Russia. All that concerns Russia.Аnswers questions citizen of Russia. (crime, life)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Another one....... this is becoming much more common in the EU. People are getting sick of NATO, fear mongering, and the blackmail.
Putin has said that the world is not more secure in the past and we all know it isn't. Why? We know the reason for that too. I think the Europeans need their own army and NATO needs to disappear along with the US from the European continent.
Is that Russia's response to another country signing up to join NATO? Perhaps that country could be convinced by Putin that his country is not a threat to them and therefore they don't need to join.
The US F-22 and F-35 have had their share of difficulties and they're obsenely expensive for what you get. The US has no common sense when it comes to value.
.
Which is why Australia, Denmark, Israel, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Norway, Turkey, South Korea and the UK recently placed orders for more F-35s.
There are other institutions that can accomplish the same thing as the needs arise. The only reason we have an MIC is because we have not been able to get our reptilian mind under control. Building a bomb is a vast waste of resources from square one. From the time it is assembled to the moment it destroys itself it takes and gives nothing in return. The internet was not invented buy a military mind, the airplane was not nor was the plow.
The reptilian mind invents nothing,
Like I said, that's a valid point, but it still doesn't change the fact that the MIC and assorted institutions were instrumental in setting up these parameters. I'm not just talking about the US here, but other countries MIC's as well. Russia benefits greatly from their own development as that technology ends up in the public sector in the long run.
Spent better might be a fair argument, but the MIC is hardly a waste a money. The money Russia and the US as well as any other country spends there is instrumental in building up the technological infrastructure needed for the future.
GPS, drones, internet... can trace their genesis to the MIC.
The MIC is not research, development, and maintaining a military.
The MIC, the on Eisenhower first warned and thereafter, is (example);
-keeping open bases no one wants except for a handful of politicians.
-ordering weapons no one wants except for a handful of politicians.
-putting US resources purposely in harm's way to justify using the military for intervention.
-Ignoring the military recommendations and ordering maintaining certain levels of assets, like the minimum number of ships.
-obligating US military assets to be involved in everything possible, thus over-taxing those assets, but at leas the neocons/MIC can pound their chest proudly.
-having to create laws to prevent flag ranks from joining defense firms due to previous past influences.
-working in collaboration wit lobbyists, politicians, and defense industries to minimize the chances of any weapons program getting killed, by doing things like putting manufacturing areas in different locations to get the politician on board on not "kill jobs" in their district.
-over inflating and exaggerating threats to justify defense spending.
-continual support for threats so the threats will have continued means to challenge the US and be a threat, either real or exaggerated, see China for example.
-endless wars, constant combat engagement with no focus nor actual objective goal, other than some Orwellian "end terrorism" or something along those lines, ensuring endless conflict.
Skripals are now located at the place where the second poisoning occurred, but this is not the official story.
A lot of the money is wasted in defense procurement since the same concerns are involved in manufacturing and magnifying threats in order to drum up political pressure for more spending. DoD, State, and the private sector funnel money to think tanks and single issue policy research institutes to produce publications supporting their businesses. It's often referred to as the echo chamber. It magnifies the message by using multiple media outlets to give the appearance of a broad democratic majority that's pushing for the change.
What MWR is saying is true, but that doesn't make the current situation or the situation in the past , acceptable. We could progress so much faster, government would be so much more effective if we/it would just change the priorities. Seek enemies and you will find them. That's the wrong way to use peoples imaginations and talents. It's Orwellian in nature and primitive.
The MIC is not research, development, and maintaining a military.
The MIC, the on Eisenhower first warned and thereafter, is (example);
-keeping open bases no one wants except for a handful of politicians.
-ordering weapons no one wants except for a handful of politicians.
-putting US resources purposely in harm's way to justify using the military for intervention.
-Ignoring the military recommendations and ordering maintaining certain levels of assets, like the minimum number of ships.
-obligating US military assets to be involved in everything possible, thus over-taxing those assets, but at leas the neocons/MIC can pound their chest proudly.
-having to create laws to prevent flag ranks from joining defense firms due to previous past influences.
-working in collaboration wit lobbyists, politicians, and defense industries to minimize the chances of any weapons program getting killed, by doing things like putting manufacturing areas in different locations to get the politician on board on not "kill jobs" in their district.
-over inflating and exaggerating threats to justify defense spending.
-continual support for threats so the threats will have continued means to challenge the US and be a threat, either real or exaggerated, see China for example.
-endless wars, constant combat engagement with no focus nor actual objective goal, other than some Orwellian "end terrorism" or something along those lines, ensuring endless conflict.
Well said.
Putin and his people said they were going to concentrate on creating conditions of opportunity for people. Cutting out unneeded military expenditures is a great way to do it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
