War in Vietnam, war in Iraq, war on poverty, war on drugs

[betgo]

I am not a libertarian or anarcho-capitalist, and I don't blame everything that is going on on Licoln or even FDR. However, it seems like we have a bloated federal government that engages in hugely wasteful, nonproductive and damaging projects.

The wars on poverty and drugs seem similar to the wars in Vietnam and Iraq. A lot of money spent, plenty of casualties, but nothing accomplished. The war on poverty resulted in people developing a strange lifestyle of dependence on the government. The war on drugs sends some people to prison for a long time, but does little to stop drugs. The situation is very similar to the prohibition of alcohol, except in that case the enforcement was obviously corrupt and there were only some short prison sentences.

It seems like politicians, bureacracy, government contractors and some special interests like these giant projects because because they gain through all the wasteful expenditures.

Socialism was a 19th century ideal based on the excesses of capitalism. However, it was very naive to expect government to solve a lot of problems. It seems like Communism failed because the huge government didn't work economically. Big government has become a deadweight in the US and western Europe.

[Dr1Gonzo]

Have you read 1984 ?

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
Have you read 1984 ?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeh, among other things, there were always never ending wars.

[AScorz]

Thats what we do. When theres a problem we declare war on it, we don't do anything about it. We Just declare war on it. Throw alittle money in around the elections. The drug laws are a joke. Poverty isn't rampit. I'm not saying it dosen't exist, but we got rid of the soup kitchens a long time ago. The war on terror has been good and bad. Iraq is being fought poorly because of P.C., and other political crap. We need to march, and kick em all out. Republican, Democrate, Liberal, or Conservative. None have our interest at heart.

[steve9789]

I am in totally with you.

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
Thats what we do. When theres a problem we declare war on it, we don't do anything about it. We Just declare war on it. Throw alittle money in around the elections. The drug laws are a joke. Poverty isn't rampit. I'm not saying it dosen't exist, but we got rid of the soup kitchens a long time ago. The war on terror has been good and bad. Iraq is being fought poorly because of P.C., and other political crap. We need to march, and kick em all out. Republican, Democrate, Liberal, or Conservative. None have our interest at heart.

[/ QUOTE ]
War on terror and war on crime are other examples. War on anything means big boondoggle wasting tons of resources with mostly destructive results.

Real wars are the same thing. Never ending, no results, lots of casualties are destruction to country where war is.

As for Iraq, we could be harsher, but there are already complaints about civilian casualties and interogation methods. I think it is awfully difficult to subdue a middle eastern country without being awfully ruthless. However, the US can't operate like Saddam Hussein, and if the US took a harsher approach, the bad publicity in the mideast and Europe would be worse.

There was controversy about not taking a stronger approach is Vietnam also. However, the whole nature of these conflicts is likely to produce an endless quagmire. The same is true for domestic wars in drugs, crime, poverty, and terror. They are completely unwinnable by their very nature.

[tolbiny]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it is awfully difficult to subdue a middle eastern country without being awfully ruthless.

[/ QUOTE ]

Statements like this really bother me. Its alright to admit our goal is to subdue, because its an innocuous word for sticking a gun in someone's face and telling them what to do. Its a joke to anyone who actually believes in freedom that this is an acceptable way to act .

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think it is awfully difficult to subdue a middle eastern country without being awfully ruthless.

[/ QUOTE ]

Statements like this really bother me. Its alright to admit our goal is to subdue, because its an innocuous word for sticking a gun in someone's face and telling them what to do. Its a joke to anyone who actually believes in freedom that this is an acceptable way to act .

[/ QUOTE ]

I am against the war in Iraq. I was just responding to the other poster saying that we could win if we were tougher. I am agreeing that it is difficult to take control of a mideastern country by gentle means, but that is partly why the whole project is impossible.

Sorry, we are not subduing Iraq but building democracy. War is peace, freedom is slavery, truth is lies.

[tolbiny]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think it is awfully difficult to subdue a middle eastern country without being awfully ruthless.

[/ QUOTE ]

Statements like this really bother me. Its alright to admit our goal is to subdue, because its an innocuous word for sticking a gun in someone's face and telling them what to do. Its a joke to anyone who actually believes in freedom that this is an acceptable way to act .

[/ QUOTE ]

I am against the war in Iraq. I was just responding to the other poster saying that we could win if we were tougher. I am agreeing that it is difficult to take control of a mideastern country by gentle means, but that is partly why the whole project is impossible.

Sorry, we are not subduing Iraq but building democracy. War is peace, freedom is slavery, truth is lies.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, all we need to do to solve all these problems is to declare a war on violence. If we are ruthless enough i think we can win that one.

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]
I am not a libertarian or anarcho-capitalist

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are.

Have a look around on my new blog: http://thefreedomchannel.blogspot.com/ .