G
guest123
yep rome is falling ,, u know empires used to last a lot longer in the old days ...
A question for the older tokers
- Thread starter Dr.Feelgood
- Start date
G
Guest
yes, I think the point NS makes about there now being only one "superpower" is the essential difference these days
surely one of the major "global" issues now is to sort out America's two-party politics etc. and to finally have a ruling party and a president that reflect the will of sane American people
I can't help but feel that instinct of Americans en mass is to focus inwards on their own country, not to go knocking heads together across the globe, as has happened since WWII
yeh, regarding the zeitgeist nowadays - speaking for the UK, people here for the most part are more uptight than ever, and that is saying something
other than trying to talk Blair out of office, things on the whole are taking a fairly apocalyptic tone in the media
but frankly I can't wait till we run out of fossil fuels - that won't be the "end of the world", that will be the end of the industrial age
roll on the ecological revolution - it's coming, it's just a question of when
surely one of the major "global" issues now is to sort out America's two-party politics etc. and to finally have a ruling party and a president that reflect the will of sane American people
I can't help but feel that instinct of Americans en mass is to focus inwards on their own country, not to go knocking heads together across the globe, as has happened since WWII
yeh, regarding the zeitgeist nowadays - speaking for the UK, people here for the most part are more uptight than ever, and that is saying something
other than trying to talk Blair out of office, things on the whole are taking a fairly apocalyptic tone in the media
but frankly I can't wait till we run out of fossil fuels - that won't be the "end of the world", that will be the end of the industrial age
roll on the ecological revolution - it's coming, it's just a question of when
DEC 67
DEC 67
DEC 67
Damn! It was only $15k back in the Nam. Really can't "buy the farm" with that.ShroomDr said:
G
Guest
From 1959 to 1965, roughly, the rates of loss of U.S. Troops in S.E. Asia was fairly slow. Much like the insurgency in Iraq, the VC/NVA took their time getting their groove down, but when they did, the U.S. got hurt.
There was recently an analysis that showed that comparing 'first years' of both wars, Iraq has a higher loss rate of U.S. personnel in Iraq than they did in Viet Nam.
But those kinds of stats are cold in many meanings of the term. (and yes, there was U.S. military and 'State Dept' shit going on in S.E. Asia as early as 1959, despite it being pegged at 1962, officially speaking).
And the 1963 nukes were nothing in comparison to the 'more advanced' technology of today's weapons systems.
A prime difference between 1963-1975 and now; the draft was mandatory. Unless your name was Cheney, Rothschild, Goldwater, Bush, etc., you stood to serve, or perhaps become a felon, if your number came up.
It's pretty much voluntary now. And I think that a lot of momentum that worked for peace, justice, etc., is sitting home instead, typing on a key-board, or watching sit-coms, precisely because it's more removed now, and voluntary, and fewer persons' nuts are unwillingly on the proverbial line due to that.
Human beings are relatively selfish much of the time, in my opinion, and unless 'we' have a reason to get into a movement, we'll wait and watch. The draft, ironically, provided that reason to many anti-war folks. It's gone now.
In that regard, now is much worse. Increased apathy is killing this country.
Ironic, isn't it, that a mandatory draft would likely result in greater effforts toward peace? But I suspect that it's a sad truth.
Just my opinion.
moose eater
There was recently an analysis that showed that comparing 'first years' of both wars, Iraq has a higher loss rate of U.S. personnel in Iraq than they did in Viet Nam.
But those kinds of stats are cold in many meanings of the term. (and yes, there was U.S. military and 'State Dept' shit going on in S.E. Asia as early as 1959, despite it being pegged at 1962, officially speaking).
And the 1963 nukes were nothing in comparison to the 'more advanced' technology of today's weapons systems.
A prime difference between 1963-1975 and now; the draft was mandatory. Unless your name was Cheney, Rothschild, Goldwater, Bush, etc., you stood to serve, or perhaps become a felon, if your number came up.
It's pretty much voluntary now. And I think that a lot of momentum that worked for peace, justice, etc., is sitting home instead, typing on a key-board, or watching sit-coms, precisely because it's more removed now, and voluntary, and fewer persons' nuts are unwillingly on the proverbial line due to that.
Human beings are relatively selfish much of the time, in my opinion, and unless 'we' have a reason to get into a movement, we'll wait and watch. The draft, ironically, provided that reason to many anti-war folks. It's gone now.
In that regard, now is much worse. Increased apathy is killing this country.
Ironic, isn't it, that a mandatory draft would likely result in greater effforts toward peace? But I suspect that it's a sad truth.
Just my opinion.
moose eater
Last edited:
naga_sadu
Active member
The Pentagon is voicing the exact same concerns as well. But Bush and his thugs insist that they're on the right track. This is really going to kill the US economy one day. The man who defeated the US in Vietnam, General Vo Nguyen Giap, also said the same thing.
Also, back then in the US #1 enemy were the Socialists. The bulk of military spending was focused on making more advanced platforms than the USSR. And the bulk of military construction biz was centered around blocking Soviet influence sphere expansion (ex: building more bases). Dunno bouts the Soviet side (considering all econ. activity was state run), but it was surely good business for the private sector large scalers in the US.
Now, the #1 enemies seem to be drugs and former prodigies- aka. terrorists. After all, for the arms and mil. construction biz, the more enemies you have the smoother the business runs...
Last edited:
G
Guest
naga sadu wrote:
>>>The Pentagon is voicing the exact same concerns as well. But Bush and his thugs insist that they're on the right track.<<<
I mean no disreapect to any veterans what-so-ever when I say this. I'm Chapter 35 myself. But when Shrub stood on that aircraft carrier with the banner that read, "Mission Accomplished," and stated that military operations were coming to a close, I busted a gut laughing -hard-!! What a -fucking- bafoon!!!
The guy has absolutely -NO- idea about the complexities and obstacles to a conventional force conducting what will almost always, in that situation, morph into a guerilla war.
The -only- expedient way that I know of for a conventional force to kick ass in a guerilla conflict is by locking down and literally crushing the vast majority of the -entire- population, 'cause you can't tell who's who unless they're actively firing, and IEDs don't allow for that....
And that unadvisable strategy -absolutely- -does- -not- win the hearts and minds of those whom you're supposedly 'liberating.'
We shouldn't let complete idiots even -enter- the Whitehouse, let alone run the country!!
moose eater
>>>The Pentagon is voicing the exact same concerns as well. But Bush and his thugs insist that they're on the right track.<<<
I mean no disreapect to any veterans what-so-ever when I say this. I'm Chapter 35 myself. But when Shrub stood on that aircraft carrier with the banner that read, "Mission Accomplished," and stated that military operations were coming to a close, I busted a gut laughing -hard-!! What a -fucking- bafoon!!!
The guy has absolutely -NO- idea about the complexities and obstacles to a conventional force conducting what will almost always, in that situation, morph into a guerilla war.
The -only- expedient way that I know of for a conventional force to kick ass in a guerilla conflict is by locking down and literally crushing the vast majority of the -entire- population, 'cause you can't tell who's who unless they're actively firing, and IEDs don't allow for that....
And that unadvisable strategy -absolutely- -does- -not- win the hearts and minds of those whom you're supposedly 'liberating.'
We shouldn't let complete idiots even -enter- the Whitehouse, let alone run the country!!
moose eater
Last edited:
G
Guest
naga sadu wrote:
>>>Now, the #1 enemies seem to be drugs and former prodigies- aka. terrorists<<<
One year after the shootings at Kent State, Dick Gregory participated in a gethering at Kent State, in which he gave a speech, entitled 'The Cowboy Always Needs and Indian.'
He covered a cynical (sometimes humorous, sometimes tear-provoking) historical evolution of the (selection of our 'enemies') against whom we must discriminate 'for their own good.'. One of the last stops in that list was hippies/our own children.
We used to listen to that speech every May 4th. There's still a couple of copies of it at varioous libraries around the country, but it's hard to get through inter-library loan, 'cause they don't like them to get ruined, and there's very few remaining now.
It's worth a listen for a flash-back to yester-year and a time that there was momentum for change that, unfortunately, mostly fizzled.
moose eater
>>>Now, the #1 enemies seem to be drugs and former prodigies- aka. terrorists<<<
One year after the shootings at Kent State, Dick Gregory participated in a gethering at Kent State, in which he gave a speech, entitled 'The Cowboy Always Needs and Indian.'
He covered a cynical (sometimes humorous, sometimes tear-provoking) historical evolution of the (selection of our 'enemies') against whom we must discriminate 'for their own good.'. One of the last stops in that list was hippies/our own children.
We used to listen to that speech every May 4th. There's still a couple of copies of it at varioous libraries around the country, but it's hard to get through inter-library loan, 'cause they don't like them to get ruined, and there's very few remaining now.
It's worth a listen for a flash-back to yester-year and a time that there was momentum for change that, unfortunately, mostly fizzled.
moose eater
Last edited:
B.H. while speaking of the Islamic forces not being so quick to forget @ forgive,lets not forget who drew the lines in the sand,and then installed royal families to run things.British_Hempire said:
I'm just sayin 
G
Guest
my wife is in the navy and the life insurance for her is 400kShroomDr said:
