The culture of detached, blind violence in America is disturbing at times. The vast, vast majority of people actually support the mass murder of innocent civilians- as long as it is in another country. If the government condones it, to hell with the reasons, the evidence, the proof. Wave the flag and slap yellow magnets on your car and you are one of a few hundred million ignorant robots spouting the official line. 1984 is now reality.
There are of course exceptions to every rule. So is there any excuse, or rather any use, for the military being overseas? It would be nice to bring them all home and close the foreign bases, but what could they possibly be doing over there that is good for us or the rest of the world?
Certainly not taking sides in local conflicts, such as the rebellion in the Philippines that is turning into a mini-Vietnam with more and more US troop involvement. Not the massive money scheme that bu*h and che*ey set up- more commonly known as "Iraq". Nor the revenge for the pipeline deal gone bad now known as "Afghanistan". It's funny isn't it- how every time an urgent need for war crops up, it happens to be in an oil rich area. Did you know there is a lot of oil in the East Adriatic / Iberian Peninsula too- you know, that place where Yugoslavia and Albania used to be? But there must be some use for all those troops wandering the globe, right? I have thought of a few....
1. Send them home to America. American borders are completely undefended. Millions of illegal aliens walk in year after year, billions worth of drugs are carried in, and allegedly anyways- lots of sex slaves including kids are brought in as well. Not to mention the fact that any terrorist could also walk in, toting any bombs he wanted. That last one goes for the North border too. Whatever the domestic bases do to keep busy, they apparently do not feel like the open borders are a threat, so if the overseas troops were brought home and stationed along the land borders, then maybe something would get done about this plethora of problems that Mexico, terrorists, and probably agents of hostile countries around the world, are laying on us. Let's build about 50 bases along the north and about 30 along the south, each designed for five thousand troops each. That would about cover it.
2. Have them enforce international laws on the high seas. If the US Navy put its mind to it, I am sure it could put a screeching halt to piracy, toxic waste dumping, illegal whaling, and drug shipments. How do you think Thai pot gets here, or poppies from Lebanon? Not in planes- too high profile. Boats are sneakier. I promote the blasting to bits of every Somali pirate and if need be, every Somali boat in existence including their docks. We decimated the entire Iraqi air force, so why not the boats of another nation? If toxic dumping ships were stopped, searched, and escorted back to their home countries and then reported to their authorities plus the UN, the bastards would just have to deal with it some other way. It is also ludicrous that an animal rights group has to patrol the Intl. Whale Sanctuary from illegal whaling while various navies do nothing. There are also pirates crawling the waters of Southeast Asia and other areas. No one can say we don't have enough ships to embark on these worthy endeavours. Including ones being built, and not including lots of decommissioned ships that could be used any time, it includes:
-14 aircraft carriers,
-14 amphibious assault ships (like small aircraft carriers with 2200 marines. designed for land assaults and special forces ops), 14 amphibious transport docks (supports assault ships), 12 dock landing ships (also supports assault units),
-22 cruisers (large self sufficient combat vessels), 52 destroyers (like cruisers but bigger), 30 frigates (slightly smaller and faster heavily armed escort ships),
-18 ballistic missile subs, 04 guided missile subs, 66 attack subs;
-thousands of smaller vessels.
3. Send them on hostage rescue operations. These could be from terrorists, pirates, or other criminals. There are plenty of special forces out there, just do it. Proactively hunting down alleged terrorists makes a convenient excuse to attack everybody, but rescuing hostages with SEALS would uproot the plans of any would-be hostage takers. They would know their fates were sealed. This policy of automatic hostage rescue would also insure the safety of travelers the world over.
4. Utilize them for temporary invasions, with a pre-established time limit of 30 days or less. This would be sufficient and justifiable for two reasons only: to stop the two major evils in the world of mass starvations (such as seen in Somalia due to warlords hoarding grain, or food deliveries to areas like Ethiopia and Sudan), and genocides in progress (not ones just alleged or instigated such as in the case of the Bosnia scenario). The Rwandan genocide could have been prevented, as well as the one in Cambodia. (But they had no oil...) Right now one that started in 1969 continues to this day in Myanmar- formerly called Burma. No one cares since they have no oil either. A US invasion into the capital city, which is in a delta near the ocean, could quickly eliminate the central govt. and then leave. This would create an opportunity for other political parties to fill the take power. A similar plan could be enacted for the country of Niger, where the participants in their civil war have been literally cannibalizing one another. Or perhaps the civil war in the Central African Republic (Zaire) where they use machetes to chop off people's arms and legs by the thousands. This war is over rights to mines that supply rare minerals for use in American electronics. I propose wiping out the govt. and leaving: no nation building crap, no destruction of infrastructure, no civilian massacres.
5. Require them to invade and hold at least a 50-100 mile buffer zone of any bordering nation that sends military sorties into our home country. This would fix Mexico and their corrupt military, frequently escorting drug runners. (What? The traitorous ACLU, Sierra Club, and Green Party didn't bother to mention that to you? Shootouts between the Mexican Army and local sheriffs have occurred up to 100 miles north of the Rio Grande. See older posts.)
Those are all of the possible reasons I can think of to utilize American troops in other countries or overseas. If another country wants nuclear powered electricity, so what. If they use it to build bombs with too, you know what they say: those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Leave other countries alone, it is all their problem and they can handle it without us babysitting them. Let's either put the forces to good use for all, like the reasons listed above, or just bring them all home and protect our own country for once.
Warmongers should kill each other, not other people all over the world. Ever heard of minding your own business, or that rule your god literally wrote in stone for you: thou shalt not kill??? Whomever supports the imperialist policies of the American government needs to grow up and reexamine the writings of the Founding Fathers, not to mention their own religious book.
see also US Constitution, Section 1, Article 8: Powers Granted to Congress. "To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money for that use shall be for a longer term than two years; "
(has it been two years yet? or has congress been renewing this as a technicality, implying we have been at war permanently since 1787?)
movie that realistically portrays modern day Burma
(c) james platt
(c) james platt