American Militarism

[michaeledward]

Yeah ... but I like the 'soon-to-be-budgeted-out-of-existance' space program. NASA gave us Velcro, don't you know ... (or at least popularized it).

And don't forget those clever pens that can write upside down.

Less Military expansion ... more Space exploration for me.

 

[Makalakumu]

Yeah ... but I like the 'soon-to-be-budgeted-out-of-existance' space program. NASA gave us Velcro, don't you know ... (or at least popularized it).

And don't forget those clever pens that can write upside down.

Less Military expansion ... more Space exploration for me.

You should check the documents entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses" They specifically call for pulling the plug on NASA and militarizing space.

Military technology is highly classified stuff and the civilian returns have always been limited. NASA, on the other hand, has given tenfold returns on investments. A lot of the technology we use everyday was developed first for space exploration...

That is why you can win Civilization III with the space race...

 

[michaeledward]

While the comment was 'tongue in cheek', the sentiment is now.

I do know how important NASA has been to our society. And I know the prospects of putting a man on Mars anytime soon is extremely limited, and certainly not possible with the budgets being proposed.

Spirit and Opportunity are still rocking ... Galileo is returning brilliant information.

Ahh ... but let's kill them too.

Maybe some people need to start protesting astronaunts ... spitting on them when they get out of the ISS.

Al Franken would call it 'kidding on the square'.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

And since we are all typing and applying technologies that are built on sciences and materials that came directly from those "military adventurisms" as you put it, to include some petroleum based materials that are essential to the quality of life we live today....I can really see how 'only a small group of capitalists' have benefitted.

Now THERE is a reason for going to war. The technological marvels it brings.

Given that we fund the wars with tax dollars, would it be possible to put that money into research and development without, say, causing the deaths of several million people? Or do we require war to somehow spur a devious creativity that leads to the miracle of plastics?


Regards,


Steve

 

[Makalakumu]

Now THERE is a reason for going to war. The technological marvels it brings.

Given that we fund the wars with tax dollars, would it be possible to put that money into research and development without, say, causing the deaths of several million people? Or do we require war to somehow spur a devious creativity that leads to the miracle of plastics?


Regards,


Steve

In my opinion, if we slashed our military budget and put the money into space exploration, we'd probably get more out of it and we'd be doing something constructive with our national treasure. Heck, I'd probably feel good about paying taxes...

 

[loki09789]

Now THERE is a reason for going to war. The technological marvels it brings.

Given that we fund the wars with tax dollars, would it be possible to put that money into research and development without, say, causing the deaths of several million people? Or do we require war to somehow spur a devious creativity that leads to the miracle of plastics?


Regards,


Steve

Hate to say it, but it seems that war and the race to win and get it over with quickly and decisively has been one of the most powerful motivators for innovation. Think about who the largest contract carriers are: Governments. Where does all that private sector R/D end up being applied, refined and then finds a 'civilian' application as a side benefit? Advancements in communication, information techonology, transportation, ....all leap faster because of the motive of shooting, moving and communicating better than the other guy can.

The rude fact is that violence is a reality of life - so is it wrong to try and be 'better' at it than the other guy so that you can finish the fight and reduce the protracted damage to people, environment and stability? Funny how we all train to 'master violence' so that we can do just that on a personal level but it is 'wrong' on a national level.

Now is it 'wrong' to stabilize the global economy (unless you like paying 2.00 a gallon) by protecting petroleum interests for the US? I don't think so personally. I think military operations can be combined to protect humanitarian and other objectives - but which is going to do more long term good in reality - protecting the resources, political/economic stability of the whole or devoting the majority of military assets to saving a handful of lives....?

I don't say this lightly. I was one of Uncle Sam's Misguided Children for a while and became a repeat fool by changing over to Army MP's as well. I know what it means to be 'expendable' and had to train and lead so that 'mission first' was the motto. You don't have to like it, you just have to do it.

 

[loki09789]

In my opinion, if we slashed our military budget and put the money into space exploration, we'd probably get more out of it and we'd be doing something constructive with our national treasure. Heck, I'd probably feel good about paying taxes...

NASA budgetary support comes partially from its support of military communication and observation....the training of astronauts is partially done by military personnel and military departments (Air Force) and such.

NASA is, at least partially, nothing more than a huge R/D lab for technology that finds its way onto the battlefield OR supports battle/intelligence interests.

 

[Makalakumu]

NASA budgetary support comes partially from its support of military communication and observation....the training of astronauts is partially done by military personnel and military departments (Air Force) and such.

NASA is, at least partially, nothing more than a huge R/D lab for technology that finds its way onto the battlefield OR supports battle/intelligence interests.

Yes, that is true, but true too is a pretty common fact that among scientists 50% work somehow for the military.

They are not all working for NASA.

 

[loki09789]

Yes, that is true, but true too is a pretty common fact that among scientists 50% work somehow for the military.

They are not all working for NASA.

Yeah....so that means what?

 

[michaeledward]

NASA budgetary support comes partially from its support of military communication and observation....the training of astronauts is partially done by military personnel and military departments (Air Force) and such.

NASA is, at least partially, nothing more than a huge R/D lab for technology that finds its way onto the battlefield OR supports battle/intelligence interests.

I do know that NASA will sometimes launch satellites for the Military, a service for which the military compensates NASA. But, what is the lost opportunity costs of a shuttle launch to support military communication compared with, say, a service mission to the hubble space telescope?

I do know that the corps of astronauts is selected in part from military backgrounds (although, I think today, this is a less frequent career path than it was, say, 40 years ago).

But please expand on the your idea that 'NASA BUDGETARY SUPPORT' comes from the military. Do you know if the 14 billion dollar NASA budget includes a line item as 600,000,000.00 support for top secret military camera satellite?





Here's an interesting statistic ....

Americans spent over 19 times as much at restaurants in 1997 as the federal government spent on NASA that year.


http://www.richardb.us/nasa.html#table3


​

 

[michaeledward]

The rude fact is that violence is a reality of life...
so is it wrong to try and be 'better' at it than the other guy

If this is a fact, why is it rude?

But further, why is violence a reality of life?

Does man have the will to decide if he is going to execute a violent act?

If man can decide and attempt to be 'better than the other guy' at executing a violent act, why can he not decide that 'better' means 'non-violent'?

 

[loki09789]

If this is a fact, why is it rude?

But further, why is violence a reality of life?

Does man have the will to decide if he is going to execute a violent act?

If man can decide and attempt to be 'better than the other guy' at executing a violent act, why can he not decide that 'better' means 'non-violent'?

Typo...meant 'crude' as in rough as in basic, primal....

Well....we do practice 'martial arts' and there have been wars, crime, violence (even in something more literal, like eat or be eaten type of violence), and plan old historical patterns make it real....The practical reasons for violence have become less concrete and more abstract the more complicated and intricate (and metaphorical) social structures have become.

There was a time when running down a deer or dropping a rock on a wooly mammoth was 'justified violence' because it was a means to survival (or smashing a rock on the head of the guy who is trying to steal your hard earned meal - or maybe the meal your stealing from him because you'd rather eat than die).

Now, though more symbollic, justifications such as protecting petroleum market stability for violence have been used along with other reasons making it harder to see what and where the proper lines of justification are....

Yes, man does have the will to decide if he is going to execute a violent act...like whether or not to mob, mall and harass and throw things at a public servant while he/she attempts to do their job. It might not be clubbing and shooting, but I am pretty sure it isn't civil either.

Please.....tactics and timing dictate what 'act' is 'better' in the short and long of it, my fellow former. You know that from personal experience/training in and out of martial arts. If you want to argue the moral high ground idea, how many of your fellow Americans are you willing to sacrifice for the sake of that ideal? How about from your own family?

It seems awefully ironic to be hearing 'peace first and only' arguments from martial artists. We make violence an intellectual and physical art form. We train with the idea that our 'medium of expression' might very well be somebodies face and yet I am reading these kinds of comments?

Remember the finger thing, one points at me, three point back.

 

[Makalakumu]

Yeah....so that means what?

My point is that the military doesn't need NASA. In fact, the president and his PNAC buddies would like to create a space based wing of the military. This would take the place of NASA and all information discovered would first go through the Pentagon. Read "Rebuilding Americas Defenses" by Paul Wolfowitz.

 

[loki09789]

My point is that the military doesn't need NASA. In fact, the president and his PNAC buddies would like to create a space based wing of the military. This would take the place of NASA and all information discovered would first go through the Pentagon. Read "Rebuilding Americas Defenses" by Paul Wolfowitz.

No, but NASA does need the military it seems....

NASA is not anything to get idealistic about either. Remember the 'Space Race' and the moon landing? That was the ultimate in Cold War Tactical victory. Not a shot was fired but we 'won' the race, therefore asserting our technological superiority - no different than a 'joint forces training exercise' in plain view of your enemy so they can see your military might in action or the way guys puff up an chest beat in competition for a girls affections.

 

[michaeledward]

Remember the finger thing, one points at me, three point back.

I don't recall pointing any fingers :shrug:
Just asking questions.

~ all pre-ordained, a prisoner in chains, a victim of venomous hate ~

 

[Makalakumu]

It seems awefully ironic to be hearing 'peace first and only' arguments from martial artists. We make violence an intellectual and physical art form. We train with the idea that our 'medium of expression' might very well be somebodies face and yet I am reading these kinds of comments?

I couldn't be a martial artist if I believed "peace first and only". We have discussed this before, haven't we?

In my martial art we strive to better ourselves through expression of martial technique. Sure, we could dance instead, or we could paint or write, or all three and do the same thing. Yet, on a deeper level there is an understanding that self defense could be important as well as a desire to emulate a mythos that one feels important. Personally, I seek the power my art offers so that I may come to understand it and use it appropriately...hopefully to grow more peaceful.

You may be interested in this thread ...

How does the above view translate into the position presented on the military? I believe that the military, in its current state, is not a tool for self defense. It is a tool to make people do what our leaders want, whether by fear or by force. The end result is NOT Self Defense. Our country spends more on our military then all of the other industrialized nations of the world combined. And we are planning to increase this spending. The Bush Administration is looking at increasing military spending to at least 4% of our GNP. This number is so rediculously large that it is nearly incomprehensable. Have you ever wondered what we lose as a society by being so militaristic?

upnorthkyosa

 

[loki09789]

I couldn't be a martial artist if I believed "peace first and only". We have discussed this before, haven't we?

In my martial art we strive to better ourselves through expression of martial technique. Sure, we could dance instead, or we could paint or write, or all three and do the same thing. Yet, on a deeper level there is an understanding that self defense could be important as well as a desire to emulate a mythos that one feels important. Personally, I seek the power my art offers so that I may come to understand it and use it appropriately...hopefully to grow more peaceful.

You may be interested in this thread ...

How does the above view translate into the position presented on the military? I believe that the military, in its current state, is not a tool for self defense. It is a tool to make people do what our leaders want, whether by fear or by force. The end result is NOT Self Defense. Our country spends more on our military then all of the other industrialized nations of the world combined. And we are planning to increase this spending. The Bush Administration is looking at increasing military spending to at least 4% of our GNP. This number is so rediculously large that it is nearly incomprehensable. Have you ever wondered what we lose as a society by being so militaristic?

upnorthkyosa

"Society" isn't militaristic...do you see standardized uniforms in schools, marching parades, war heroes on commemorative stamps.... we simply have a build up in military spending due to the commitments we are tasking out to accomplish right now.

The military is not strictly a 'defensive' force, never has been and never will be. And, just like in martial arts, going on the offense can be a form of defensive preventative maintenance. THere have been many discussions on 'pre-emptive' striking and almost everyone posted some kind of affirmative statement about it, why is it so different on a different scale of martial strategy?

It is a double edged sword, do we go cheap and risk servicemen and women because they are spread too thin or have cheaper equiptment or do we infringe on rights by making 'single w/no children' stipulations for servicemen/women so that the cost of social services and health benefits is less?

This has spun out of center but consider this, where do you think one of the best places to apply 'green' technology is going to be for the Gov? Military transportation and weapon's platforms. "Green" options (such as vegatable based diesel), once standardized are cheaper and faster to produce and at times can be produced in a field expedient manner (waste oil conversion into vehicle grade use and such). Won't the tree huggers love that?!

 

[Makalakumu]

"Society" isn't militaristic...do you see standardized uniforms in schools, marching parades, war heroes on commemorative stamps....

Yes, I see all of those things. Schools are collaborating with ROTC now. Kids can get credit for doing PT, drill, and other basic military stuff. Also, marching band ring a bell? Or how about the school my daughter may attend...its name "MacArther". What country are you living in???

"we simply have a build up in military spending due to the commitments we are tasking out to accomplish right now.

No, it is not that simple. Our commitments were planned well before 911. The increase in funding is just another cog in a machine that was contructed by PNAC. The War on Terror became an excuse to ratchet up military spending to astronomical levels.

The military is not strictly a 'defensive' force, never has been and never will be. And, just like in martial arts, going on the offense can be a form of defensive preventative maintenance. THere have been many discussions on 'pre-emptive' striking and almost everyone posted some kind of affirmative statement about it, why is it so different on a different scale of martial strategy?

Sure, I'll go with you on this one. And other countries seem to think this as well. Yet, don't you think the same legal standards (or the spirit of said standards) that we must use before acting pre-emptively should be employed before we strike?

It is a double edged sword, do we go cheap and risk servicemen and women because they are spread too thin or have cheaper equiptment or do we infringe on rights by making 'single w/no children' stipulations for servicemen/women so that the cost of social services and health benefits is less?

As I said before, other places in the world are able to get along with FAR less then we do. Why do we need to carry such a big stick? Is our military the worlds new constabulary?

This has spun out of center but consider this, where do you think one of the best places to apply 'green' technology is going to be for the Gov? Military transportation and weapon's platforms. "Green" options (such as vegatable based diesel), once standardized are cheaper and faster to produce and at times can be produced in a field expedient manner (waste oil conversion into vehicle grade use and such). Won't the tree huggers love that?!

Let me get this straight. The military will probably be the main developer of "green" technology and hopefully civilians will get to use some of it. And you are saying that we do not live in a militaristic society?

 

[loki09789]

1.Yes, I see all of those things. Schools are collaborating with ROTC now. Kids can get credit for doing PT, drill, and other basic military stuff. Also, marching band ring a bell? Or how about the school my daughter may attend...its name "MacArther". What country are you living in???

2.Sure, I'll go with you on this one. And other countries seem to think this as well. Yet, don't you think the same legal standards (or the spirit of said standards) that we must use before acting pre-emptively should be employed before we strike?

3.As I said before, other places in the world are able to get along with FAR less then we do. Why do we need to carry such a big stick? Is our military the worlds new constabulary?

4.Let me get this straight. The military will probably be the main developer of "green" technology and hopefully civilians will get to use some of it. And you are saying that we do not live in a militaristic society?

1. Yes schools that have low academic performance, high crime/drug/drop out rates that are trying to use an ROTC model to instill some kind of discipline and personal pride in the student's lives that isn't happening at home, much like you do when you agree to teach 'under priviledged' students and enforce same standards while teaching at discount or even for free as you have mentioned. Marching Bands......yeah those kids are REALLY being groomed for the military. You really don't have any idea what living in a 'militaristic society' is like. Ask people in N. Korea, Feudal/Empirial Japan/Korea/China or someone who has been IN the modern military and knows militaristic culture from the inside. If I walk by a 'senior' in my school or at any other work place and do not 'render proper respects/salute' I won't be charged for it. Heck, I am not even expected to great anyone if I don't want to do it. I might not be thought well of in the building, but I don't have to - in a 'militaristic culture' I would have to.

2. I do that the same standards should be used. What those standards are will change because of the scale and legal/political changes too.

3. Those other countries also have FAR less territory, population, international interests/investments/signed treaty obligations....that they are committed to support as well. Or, they are so poor that they can't afford to support the military the way we do (Russian soldiers w/o pay and used as farm labor comes to mind).

Those other countries are also NOT the US - the wealthiest nation in the world and the current 'king of the mountain' that others would like to knock off the top - as we have seen in 9/11 type attacks.

4. I did not say they would be the main developer but possibly the largest single entity applier of 'green' technology. The development would be from private contractors and gov. R/D developers that would also be able to sell the exact or modified versions to the auto industry, utilities both public and private....for civilian use. If it was a militaristic state, the gov would 'require by law' and issue that technology to us lowly civilians with penalties for those who lose or break said item.

A 'militaristic' culture is regimented like a martial arts school that would follow the para military structure (TKD type arts, Hard Karate Schools,...) with hierarchy and castes/job descriptions and formal duties and functions that are expected to be performed....Feudal cultures were/are 'militaristic' because of the strict rules about class and social propriety (even to the point that certain colors were outlawed for certain classes of people to wear and to wear them was considered 'inpersinating' someone of higher class much like 'impersinating an officer' is used today).

That ain't what we got here.

Even the old "Confucist" family hierarchy is far more 'militaristic' than in the States.

Heck, I have students in school that can't seem to put "Mr." and "Martin" together and I get "Martin, can I ...." or "Yo, can I...." and we live in a military State? Please.

 

[Makalakumu]

1. Yes schools that have low academic performance, high crime/drug/drop out rates that are trying to use an ROTC model to instill some kind of discipline and personal pride in the student's lives that isn't happening at home, much like you do when you agree to teach 'under priviledged' students and enforce same standards while teaching at discount or even for free as you have mentioned. Marching Bands......yeah those kids are REALLY being groomed for the military. You really don't have any idea what living in a 'militaristic society' is like. Ask people in N. Korea, Feudal/Empirial Japan/Korea/China or someone who has been IN the modern military and knows militaristic culture from the inside. If I walk by a 'senior' in my school or at any other work place and do not 'render proper respects/salute' I won't be charged for it. Heck, I am not even expected to great anyone if I don't want to do it. I might not be thought well of in the building, but I don't have to - in a 'militaristic culture' I would have to.

2. I do that the same standards should be used. What those standards are will change because of the scale and legal/political changes too.

3. Those other countries also have FAR less territory, population, international interests/investments/signed treaty obligations....that they are committed to support as well. Or, they are so poor that they can't afford to support the military the way we do (Russian soldiers w/o pay and used as farm labor comes to mind).

Those other countries are also NOT the US - the wealthiest nation in the world and the current 'king of the mountain' that others would like to knock off the top - as we have seen in 9/11 type attacks.

4. I did not say they would be the main developer but possibly the largest single entity applier of 'green' technology. The development would be from private contractors and gov. R/D developers that would also be able to sell the exact or modified versions to the auto industry, utilities both public and private....for civilian use. If it was a militaristic state, the gov would 'require by law' and issue that technology to us lowly civilians with penalties for those who lose or break said item.

A 'militaristic' culture is regimented like a martial arts school that would follow the para military structure (TKD type arts, Hard Karate Schools,...) with hierarchy and castes/job descriptions and formal duties and functions that are expected to be performed....Feudal cultures were/are 'militaristic' because of the strict rules about class and social propriety (even to the point that certain colors were outlawed for certain classes of people to wear and to wear them was considered 'inpersinating' someone of higher class much like 'impersinating an officer' is used today).

That ain't what we got here.

Even the old "Confucist" family hierarchy is far more 'militaristic' than in the States.

Heck, I have students in school that can't seem to put "Mr." and "Martin" together and I get "Martin, can I ...." or "Yo, can I...." and we live in a military State? Please.

While the examples of other militarisic societies you cite are good, I would still posit that our culture is militaristic. In my opinion, there are variations of militaristic societies that do not have to have their people constantly marching around saluting each other. Ours is one of these. Here is a few reasons why I think this.

1. We spend 50 cents of every tax dollar on the military.
2. The military is glorified by most in our culture.
3. We worship violence in ths culture with our stories, our movies, and our games.
4. Although not as overt as some cultures as you have pointed out, our society is replete with militaristic rituals. In our schools, during sporting events, and in many other locations, the influence of the military can be seen.

The simple fact of the matter is that all of the above require or are some form of conditioning in militaristic behavior. You may not see what you saw surrounded by soldiers when you served and that is fine. Some serve and most support - our society is structured to facillitate this...