHING to say about anyone else, not that we need to bring up Egypt or Saudi Arabia or our unusual orange king that loves Duterte more than Trudeau...

Re: US military is a bigger polluter than as many as 140 countries

#194

Post by justaaron » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 7:10 PM UTC

justaaron wrote: post #193

justaaron wrote: post #192

Look at all the fake patriots rushing to defend the very thing that is undoing the basic tenets of the USA's founding political philosophies. The articles point is being wantonly ignored by turning this into yet another debate on whether God appointed the USA to defend the world against itself. The US military machine pollutes more than 140 countries! May I suggest that: 1) large powerful countries tend to bully and…

Unilateralism is literally only followed by a singular large country. The entirety of the rest of the world, real-politik-inclusive as it may be (like we aren't LOL) accepts a multi-polar world as a reality. It's very ironic that this same nation has ANYTHING to say about anyone else, not that we need to bring up Egypt or Saudi Arabia or our unusual orange king that loves Duterte more than Trudeau...

So, this "more pollution than 140 nations" description encapsulates 2 fundamental truths, IMNVHO

1) That the USA spends more than the entire rest of the world combined in it's "defense" budget, as having more than 700 bases in more than 80 countries has a price.

2) That it's considered above-sacred to allow this military machine to do literally anything it wishes to do, including treating the ocean as it's dumping ground. (is now a good time to mention the Bikini atoll?)

Re: US military is a bigger polluter than as many as 140 countries

#195

Post by mooseburger » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 7:11 PM UTC

lawlessone wrote: post #63

mms1973 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Humanity's big problem is not global warming. It is uncontrolled demographic explosion in Africa and Asia. More mouths to feed only will make ecologic problems worse.

Asia and Africa are just following what Europe and America did years ago.

Yeah, and their only choice is to stop, because the US and Europe alone cannot solve global warming.

Re: US military is a bigger polluter than as many as 140 countries

#196

Post by justaaron » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 7:11 PM UTC

Fjolsvith wrote: post #68

godzilla82 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US mouths eat more than asian and african. Source : https://ourworldindata.org/food-per-person

Ah, but pollution is bigger in Asia. https://waqi.info/

making our stuff, and disposing of our waste.

Re: US military is a bigger polluter than as many as 140 countries

#197

Post by justaaron » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 7:12 PM UTC

Fjolsvith wrote: post #68

godzilla82 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US mouths eat more than asian and african. Source : https://ourworldindata.org/food-per-person

Ah, but pollution is bigger in Asia. https://waqi.info/

not to mention that we openly support regimes that will cut their own peoples legs and pollute their own lands for our business.

Re: US military is a bigger polluter than as many as 140 countries

#198

Post by antientropic » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 7:16 PM UTC

pinkfoot wrote: post #98

PaulHoule wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to be a fan of Noam Chomsky and think that the U.S. was a negative force in the world. I can point to plenty of kneecapping and bad policies. However in 2019 I see the rise of authoritarian states such as China, Russia and their "fellow travelers" and I think that freedom is very much at risk. Green Party activist Howie Hawkins, for instance, goes to rallies where they want to see NATO demolished but when Russ…

> … when Russia is carving up the Ukraine like a steak … it seems like NATO is more relevant today then ever. NATO is not required for the Ukraine. Under the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, 1994 - the USA, UK, and others committed to defend the territorial integrity of the Ukraine in exchange for them giving up the 3rd largest nuclear arsenal. Then you didn't. Why would NATO be different - under an actual…

The Budapest Memorandum contains no such commitment (see https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ukraine._Memorandum_on_Securi...). It states the parties' commitment "to respect the Independence and Sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine", not to go to war if others violate those.

Re: US military is a bigger polluter than as many as 140 countries

#199

Post by yazan94 » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 7:21 PM UTC

gdy wrote: post #189

lostmymind66 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canada, like many other countries around the world, enjoys the luxury of being protected by the US and doesn't have to spend as much money on defense. During WWII, do you think appeasement would have worked? The reason many evil countries aren't bombing the US and Canada is because they know they would be obliterated by the US military due to past campaigns.

"the luxury of being protected by the US" Protected from what? From the White Walkers? Who is there to attack Canada (besides the US itself)? The Great Britain is trying to return the lost colony? France is thinking about taking over the Quebec?

That's a bit more complicated don't you think? 70+ years with America as a superpower (20+ where it is almost the only one in its class) makes it easy to forget that things could have been massively different. Imagine a case where the Soviet Union did not dissolve, but stabilized as a military and economic equal to the US. Would you say that Canada's peace and prosperity would be guaranteed in this alternative universe? What about other countries in eastern Europe or the Middle East?

To give you an couple examples in the current real world, imagine if South Korea or Taiwan didn't have such good relations with America in the post-WW2 peace. It is not that far fetched to think that there could be a single communist Korea, Taiwan could have been swallowed up by mainland China.

Re: US military is a bigger polluter than as many as 140 countries

#200

Post by _iiu1 » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 7:26 PM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #134

dashundchen wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Our relatively wealthy, safe, modern lives with all the bells and whistles and freedoms we in the west take for granted, only is possible because it ultimately sits on top of military dominance that allows us to secure acccess to the proper resources and gives us negotiation power. This belief astounds me. Do you really think your material condition requires the constant death, destruction and turmoil inflicted by…

No but the treath of it does. Name me on other superpower that doesent rely on strong military.

Being aggressive and hateful to the entire world at once will tend to requires substantial bodyguard resources, and will eventually fail.

Peace based upon respect and respect for hard-won rules and structures is the right road.

Switzerland learned this lesson through bloodshed, after a disastrous campaign in which nationals supporting the Duke of Milan got caught in reprisals from his foes, thus beginning the great Swiss tradition of neutrality in foreign conflict.

While I won't argue about the relative morality involved in World War 2, I will argue that all ensuing wars the USA has been involved in have ultimately undermined it's prospects for future peace.

It seems like many of my fellow Americans need a history lesson vis-a-vis Iran.

The USA and UK conspired to overthrow the democratically elected Iranian prime minister Mossadegh, as he threatened to nationalize (their own) oil, which Standard Oil, among others, didn't like very much (Shades of United Fruit and Guatemala anywone?)

We then attempted to install the Shah (we knocked down their democracy because it was too lefty, then we put a king back on the throne.)

The 1979 revolution was a direct reaction to this, and could have been seen coming from a decade before.

This was initially a real revolution, but of course, they purged the lefties and students out and installed a right wing religious government, rather like many Republicans want for America.

And we have the nerve to hammer on them for desiring self-actualization... incredible.

Hypocrisy is not even the beginning of it...