Page 7 of 22

Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 11:34 am
by MSimon
IMHO it is unsustainable.


For most of the cold war US arms spending ran 10% of GDP. Currently with a hot war on it is running about 6% of GDP. That level is probably sustainable indefinitely. It also shows that the military/industrial complex is not quite as powerful as you think. Why can't they get that other 4%?

It is not the military that is ruining us. It is the public unions and their pensions. Plus Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc.

Most of us in the US think of our military as an insurance policy. i.e. you pay your premiums and hope you never have to make a claim. Because the truth is that it is hard to figure the right amount of spending. You only know when you have spent way too much or just short of enough. Given the lessons of WW2 just short of enough is not popular. But 65 years on the lessons of that war are being forgotten. Even the war babies are old men now.

Churchill thought if the war could buy 50 years without another world war the job would have been well done. We are 65 years on and the peaceniks of the 1930s are reincarnated. I am not hopeful.

Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 12:01 pm
by Skipjack
Dude, wouldnt it be enough to just spend as much money as the rest of the world? At least for a while?

Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 12:08 pm
by Skipjack
On Oradour mentioned earlier:
A few things.
First, it is interesting that the french have the archives about this and other things under lock until 2054.
Second, the church exploded. Why?
Third reprisals were not a war crime, but were still legal according to the Hague convention at the time (was changed 1949).
The officer in charge was only supposed to take hostages in exchange for another officer held hostage by the resistance fighter. After encounting a burned out ambulance with the inhabitants cruely murdered by the resistance fighters (chained to the steering wheel and burned alive), he exceeded his orders and ordered a reprisal in the town. He ordered to execute the men and burn any house with weapons stashed in it.
Now this is where the accounts go apart. The church with the women and children seemingly exploded for some reason. Some say it was the Germans, others say it was a weapons depot in the church that cought fire when nearby houses burned down.
I honestly dont know. I guess the truth is somewhere in the middle.
Fact is that almost the entire Wehrmacht leadership protested the act of this officer and he was meant to be courtmarshalled for it. However, he died at front before this could happen.
So much about the leadership encouraging it.

Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 5:09 pm
by rjaypeters
Skipjack, re: Secession from EU.

Where I live, folks take the topic of secession seriously, what with the 150th anniversary of the local "recent unpleasantness" coming up. I hope secession from the EU is handled less bloodily than the US attempt.

A few years ago, idiots in California talked about secession from the USA. My response was to let them. Hmmm...

I'm trying to think of a more modern example of secession from a large federated political organization and the only thing that comes to mind is the break-up of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).

Sorry it took so long to respond, I was working on stuff for another thread.

Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 7:06 pm
by KitemanSA
MSimon wrote:
Skipjack wrote:You missunderstood my question.
"Why would you need to deterr people that do not want to attack US soil?"
And actually it was European oil that was most threatened.
It wasn't American oil that started the war but the American Dollar. Saddam was about to convert from the Petro-Dollar to the Petro-Euro. That would have been disasterous for the US. He had to be stopped.

Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 7:54 pm
by CaptainBeowulf
There was the black SS that was nasty yes, but the WaffenSS was simply a special unit of the Wehrmacht.
Of course you shouldn't trust Wikipedia, but these accounts are well recorded and the current Wikipedia pages don't seem out of line:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malmedy_massacre

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12th_SS_Pa ... te_note-28

"Fair" applications of the landkreigsordnung by the Waffen SS, no?

Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 8:21 pm
by Skipjack
I hope secession from the EU is handled less bloodily than the US attempt.
Well right now the members of the EU are still autonomous countries.
So anybody is free to leave whenever they want (though might have to face sanctions and of course it would be expensive and complicated).

On the southern countries and their feeling of entitlement. I was apalled by the demonstrations in Greece and the burning cars etc. I find this horrible. These people should work on getting their economy back on track and be ashamed of themselves for having run down their country like that. Instead they are complaining about the EU, especially Germany and that they are not emmediately getting the help that they requested. For some reason they feel entitled to this?!
That after they have been cheating themselves into the Euro...
60% of Germans want the Deutschmark back. I can see why.

Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 8:36 pm
by Skipjack
Of course you shouldn't trust Wikipedia, but these accounts are well recorded and the current Wikipedia pages don't seem out of line:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malmedy_massacre
If they were so guilty, why were they released and their sentences annulated?

Also, the US retaliated either way:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chenogne_massacre

So you know action and reaction. Until all the allied archives have been made fully available to the public, we might never know what really happened.
This can also be considered retaliation for what Canadian soldiers did to three captured German officers by tying them to their vehicles. Two were subsequently shot and killed while passing through the lines; the third one managed to crawl back to his lines were he subsequently died 3 days later.
Not trying to justify anything the Germans did there and this indeed sounds like serious warcrimes, but of course you retaliate for retaliation and thingy quickly escalate. Still, you are right, if this happened like that this is indeed a serious crime.
Again, it would be great to have all archives opened to really see what happened. Starting with WW1 archives might be good...
The allies have been covering up stuff a lot. See the waterbombing of the Luisitania by the British.

Giggles

Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 10:02 pm
by bcglorf
KitemanSA wrote:
MSimon wrote:
Skipjack wrote:You missunderstood my question.
"Why would you need to deterr people that do not want to attack US soil?"
And actually it was European oil that was most threatened.
It wasn't American oil that started the war but the American Dollar. Saddam was about to convert from the Petro-Dollar to the Petro-Euro. That would have been disasterous for the US. He had to be stopped.
Thanks for the laughs. I don't know if I'll get tired of that one or the moon landing conspiracy first, they both just work on so many levels.

Re: Giggles

Posted: Sat Dec 18, 2010 1:41 am
by KitemanSA
bcglorf wrote:
KitemanSA wrote:
MSimon wrote: And actually it was European oil that was most threatened.
It wasn't American oil that started the war but the American Dollar. Saddam was about to convert from the Petro-Dollar to the Petro-Euro. That would have been disasterous for the US. He had to be stopped.
Thanks for the laughs. I don't know if I'll get tired of that one or the moon landing conspiracy first, they both just work on so many levels.
You are welcome!
Of course, one tried and true way to discredit a revealed truth is to make it into a joke. Another way is to attempt to discredit the revealer thru accusations of malfeasance. :wink:

Posted: Sat Dec 18, 2010 4:36 am
by MSimon
Skipjack wrote:Dude, wouldnt it be enough to just spend as much money as the rest of the world? At least for a while?
That is around what we do spend. As much as the rest of the world combined.

Re: Giggles

Posted: Sat Dec 18, 2010 4:39 am
by MSimon
KitemanSA wrote:
bcglorf wrote:
KitemanSA wrote: It wasn't American oil that started the war but the American Dollar. Saddam was about to convert from the Petro-Dollar to the Petro-Euro. That would have been disasterous for the US. He had to be stopped.
Thanks for the laughs. I don't know if I'll get tired of that one or the moon landing conspiracy first, they both just work on so many levels.
You are welcome!
Of course, one tried and true way to discredit a revealed truth is to make it into a joke. Another way is to attempt to discredit the revealer thru accusations of malfeasance. :wink:
If Saddam was smart he would have avoided paper currency and accepted only gold.

Posted: Sat Dec 18, 2010 4:47 am
by MSimon
I couldn't find a thing on

waterbombing of the Luisitania

got a link?

Posted: Sat Dec 18, 2010 5:01 am
by MSimon
So much about the leadership encouraging it.
So the Wehrmacht was governing Germany from 1933 to 1945?

Do you have a cite?

Re: Giggles

Posted: Sat Dec 18, 2010 1:28 pm
by KitemanSA
MSimon wrote: If Saddam was smart he would have avoided paper currency and accepted only gold.
Would have had the same effect, the voiding of the petro-dollar. He would have been stopped.