Will a new war help America's economy?

[Shirohebi]

If you only had a Lambo!!!!

 

[EnDash]

depends on what you mean by "economy". some people will defenitly gain a lot from war, some people will lose a lot from war. in the end it might show a statistic of national growth or at least stayed the same (if the only thing that changed was going into war). but you can defenitly know for sure that a lot of companies and people will make less money and a lot of companies and people will make more money.

economy is based on demand, in war there is demand for weapons, miliatry technology and intel. in peace those things are not rushed and other things are demanded more.

btw, the first american general porpuse computer, called the ENIAC from the 40's, was funded by the miliatry to compute ballistic trajectories for missiles. so in fact the computer revolution was helped by the fact that you needed to know where bombs will hit.

 

[YowYan]

a country bombing another country does not a good economy make.

a productive economy produces. Wars don't produce wealth. They destroy it.

the rest of reizon's post was about Social Darwinism. From a cynic's perspective, this has some validity (though it's completely morally repulsive, and I feel insulted to have my country accused of practicing it) , but it has nothing to do the economy.

edit; just reread that. I'm not anti-war. There are certain instances where a war is necessary to defend morals (removing evil men like Hitler and bin Laden). "The Tree of Liberty must be, from time to time, renewed with the blood of patriots and tyrants." However, wars don't produce for the economy. They are justified for other reasons.

You're not anti-war?
You do know that most, if not, all wars are based on lies and private interest? Including the Bin Laden scam and USA officials financing Hitler's succes?

 

[uchihajaime]

You're not anti-war?
You do know that most, if not, all wars are based on lies and private interest? Including the Bin Laden scam and USA officials financing Hitler's succes?

Bin Laden was an evil man who murdered 2000+ innocents. He deserved to be hunted down like any other criminal or murderer. He deserved to die. the same with Hitler except with millions not thousands of causalities.

Of course all wars have some private interests. No war is fought over purely ideal reasons, because humans are flawed creatures. We take something ideal and then try to profit of it. The idea is to look at the reason to go to war. Weigh the private interests and the moral reasons to go to war. You can't say, "No, I won't stop a madman from murdering millions of people because some cabal will make money off the weapon sales." If you do that, then you're allowing deaths which you could prevented. This is immoral. the only thing worse is killing them yourself.

Pacifism is stupid. You just ignore the world and its problems. You can't be idealistic in his not-idealistic world. You just thumb your nose at people who could save. There comes a time when all must fight for what the believe in. If you aren't willing to fight for what you believe, then why do you believe in it!?

so what if a couple Americans funded Hitler (source and statistics please), this has nothing to do with going to war and removing that madman.

 

[YowYan]

Bin Laden was an evil man who murdered 2000+ innocents. He deserved to be hunted down like any other criminal or murderer. He deserved to die. the same with Hitler except with millions not thousands of causalities.

Of course all wars have some private interests. No war is fought over purely ideal reasons, because humans are flawed creatures. We take something ideal and then try to profit of it. The idea is to look at the reason to go to war. Weigh the private interests and the moral reasons to go to war. You can't say, "No, I won't stop a madman from murdering millions of people because some cabal will make money off the weapon sales." If you do that, then you're allowing deaths which you could prevented. This is immoral. the only thing worse is killing them yourself.

Pacifism is stupid. You just ignore the world and its problems. You can't be idealistic in his not-idealistic world. You just thumb your nose at people who could save. There comes a time when all must fight for what the believe in. If you aren't willing to fight for what you believe, then why do you believe in it!?

so what if a couple Americans funded Hitler (source and statistics please), this has nothing to do with going to war and removing that madman.

The only type of war I'd support is that of civil revolution against a tyrannical government.

About your comment on pacifism. Try to imagine that every citizen was aware of the fact they were being misled with war propaganda and the way the system was build promoted obedience and obedience only.. Imagine all the people knowing the real reasons why we go to war.. Do you think the authorities could get us to go to war if we were "awake".

 

[uchihajaime]

The only type of war I'd support is that of civil revolution against a tyrannical government.


About your comment on pacifism. Try to imagine that every citizen was aware of the fact they were being misled with war propaganda and the way the system was build promoted obedience and obedience only.. Imagine all the people knowing the real reasons why we go to war.. Do you think the authorities could get us to go to war if we were "awake".

that's it! Time for a tirade.


So, I assume you would support a war against Hitler, despite your previous comment. Now, you're contradicting yourself.

You're assuming the only reason people go to war is misleading propaganda. First off, yes, it's a reason to so to war. It increases the number of recruits. I've seen propaganda from both World Wars, but you're the "ignorant little bubba" (from her neg rep, though I will admit to neg reping her as well) if you assume the only reason we go to war is because of propaganda. Propaganda is made for a mix of reasons. Wars are started for a mix of reasons. Everything that has happened in the course of history of humanity has happened for a mix of reasons. In history, there is no such thing as a sole cause, the ignorance.

I didn't support the war against Bin Laden because I was told to by propaganda. You're assuming everyone that has ever support a war did so because they were told to. You are assuming humans can't think for themselves. I reasoned that a mass-murdering hypocrite needs to die for the world to be a better place. First, there's justice for families he'd made suffer. Second, there's more safety in the world now that one less criminal mastermind is alive. Third, justice is served. There needs to be some kind of justice for the thousands that were burned, boiled and crushed to death and for their families that suffered for a decade. According to you, those suffering families will get nothing for the years of absolute pain of knowing the man that ripped a hole into their hearts by taking away a loved one. Why? Because Bin Laden wasn't a government. If you commit mass-murder and you're not a government, it's okay. They will be no repercussions. There will be no justice. To me, this is egregious.

You only support war against tyrannical governments. It's much more complex than that. You can't ask "Are you fighting a war against a tyrannical government'' "Yes" "I'll support you." News flash; Saddam ruled over an oppressive government. Now, Iraq is worse of than it was before. Do you support it because it passes your sole criteria over being against an oppressive government? Never ever under any circumstances support something because of one thing. This is the single most ignorant thing a human being can do. Analyze all of the facts and reasons you can support.

edit:

yeah, we're already awake. I would support a war against that evil man that butchered thousands for the crime of not being the same religion as him. no matter what the government told me, I would want justice done to that man

humanity is not an ideal. You think if the one thing goes away, the world will be more enlightened. Your idealism is unrealistic. Humanity is flawed at every level. You seem to assume that mankind at the lower rungs of society is ideal and being corrupted by the elites. NO. Humanity is flawed at every level.

It's every humans' job to do their research into politics to decide what they support, not be spoonfed by what "propaganda" told them. Humans can do that.

government support only obedience. what country to do live in? I can petition my government a list of grievances. my government has elections where it bows to the wishes of the people. Poeple > government. not the other war around.

 

[Hunty]

Here let's get down to the basics:

We own many different countrys (China) money, war will only cause more of a problems. Until we pay China back; we'll always be in this hole.

 

[YowYan]

that's it! Time for a tirade.


So, I assume you would support a war against Hitler, despite your previous comment. Now, you're contradicting yourself.

You're assuming the only reason people go to war is misleading propaganda. First off, yes, it's a reason to so to war. It increases the number of recruits. I've seen propaganda from both World Wars, but you're the "ignorant little bubba" (from her neg rep, though I will admit to neg reping her as well) if you assume the only reason we go to war is because of propaganda. Propaganda is made for a mix of reasons. Wars are started for a mix of reasons. Everything that has happened in the course of history of humanity has happened for a mix of reasons. In history, there is no such thing as a sole cause, the ignorance.

I didn't support the war against Bin Laden because I was told to by propaganda. You're assuming everyone that has ever support a war did so because they were told to. You are assuming humans can't think for themselves. I reasoned that a mass-murdering hypocrite needs to die for the world to be a better place. First, there's justice for families he'd made suffer. Second, there's more safety in the world now that one less criminal mastermind is alive. Third, justice is served. There needs to be some kind of justice for the thousands that were burned, boiled and crushed to death and for their families that suffered for a decade. According to you, those suffering families will get nothing for the years of absolute pain of knowing the man that ripped a hole into their hearts by taking away a loved one. Why? Because Bin Laden wasn't a government. If you commit mass-murder and you're not a government, it's okay. They will be no repercussions. There will be no justice. To me, this is egregious.

You only support war against tyrannical governments. It's much more complex than that. You can't ask "Are you fighting a war against a tyrannical government'' "Yes" "I'll support you." News flash; Saddam ruled over an oppressive government. Now, Iraq is worse of than it was before. Do you support it because it passes your sole criteria over being against an oppressive government? Never ever under any circumstances support something because of one thing. This is the single most ignorant thing a human being can do. Analyze all of the facts and reasons you can support.

You're not looking at the source of the issue buddy..
Hitler wouldn't be a threat if he didn't have people blindly following his inhumane ideologies.

Case closed.

Osama: How is needing a ''mass-murderer'' to die efficient when he himself was put in that position by your own government. Yes, I believe that the whole Osama fiasco was uphold to stir fear amongst the simpleton americans towards the muslim world and thus creating a society that would lay down their civil rights in name of a fake sense of security. Look at the motive, buddy. No matter how ridiculous this may sound to the average mind, if there's a legit motive behind it, it's possible.

 

[Hunty]

You're not looking at the source of the issue buddy..
Hitler wouldn't be a threat if he didn't have people blindly following his inhumane ideologies.

Case closed.

Osama: How is needing a ''mass-murderer'' to die efficient when he himself was put in that position by your own government. Yes, I believe that the whole Osama fiasco was uphold to stir fear amongst the simpleton americans towards the muslim world and thus creating a society that would lay down their civil rights in name of a fake sense of security. Look at the motive, buddy. No matter how ridiculous this may sound to the average mind, if there's a legit motive behind it, it's possible.

Exactly, Osama was a figure head to strike fear into the citizens of America and Iraq.

 

[uchihajaime]

You're not looking at the source of the issue buddy..
Hitler wouldn't be a threat if he didn't have people blindly following his inhumane ideologies.

Case closed.

Osama: How is needing a ''mass-murderer'' to die efficient when he himself was put in that position by your own government. Yes, I believe that the whole Osama fiasco was uphold to stir fear amongst the simpleton americans towards the muslim world and thus creating a society that would lay down their civil rights in name of a fake sense of security. Look at the motive, buddy. No matter how ridiculous this may sound to the average mind, if there's a legit motive behind it, it's possible.

comment about Hitler: duh. same with bin Laden. However, both were still a mass-murdered that needed to answer for his crimes. Hypotheticals of him not convincing people to follow him are irrelevant. he got people to follow him. he murdered people. murder is a crime that must be punished. Bin Laden was punished. justice served.

Bin Ladin decided to kill people. He wasn't told to do that by American. He committed murder. He was punished.

Are we getting into the stupid Patriot Act now? It is stupid and rushed because of fear. However, it doesn't refute the argument that bin Laden was a mass-murderer that needed to answer for crimes against humanity.

 

[YowYan]

comment about Hitler: duh. same with bin Laden. However, both were still a mass-murdered that needed to answer for his crimes. Hypotheticals of him not convincing people to follow him are irrelevant. he got people to follow him. he murdered people. murder is a crime that must be punished. Bin Laden was punished. justice served.

Bin Ladin decided to kill people. He wasn't told to do that by American. He committed murder. He was punished.

Are we getting into the stupid Patriot Act now? It is stupid and rushed because of fear. However, it doesn't refute the argument that bin Laden was a mass-murderer that needed to answer for crimes against humanity.

Lo and behold, people. A simpleton in full glory.

*claps*

 

[uchihajaime]

Lo and behold, people. A simpleton in full glory.

*claps*

premise one: bin laden committed murder
Premise two: murderers need to be punished if we expect to live a reasonably just world
conclusion; Bin Laden needed to be punished.

I even agree with you that propaganda affects the masses. However, just because propaganda caused some to want bin Laden dead, did not mean that bin Laden can escape justice.

 

[Jin Hayami]

premise one: bin laden committed murder
Premise two: murderers need to be punished if we expect to live a reasonably just world
conclusion; Bin Laden needed to be punished.

I even agree with you that propaganda affects the masses. However, just because propaganda caused some to want bin Laden dead, did not mean that bin Laden can escape justice.

Don't bother debating with YowYan. He is the ultimate modern day hippy raging against the establishment simply because his generation thinks it's cool. He doesn't understand the point. If you see someone shoot a bunch of people on the street you don't just look the other way. You do what you have to to stop them. If you don't you're a coward. Does it really matter that by keeping this person from killing more people the life insurance companies don't have to pay as much? Of course not. Since when does multiple benefits from an action make it unjust? That's the excuse of the cowardly for inaction.