ISIS Has Brought the War to the U.S.

[Helix]

We would, if we could.

politicians need to study the problem so that they can better explain it to the American people. for example, if we were to announce a thirty year moonshot to replace oil as a transportation fuel, that would do more to defund terror than any bombing campaign.

 

[joG]

no matter what you claim to support here, you will vote for candidates who support cutting taxes during wartime. is this incorrect?

We are not really at war and haven't been since at least Vietnam and by many considerations since ww2. What we see going on is making security in a time without robust general law enforcement and r2p. The world is in many ways like the Wild West and free for all.

 

[joG]

politicians need to study the problem so that they can better explain it to the American people. for example, if we were to announce a thirty year moonshot to replace oil as a transportation fuel, that would do more to defund terror than any bombing campaign.

You are correct that the politicians have not done a very good job of explaining the world and its demnds since the Soviet meltdown and into the future. But that might be partially because the thing was thrashed out in a long and detailed discussion on platforms like Foreign Affairs magazine and in international committees during the 1990s. And the topic is neither simple nor short to communicate.; not at all the stuff of election platforms.

 

[Helix]

We are not really at war and haven't been since at least Vietnam and by many considerations since ww2. What we see going on is making security in a time without robust general law enforcement and r2p. The world is in many ways like the Wild West and free for all.

the US is at war whether it's declared or not, and has been for more than a decade. that much is indisputable.

 

[Helix]

You are correct that the politicians have not done a very good job of explaining the world and its demnds since the Soviet meltdown and into the future. But that might be partially because the thing was thrashed out in a long and detailed discussion on platforms like Foreign Affairs magazine and in international committees during the 1990s. And the topic is neither simple nor short to communicate.; not at all the stuff of election platforms.

also, the politicians themselves haven't studied history or read The Art of War, so even they don't understand the problem.

 

[joG]

the US is at war whether it's declared or not, and has been for more than a decade. that much is indisputable.

If one wants to erase the difference between war and policing? Sure. Then the chatter is as meaningful as befits a garden party and a game of Croquet. .

 

[joG]

also, the politicians themselves haven't studied history or read The Art of War, so even they don't understand the problem.

Well, some have and some haven't. Pity the man of change never walked that walk but thinks that enough to talk the talk, which he does and makes one shudder.

 

[Helix]

If one wants to erase the difference between war and policing? Sure. Then the chatter is as meaningful as befits a garden party and a game of Croquet. .

the US is at war. even the hawks in this thread admit as much.

 

[Helix]

Well, some have and some haven't. Pity the man of change never walked that walk but thinks that enough to talk the talk, which he does and makes one shudder.

if you're talking about Obama, he should have pulled out of the region like he said he was going to. still, better than McCain. he would probably have sent troops in by the tens of thousands during the Arab Spring. and yeah, IS or some similar group of extremist assholes would probably have still popped up in response.

 

[Jack Hays]

no matter what you claim to support here, you will vote for candidates who support cutting taxes during wartime. is this incorrect?

The answer is that no one can foresee for whom we will vote. And I'm through being insulted.

 

[Helix]

The answer is that no one can foresee for whom we will vote. And I'm through being insulted.

and you haven't been insulted. i've asked if you will actually vote for a candidate who supports your position, or whether you will simply vote for a neoconservative hawk who would put the war on the credit card. i think we both know the answer to that question.

 

[joG]

the US is at war. even the hawks in this thread admit as much.

That we use the term "war" does not really change the reality of the thing. If we were at war, our lives would be quite different.

 

[joG]

if you're talking about Obama, he should have pulled out of the region like he said he was going to. still, better than McCain. he would probably have sent troops in by the tens of thousands during the Arab Spring. and yeah, IS or some similar group of extremist assholes would probably have still popped up in response.

The problem that Obama is having and why nobody thinks of him as a serious player is that he was a neophyte and in his naivité promised, what his congregation wanted to hear. Now, seven years down the road he has been as unsuccessful with his misbegotten promises and actions as one had to fear. What is worse, he has not come back and explained to his disciples that he was wrong to start with. That he did not know many things we now knows. That the world is not a place you can will to be Good. That bad things happen. That they find you. That you cannot hide.

 

[Helix]

That we use the term "war" does not really change the reality of the thing. If we were at war, our lives would be quite different.

The US is at war, and has been for more than a decade.

 

[Helix]

The problem that Obama is having and why nobody thinks of him as a serious player is that he was a neophyte and in his naivité promised, what his congregation wanted to hear. Now, seven years down the road he has been as unsuccessful with his misbegotten promises and actions as one had to fear. What is worse, he has not come back and explained to his disciples that he was wrong to start with. That he did not know many things we now knows. That the world is not a place you can will to be Good. That bad things happen. That they find you. That you cannot hide.

So what do wartime tax rates look like? What's the plan / exit strategy?

 

[Ikari]

Because if we fight, we can prevail. We are going to be attacked anyway; our only path to safety is to win.

Can we? In 14 years we haven't seemed to have done anything but make it worse. More of the same won't work.

 

[joG]

So what do wartime tax rates look like? What's the plan / exit strategy?

It is less a question of tax rates in war than of rationing. Should we be brought into a real war, the proportion of GDP dedicated to winning would be much higher than 5 or 6 percent.

 

[Helix]

It is less a question of tax rates in war than of rationing. Should we be brought into a real war, the proportion of GDP dedicated to winning would be much higher than 5 or 6 percent.

Ok, so how much should taxes go up, and what's the exit strategy?

 

[joG]

Ok, so how much should taxes go up, and what's the exit strategy?

Well, in ww1 government spending over doubled and went up by about 3,5 times in ww2. As we are the main supplier of security right now, we probably would not need to jack up as much as back then. But the total public share would surely go to 50 or 60 percent of GDP. This is in the case of an extended real war.

 

[Jack Hays]

and you haven't been insulted. i've asked if you will actually vote for a candidate who supports your position, or whether you will simply vote for a neoconservative hawk who would put the war on the credit card. i think we both know the answer to that question.

And you continue to do it.

 

[Jack Hays]

Can we? In 14 years we haven't seemed to have done anything but make it worse. More of the same won't work.

It may take two or three times that long.

 

[Jack Hays]

and you haven't been insulted. i've asked if you will actually vote for a candidate who supports your position, or whether you will simply vote for a neoconservative hawk who would put the war on the credit card. i think we both know the answer to that question.

You will note that I have never assumed I know for whom you will vote.

 

[Helix]

Well, in ww1 government spending over doubled and went up by about 3,5 times in ww2. As we are the main supplier of security right now, we probably would not need to jack up as much as back then. But the total public share would surely go to 50 or 60 percent of GDP. This is in the case of an extended real war.

So, how much? What's the exit strategy?

 

[Helix]

And you continue to do it.

To point out that no matter what you claim on this site, you'll be voting for a neoconservative hawk who will run on a platform of war and cutting taxes? Absolutely.

 

[Helix]

You will note that I have never assumed I know for whom you will vote.

Probably Sanders in the primary, most likely after he drops out.