is shit that's just kinda drilled into you during grade school. You don't talk about the decimation of capital in Europe following WW1 or the crushing poverty that plagued the next generation. You don't talk about the obliteration of infrastructure in Korea or Vietnam or Afghanistan or Iraq, nor the decades of poverty and disease and famine that followed. You don't talk about the Drug Wars in Latin America, the decades-long effort to render entire regions of arable land infertile in order to corral unapproved drug fields, operations to sterilize large parts of the African population as part of "population control" in post-War Congo, or the hellish treatment of civilians and refugees following any one of these entirely man-made calamities.
Neither do you discuss the volume of real estate bulldozed to make way for domestic modernization projects. No educators want to discuss how many communities (particularly communities of color) got plowed under to build the US Highway System. No testing agency quizzes anyone on the real state of the Water Cycle or how large asphalt and concrete slabs impact groundwater reserves or erosion patterns. Certainly, there is no inquisition into the impact a massive bombardment and subsequent occupation might have on the quality of land, water, and air in the ruined territory they create.
These are just not subjects we discuss with young people. They aren't included in the games we play or the stories we tell. They aren't a part of the mythology we've woven around ourselves. I don't know if its seriously included anywhere. But it is certainly not mentioned in a country with a monetary incentive revolving around the export of wars.
There's a big graveyard up in Gettysburg suggesting otherwise. And another at Little Big Horn.
But imagine looking at Sherman's March to Atlanta, nodding sagely, and telling folks in the state "This will be good for your economy". Now imagine if Sherman had B-52s.
what I mean is the Lakota Sioux (and allied tribes) wouldn’t have necessarily considered themselves part the Unites States of America
Hence the war, sure. But then it ended badly, and now here we are.
I could point to a bunch of other failed struggles, from the Whiskey Rebellion to Blair Mountain to the Greensboro Massacre and call them "defensive conflicts", too.
It seems a weird response to be like yeah the USA has experience in fighting a defensive war, because of that time when doing genocide to First Nations they lost as the attackers.
I'm not sure what to tell you other than that the US is conquered territory. Residents struggle against the occupation regularly. And those struggles regularly fail.
is shit that's just kinda drilled into you during grade school. You don't talk about the decimation of capital in Europe following WW1 or the crushing poverty that plagued the next generation. You don't talk about the obliteration of infrastructure in Korea or Vietnam or Afghanistan or Iraq, nor the decades of poverty and disease and famine that followed. You don't talk about the Drug Wars in Latin America, the decades-long effort to render entire regions of arable land infertile in order to corral unapproved drug fields, operations to sterilize large parts of the African population as part of "population control" in post-War Congo, or the hellish treatment of civilians and refugees following any one of these entirely man-made calamities.
Neither do you discuss the volume of real estate bulldozed to make way for domestic modernization projects. No educators want to discuss how many communities (particularly communities of color) got plowed under to build the US Highway System. No testing agency quizzes anyone on the real state of the Water Cycle or how large asphalt and concrete slabs impact groundwater reserves or erosion patterns. Certainly, there is no inquisition into the impact a massive bombardment and subsequent occupation might have on the quality of land, water, and air in the ruined territory they create.
These are just not subjects we discuss with young people. They aren't included in the games we play or the stories we tell. They aren't a part of the mythology we've woven around ourselves. I don't know if its seriously included anywhere. But it is certainly not mentioned in a country with a monetary incentive revolving around the export of wars.
"War stimulates the economy" - guy whose country has never fought a defensive war.
There's a big graveyard up in Gettysburg suggesting otherwise. And another at Little Big Horn.
But imagine looking at Sherman's March to Atlanta, nodding sagely, and telling folks in the state "This will be good for your economy". Now imagine if Sherman had B-52s.
Sherman should have turn back and made another pass...
In all seriousness Americans have no concept of actual war and it's consequences being insulated within the imperial core as they are.
Eh. Maybe. But not for the sake of GDP.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
The Indian Wars were a pretty classic case of native peoples besieged by a foreign intruding power, within the North American continent.
deleted by creator
Hence the war, sure. But then it ended badly, and now here we are.
I could point to a bunch of other failed struggles, from the Whiskey Rebellion to Blair Mountain to the Greensboro Massacre and call them "defensive conflicts", too.
I'm not sure what to tell you other than that the US is conquered territory. Residents struggle against the occupation regularly. And those struggles regularly fail.
war was good for the American economy because all the competition was bombed to rubble
deleted by creator
Broadly speaking, nobody's. Even the most cynical Capitalist is better served through improved infrastructure and civil services.
But the US is trapped in an ideological crisis that forbids domestic progress if it means foreign working and living conditions improve as well.