Comments on: Small Wars: The Bane Of Superpowers http://donklephant.com/2006/11/27/small-wars-the-bane-of-superpowers/ Big Teeth. Huge Ass. Surprisingly Reasonable. Mon, 01 Dec 2008 23:54:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: BenG http://donklephant.com/2006/11/27/small-wars-the-bane-of-superpowers/#comment-126813 BenG Tue, 28 Nov 2006 19:06:41 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/11/27/small-wars-the-bane-of-superpowers/#comment-126813 Good points on why the US will not continue to support the war. I would add that the large number of mistakes made by the administration makes it difficult to agree with ‘stay the course’. Now the Baker commission gets a chance, but I don’t have much hope in that effort. Aren’t these some of the same people who got us into trouble before in Iran, who supported Saddam when he was in our ‘best interest’? I also don’t see any military leaders in the group, just more politicians and an ex supreme cour judge?. This is war, stupid ! [to paraphrase the Economist after the election] About military spending, which I’m no expert, the war is funded by tax revenue, not GNP, although related. The gov. took in about 1 trillion in taxes [according to a recent post] and the war costs, what, about 400 billion per year ? That sounds more like 4%. And if you factor in what the middle to low income taxpayer pays in taxes as a percentage of wages, I think we’re shelling out a few bucks more than our fair share. So, it’s a hard sell, especially if you’re screwing it all up. The only winners seem to be private company contracts. Good points on why the US will not continue to support the war. I would add that the large number of mistakes made by the administration makes it difficult to agree with ‘stay the course’. Now the Baker commission gets a chance, but I don’t have much hope in that effort. Aren’t these some of the same people who got us into trouble before in Iran, who supported Saddam when he was in our ‘best interest’? I also don’t see any military leaders in the group, just more politicians and an ex supreme cour judge?. This is war, stupid ! [to paraphrase the Economist after the election]
About military spending, which I’m no expert, the war is funded by tax revenue, not GNP, although related. The gov. took in about 1 trillion in taxes [according to a recent post] and the war costs, what, about 400 billion per year ? That sounds more like 4%. And if you factor in what the middle to low income taxpayer pays in taxes as a percentage of wages, I think we’re shelling out a few bucks more than our fair share. So, it’s a hard sell, especially if you’re screwing it all up. The only winners seem to be private company contracts.

]]> By: ME http://donklephant.com/2006/11/27/small-wars-the-bane-of-superpowers/#comment-125748 ME Mon, 27 Nov 2006 19:51:52 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/11/27/small-wars-the-bane-of-superpowers/#comment-125748 The US is nowhere near where the USSR was in terms of military spending as a % of GDP. USA is a very wealthy country and can afford our current war in Iraq (though higher taxes (GASP!) might be necessary). Iraq currently costs ~ 1% of US GDP. The issue is public support. I have argued from the begininning (though I haven't seen anyone else make the point) that it is immoral to start a war that will not have continued support till completion. It is easy to see that the US does not have the public will to sustain long-term counter insurgencies, unless it is clearly seen to be in our immediate interest, which is no longer the case (no WMDS, no Al qaeda connection, no threat to US). Bush claims the lesson of Vietnam is that we didn't bomb enough. With what support? The lesson of Vietnam should be not to get stuck in guerilla wars that have no direct bearing on US security, because we will never have the will to win those. The rabbit sometimes outruns the fox because, while the fox is only running for his dinner, the rabbit is running for his life. The US is nowhere near where the USSR was in terms of military spending as a % of GDP.

USA is a very wealthy country and can afford our current war in Iraq (though higher taxes (GASP!) might be necessary). Iraq currently costs ~ 1% of US GDP.

The issue is public support. I have argued from the begininning (though I haven’t seen anyone else make the point) that it is immoral to start a war that will not have continued support till completion. It is easy to see that the US does not have the public will to sustain long-term counter insurgencies, unless it is clearly seen to be in our immediate interest, which is no longer the case (no WMDS, no Al qaeda connection, no threat to US). Bush claims the lesson of Vietnam is that we didn’t bomb enough. With what support? The lesson of Vietnam should be not to get stuck in guerilla wars that have no direct bearing on US security, because we will never have the will to win those.

The rabbit sometimes outruns the fox because, while the fox is only running for his dinner, the rabbit is running for his life.

]]> By: Justin Gardner http://donklephant.com/2006/11/27/small-wars-the-bane-of-superpowers/#comment-125660 Justin Gardner Mon, 27 Nov 2006 18:20:19 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/11/27/small-wars-the-bane-of-superpowers/#comment-125660 <blockquote>This notion of ‘Super Powers’ in general is ridiculous.</blockquote> Hey, Afghanistan arguably ate up so many of the USSR's resources that it eventually folded in no small part as a result. Will the same thing happen to the US? Hope not, but it's a lot more likely when we're spending money like it doesn't cost anything to print. Just a thought.

This notion of ‘Super Powers’ in general is ridiculous.

Hey, Afghanistan arguably ate up so many of the USSR’s resources that it eventually folded in no small part as a result. Will the same thing happen to the US? Hope not, but it’s a lot more likely when we’re spending money like it doesn’t cost anything to print. Just a thought.

]]> By: BenG http://donklephant.com/2006/11/27/small-wars-the-bane-of-superpowers/#comment-125654 BenG Mon, 27 Nov 2006 18:05:18 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/11/27/small-wars-the-bane-of-superpowers/#comment-125654 This notion of 'Super Powers' in general is ridiculous. The NFL used to have 'super power' franchises back before free agency, salary caps, and draft systems to promote equality. This post shows how modern technology evens out the playing field in war, as well. The question is will this trend continue and make this ancient cold war term more irrelevant? This is not the war on terror we ever needed. Maybe this was done because of some unfinished business left over from previous wars. We can't learn from the past if we keep re-electing the same people who got us into trouble in the first place. Let's see how the new guys do. Can't wait till they get their chance. This notion of ‘Super Powers’ in general is ridiculous. The NFL used to have ’super power’ franchises back before free agency, salary caps, and draft systems to promote equality. This post shows how modern technology evens out the playing field in war, as well. The question is will this trend continue and make this ancient cold war term more irrelevant?
This is not the war on terror we ever needed. Maybe this was done because of some unfinished business left over from previous wars. We can’t learn from the past if we keep re-electing the same people who got us into trouble in the first place. Let’s see how the new guys do. Can’t wait till they get their chance.

]]>