Personally, I’m more worried about assaults on my freedom from the Religious Right and business than I am about the Taliban or Al Qaeda.
I’m not sanguine about a home-grown dictatorship being impossible, though.
Which we need for working at and buying stuff from.
Wrong, though brilliant rationalization.
I live in Canada where the ‘strength’ of our military is hardly such as to effectively protect this huge nation and all it’s borders. Threat of a strong military is not what’s protecting our freedoms. More our good standing in the world and with our allies, than military might, I’d say.
That’s the sort of delusion there is little point in trying to reason with, reason has no impact once they’ve swallowed the Koolaid, in my experience.
No. The military has actively worked against my freedom. It has not protected it at all. Every gain in freedom I have had in my life has been in defiance of the military, and their close buddies the intelligence agencies.
Is this meant as some kind of reverse-psychology sarcasm or something? If not, I hate to break it to you, but Gitmo is not closed and Obama increased our troop levels in Afghanistan and we are still there.
Just because the military is not generally used to protect our freedom, it doesn’t mean its existence does not do so.
I would love to hear more on this one. As it stands, this statement is just comes off as very paranoid.
Keep in mind that he is posting from South Africa, not the US. And that he’s a person of “mixed race” ancestry.
I agree that while much of what the military does isn’t directly “protecting my freedom”, it’s very existence does. The US needs some sort of military to protect its citizens. How big is the operative question.
The military protects the freedom of our corporations to continue doing business as they’ve become accustomed to do it over the years. In the case of the Middle East and the Muslim world their ongoing protection and US government, uh, protection of various regimes has caused a backlash in that part of the world that caused angry Middle Easterners to knock a couple of our office buildings over a decade ago. This created new opportunities for the military/government to increase freedoms for our corporations abroad, which is creating new generations of angry Middle Easterners…
I am of the opinion that, as a US resident, the US war machine is actively suppressing rather than protecting my freedoms.
For example, I would like to enjoy the freedom to live in a civilized nation – one which has its spending priorities straight and funds vital national programs such as universal healthcare, free or subsidized higher education, and a meaningful pension program. Instead, I live in an ass-backwards land where the military gobbles up tax revenues like no tomorrow and the masses are forced to fend for themselves.
Moreover, I would like to enjoy the freedom of actually being made safer by the armed forces. Instead, the military’s policy of savage imperialism only endangers me. Not only do I now have people that I have absolutely nothing against seeking to slaughter me, but I am also just one military misadventure away from a Vietnam-style draft. Neither risk is that high, to be sure, but it’s still something I can do without.
Also, there’s the humanitarian angle. I would like to enjoy the freedom of actually liking the nation where I happen to reside, but I can feel nothing but loathing for a country that slaughters innocent civilians halfway around the globe.
So yes, no matter how I slice it, the US military is a net detractor when it comes to my freedoms.
You know we do have free and/or subsidized higher education, right?
Remember ENLISTMENT GUARANTEES CITIZENSHIP! Well, not really. I don’t think we could ever get to a state where you only have freedoms and rights if you are an active or retired member of the armed services; I would be surprised, though.
Just like in the USSR, eh comrade? Minus the lines for bread and bare essentials, of course.
Well, not just like the USSR. Russia and the rest of the former Soviet states were poor countries with bad weather and short supplies of several critical resources. The US is a rich country with abundant supplies of almost every resource. We’d do communism much better. That isn’t to say that it would work, just that it’s unfair to judge communism by the Soviet Union, since they would have been just as broke and hungry as capitalists.
You do know that Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid account for almost twice the amount of money that the defense budget does, right?
Beyond that, it isn’t the military forcing Congress to spend money on it, to the detriment of the things you mention. It’s the people in the Congressional districts who vote for these people who want those things. Believe it or not, there’s a huge chunk of the population who emphatically do not want the things you mentioned.
Again, it’s not the military that has the policy of “savage imperialism.” It’s Congress and the President who send them and tell them what to do. They’re charged with carrying out those orders, not with generating them.
In many ways, our wars are less lethal to civilians than ones in the past; we actively try to minimize civilian casualties and collateral damage, unlike in prior wars like Vietnam, Korea, the World Wars, etc… In my mind, it’s hard to fault the military for trying to do their assigned orders in such a manner; it would be easier for them to just carpet-bomb things and indiscriminately kill.
I think you’re selectively viewing the country’s activities. To some degree, civilian casualties and collateral property damage are an inevitable consequence of “hot” military action. I’d argue that we deserve kudos for trying to minimize it. Plus, even if the Federal government doesn’t give money for humanitarian aid, the American people sure do, which seems better to me- people can donate where they think best, rather than having a bunch of political hacks and bureaucrats in Washington decide where the politically best place to give foreign aid is.
That’s absurd. I wouldn’t say that they detract from your freedoms in a real way- you’re just (wrongly) perceiving a lot of military-related things as standing in the way of the way you think things should be. which is a LONG way from infringing on your freedoms in any way.
Don’t give the US military all the credit. There’s also reality working against you.
Hypothetical proof is the best kind.
No, the military is to a large degree a tool used to promote various political policies and economic/corporate interests. They may weaken the political power of countries we don’t like by overthrowing governments that ally with our enemies (like the USSR) but I wouldn’t call that protecting our freedom.
However the war against Japan in WW2 was a war for our freedom, since Japan had the intention of overtaking us if they thought it was possible. Germany probably did too, but I don’t see how they’d be able to overtake the US with Russia and England fighting them.
But aside from Japan in WW2, I can’t think of any examples where our freedom as citizens was at risk in recent history, although some may exist. Al Qaeda wants to attack us, but they are responded to with police action as much (if not more) than military action. Most other wars were to weaken allies of the USSR, or promote US interests, or oppose anti-capitalist economic policy.
To what degree is protecting our freedom a side effect of potential long range planning though? The thinking behind the war in Vietnam was the domino effect, once Vietnam fell then all of SE asia would become communist. Then natural resources, manpower, etc would be allied with the USSR whose interests were not allied with ours. So eventually our freedoms as citizens would be at more risk if the USSR had more allies.
So even if the war in Vietnam wasn’t to protect our immediate freedom, down the road a stronger USSR could make our ability to get what we want as a nation weaker.
But the USSR fell within 20 years of the end of the war in Vietnam. And the domino theory did happen. Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos all went communist within a year of us leaving. The USSR dissolved and Vietnam eventually overthrew the communist government in Cambodia. It didn’t make a difference to our domestic freedoms.
So again, maybe you can make the argument that the military protects our freedom over the long term. But there is no teling what will happen over the long term. Maybe the USSR will dissolve and attacking their allies is meaningless or counterproductive. Putting US troops in Saudi Arabia helped drive Al Qaeda to want to attack us. How are we free now that we are more or less forced to maintain wars in 2 countries because of that?
If you look at immediate and direct threats to our freedom, Japan in the only one I can think of in recent history, and even that one may be iffy. I don’t think the Japanese would have had the resources to invade North America.