As for entitlement spending, that's not all for poor people or "people who don't contribute" as ctleng put it. I mean, I don't know, but I doubt that ct is including Medicare and Social Security, for people who spent their whole lives paying taxes and are now retired, as "spending on people who don't contribute." I could be wrong. Maybe he thinks the answers to America's debt crisis is forcing 80-year-olds back to work. And compared to Medicare and SS, stuff like food stamps is a pittance.
stubart: Earth. most peaceful time in the history of our species
war going out of style
Pax Americana explained
Confused or ignorant people might think that Pax Americana is somehow praise for the United States being noble and righteous or rightly guided. And of course that gets the bigots panties in a twist. But it's not that. It's a sound historical theory that if there is a hegemonic power in the world looking out for their own interests and therefore maintaining the status quo, this will reduce the number of large scale conflicts and lead to greater peace and stability. There was also a Pax Hellinica, Pax Romana, Pax Mongolica, and Pax Britannica, but the Pax Americana has been the most profound yet.
During the Cold War you could say that there were two superpowers or you could say that the fact that America's strength was so unchallengeable kept the USSR (and everyone else) from ever getting in to too much trouble. Russia invaded a few countries on their borders (and were pushed back), or engaged in proxy wars with US allies, but nothing even close to the scale of conflict and destruction we saw during WW1 and WW2 where many similarly-strong nations were engaged in total war aiming at completely destroying or dominating one another. Since the collapse of the USSR, American dominance just grew even stronger.
Don't know what BusinessFreak said. Probably something ignorant and/or crazy. I think that guy was purged.
B. $686 billion is only 1/5 of the United States' yearly budget
C. a ~9 year war of 4 trillion dollars isn't enough to have the United States drown in debt.
Missed UAE :/
Iraq is probably worse off today than it would have been had the US not "interfered." American interference in Iran failed- and Iran is not well off. If it had succeeded, then I feel they would probably be much better off. Afghanistan is better off than it was under the Taleban. re: Israel... US involvement there has always been crucial. At which point do you feel that their lack of involvement would have led to something better? When they convinced Israel to give back the Sinai? When they stopped the IDF from taking Damascus and Cairo?
Anyway this conversation is silly because both the original point (that the USA is the biggest target of terrorism, or the most hated), and the counterpoint (that the USA somehow deserves to be hated) are not even true.
They thought about themselves in the same way.
However, I still don't think that it's fair to say that Genghis Khan, Adolf Hitler, Pol Pot and Franklin Roosevelt were all pursuing their own interests or the interests of their nation as they understood them, and so they're all basically the same.
My own personal utopia would be a dissolution of nation-states and the species coming together as one trying to work toward common goals and not seeing themselves as parts of different competing tribes. But right now that doesn't seem terribly realistic. Also, governance by a constitutional geniocracy or meritocracy, as people are far too stupid for democracy to work.
When the people, you are supposed to be helping (as you claim you do) don't like you, you surely do something wrong and you should ask yourself what. If you don't, you've failed.
There is no way to tell why iron/steel was invented, but it was most probably for tools. The radio was an invention by many scientists based on pure science theories. microwave was invented for space travel (as a gas cooker is quite impractical on a rocket :-) ), satellites were developed for all kinds of purposes, cellphones are just a modern application of phones which were developed for trade purposes (ok one might argue that satellite telephones were the next big step towards cellphones) and the internet was absolutely NOT developed for military purposes. It was developed in CERN to be able to quicky communicate results from different locations to a central server.
scientific developments can never be seen as "caused by warfare research", that is just not how stuff is invented. If you had said rocketry, i might have agreed, but your examples are just wrong
You guys invaded to make Canada yours, you guys retreated and the land stayed in the UK's hands, I would consider that a military loss.
I know you yanks don't consider that a loss or a win so most people down there aren't taught that war, but up here in Canada we consider it a win for us and a loss for the USA.
So, more than any other country during the last half-century, the USA has taken the reins of "world police", most particularly when the rogue element in question impacts the economy or security of its own citizens. Do they have a perfect track record? No. But do they have a better track record than anybody else? Guess so, since there's really nobody else trying.
Having said that, I don't think that the British spending cuts have actually taken place yet, you give governments too much credit on the speed of their actions.
America can better take away 300 billion of dollar and put it in the economy and infrastructure
But anyway the overall point was that there are few countries on this list that I think anyone would honestly feel any better about having as global military hegemon than the US. Maybe Canada wouldn't be so bad.
This misconception is almost entirely disconnected from reality. Israelis have been defending themselves since the creation of their nation and Americans have never been as crucial to that as many believe. Prior to May 1948 it was the Czechs who were Israel's biggest arms supplier, though Israelis were manufacturing munitions and weapons themselves in secret under the noses of the British occupiers. After independence, France became the nation's most important ally. It wasn't really until the 1960s that the US began to intervene more in Israeli affairs- and it often wasn't on the side of the Israelis! When Israel conspired with France and the UK to capture the Sinai from Egypt, it was the USA that forced them
The US does give money to Israeli defense. And some non-military aid, as well. But the amount of money they give is a drop in the bucket next to Israel's total defense budget. It's also much smaller than the total amount of aid the US gives to all of nearby Arab and Muslim countries and Palestine.
US politicians talk a lot about Israeli security. But that's not because they care so much about it, usually. It's because Florida is a swing state and it's full of old Jews who have nothing better to do on election day than go out and vote. Only once in a long while does someone get into office so dumb as to confuse rhetoric with real policy, like the current president.
funding it with: oil.
usa: what weapons you got
shop: umm we have guns, grenades, ta-
usa: we'll take it all