Is it possible?Economic collapse and War's brewing?

You are working off of the assumption that it was ever about winning the "War's" in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq. The United States does not need to "Win" wars with countries like Vietnam and Iran, they only need to destabilize them to maintain the balance of power. The United States is not invincible by any means, and no nation ever will be , but Iran is no great threat to the US. What is Iran going to do? Besides a terrorist attack on the US, what can Iran do right now? Are they going to send their Navy halfway around the world to attack us? Are they going to shoot us with missiles that can barely reach the seaboard? Sure they can attack Israel, but how does that hurt the US really? Even if Iran had nukes, do you think they will ever have MORE nukes than the US? Iran is dangerous to the Middle East, and they may fund terrorism, but as a nation they are not a major threat to America.

You are right about America bombing Iraq and Afghanistan and leaving them as shitholes. You say the US should expect terrorists to pop up! What are they thinking you say! That IS what they are thinking! If the Middle East is kept in check by US allies like Kuwait, Turkey, Israel, etc... and the remainder are squabbling with each other and blowing themselves up, then they do your job for you. The other day I saw on the web that Al Qaeda claimed a recent terrorist attack that claimed about 200 lives in Iraq. The things is no US troops were killed. So basically Al Qaeda did the United States a favor. Controlled Anarchy.

Move into a country that has resources you desire. Instigate general disarray , so no one can organize to resist. Lay claim to many of it's resources, give them access to US trade, and install a puppet leadership. Make enemy fight itself, and keep a constant state of panic. Rinse and Repeat.

This is the way the world has worked for hundreds of years. Only after the fact do we ever learn the truth. That area has been consistently destabilized, subjugated, and looted for a couple thousand of years. Iran is the weak link out of the nations in that area. Look at all the problems in the Middle East right now- Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, and the list goes on. It was all engineered to happen, and will continue to happen. The United States looks like a Democracy, but it acts more like a Empire, but so did the French, British, Roman, and German Nations at certain times in history. It comes down to the United States still being a immature nation as a whole, it bullies those it can, takes what it can from others, and gets pissed when you don't like it. That being said I love my country, and can't say I support what it does all the time, but every country is run by stupid people, and that will never change. But like anything else, that is just my opinion, and everyone is entitled their own.



@ Moe Canibo: Did anyone ever doubt that the US would leave Vietnam? Did we ever really leave totally? I like to think we continue to smuggle large amounts of their drugs, like we do in Afghanistan, into the US from their country and profit immensely. The United States picks sides often in order to stop any one group from gaining power. The USSR was dangerous for the US and took up years of their attention, as did most Communist nations like North Korea and Vietnam. The US "apparently" feared a Communist alliance and did it's best to destabilize ANY effort at growing communist states. Did the US really lose Vietnam? How do you determine a win or loss in war? Is it by total casualties amassed, or the long term effects it has on the region, and the involved parties? What are the ulterior motives behind the wars? People always have ulterior motives, and it would be wise to understand that.

Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Russia, were all Communist "fear driven" campaigns. The United States public became so terrified of Communists, and were told that nuclear war was on the horizon. The US has often used these kinds of tactics to go to war, but they aren't the only ones. The Vietnam war was started due to false evidence to begin with, so that goes to show the real intentions of the government.

 

I think you miss the point. Just because the US said "We are doing this" does not mean that was their real goal. Look at it like a game of chess. Sometimes you have to sacrifice pieces for the final outcome. You don't let the other guy know your intentions even after you win. You keep that strategy so you can use it next time.

If the US said, " We are going to randomly start wars to control other parts of the world", people would be pissed and raise hell, but if you say, " These are bad guys. They want to take your freedom" , everyone cheers, the trumpets play, and they play the patriot card. Now I'm not saying that is the only reason for the wars, but there are ulterior motives as always.

The funny thing about Afghanistan is that we supplied everything they have. We supplied Korea and still do to this day. We supply Iraq before AND after we destroy their country. We attempt to destabilize Cuba without anyone ever knowing about it, then attempt to overthrow their government and elect a puppet leader. We get involved in minor conflicts like Bosnia and Kosovo for what?
We intervene in other countries affairs on a regular basis. I think Team America World Police had it right

There is a difference between what the military strategy is and what other's strategy may be. Is the military the only one involved in war? Private companies like KBR and Blackwater?
Is the CIA completely upfront with it's psyops and spy intelligence.

Here are two quotes which say it best:

In the Afghan war, the Taliban win only when they return to power; the U.S wins as long as they stop this from happening. From this perspective, the U.S. can ostensibly lose the war and still win it.

George Friedman has said that America’s essential military goal, in its modern wars, has been defensive – not necessarily to vanquish its enemies but to stop them, or delay them, from winning. Because of this, American victories can look a lot like defeats.

But what do I know? I only repeat what I read ......

 

No I'm not saying that. Of course everything did not go according to plan. The French were involved before the US was to begin with, and they were beaten badly as we all know. Supposedly the United States was taking a stand against Communism, but that wasn't the only reason. People often forget about the large amounts of resources that Vietnam is on top of. The Opium trade is even more profitable. I am not denying the fact that the US got their asses kicked in Vietnam. I am simply saying that it did nothing to hurt the US in the long term. It's effects won't be felt 200 years from now. It isn't like it stopped us from going to war since then. War is good business, but America has fucked up priorities a lot of the time. I just feel like the "real" reasons we go to war are not always obvious. Everyone hated the government during Vietnam, and many protested, but what really happened after that? Everyone complained, called the troops baby killers, and then they moved on. Now the vets pay the price, but the rest of the country moves on. The government got away with it, so ultimately they were shown this:

We can have a war for no real reason and get away with it. People will bitch a lot, but when it comes down to it, they are powerless. If people feel threatened they will be for war, but once the war drags on the fear wears off.

Think about World War 2. FDR wanted the US to get pulled into the war. He was corresponding with Churchhill for months, but the US wanted to stay isolated. Pearl Harbor changed that. But why did Japan attack us? Because we completely cut off their access to the ocean trade routes. They would be unable to survive a few months without imports. But everyone made the Japanese out to be evil psychos. It wasn't until years later that we learned what happened behind-the-scenes.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/09/china-us-careful-defence-strategy

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/jan/10/china-slowdown-fall-import-growth

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2012/jan/06/us-military-deployment-map

Lots of stuff going on in that part of the world right now.

 

http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/iran/articles/20120107.aspx

This is a good article about the current situation with Iran.

 

I understand where you are coming from Crni. If you go off of the official statement of the Iraq War you would be pretty confused though. We went to war with Iraq why? I mean we all know why they "Said" we went to war, but what was the real reason? Was it because of 911, or was it for resources? Was it because of terrorists, or was it for more hidden purposes? I wonder what the "History" books will have to say about it?

I know what the official statements usually say are half-truths and propaganda. Many things are kept from us, and the truth is not always apparent. The official story is only half the story. I am not saying that some grandiose conspiracy is at work, but the governments of the world have certain agendas, and they will do whatever it takes to accomplish those agendas. Many believe that the only reason we went to war with Vietnam was to show to Russia that we were committed to stop Communism. I think there are numerous reasons, but I think the official reason is bullshit personally.

I have been reading a lot of George Friedman mostly. I find some of his views to be outrageous, but he seems to have many interesting ideas. The link below explains why a war in Asia from overseas is a bad idea. I advise anyone interested to read George Friedman's book "The Next hundred Years", and keep an open mind. Many of his views are unconventional and some are outright wrong, but he is dead-on in many respects.

http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2011/03/01/never_fight_a_land_war_in_asia_99418.html

Friedman thinks that ultimately Vietnam and Iraq will have no long-term consequences for the US, but i am not completely sure. I think once the last Vietnam vets die you won't hear about it as much.
50 years from now Vietnam and Iraq will be a memory, and new conflicts will take precedence. Vietnam is remembered mostly because of it's massive casualties and unpopularity, but it is also remembered because thousands of vets walk around and constantly remind us of it. When those vets are gone the memories will simply be history, and history always slants towards certain viewpoints.


My main complaint with Friedman is his American-centric focus on the world. I don't think the world revolves around the US, but coming from some people you would think so. I am almost ashamed to be American sometimes because of the way certain people represent us, and the priorites Americans have in life.

You mean our "Freedom" is being taken away for "Security"? They can come into our house and take us to jail because they "SAY" you are a terrorist? The US is declaring war on countries for no good reason? Hmmm....what's on American Idol tonight?

 

It's easy for people to forget if they have not had to sacrifice anything.

 

Yeah you are probably right. No one has ever wasted human lives for their own selfish ambitions.

 

Well said my good man.