The troops aren't coming home until there are jobs to come home to

After thinking about it for a while, this is the only explanation I can come up with that makes any sense to me. The administration is not stupid, they know the difference between the Taliban and Al Qaeda (and they know that most of the public doesn't know it, or doesn't care to), and they know that this war is a clusterfuck that can only end badly.

But an army that is freshly unemployed? That can cause all kinds of havoc, as they found out when that dumbass Jay Garner dismissed the Iraqi army.

To be clear, I oppose escalation, or using the military for anything other than defending ourselves. We need to GTFO of a lot of places. But I won't ignore the fact that the military cash cow currently exists, and that it is more tempting to keep on milking it during a deep recession, because if you slaughter it, it won't be there anymore and there will be bloodstains everywhere...if you'll pardon the metaphor.

Employment in the military is also keeping employment numbers inflated. It's not just that they don't have jobs to come back to - it would also reflect an unemployment rate of who knows what stratospheric number.

and what are they going to do after they come home?
That is a damned good question!!!!

Solar panels are much cheaper than endless war, and the the job pays better than the military.

going home to your every night and knowing you won't be coming home in a body bag sure beats fighting in some desert shithole half way around the world in the middle of nowhere in my book.

.... when I get out I'll buy a business and be set for life. Hell, I used to think that way back when military pay was shit even for a teenager.

think of something that people might want

So I can say, "YES, WE CAN get from DC to NY in an hour!" :patriot:

is that there won't be any jobs to come home to until we stop gutting our treasury to pay to keep them over there.

It explains a lot of the rationale for going to war, more than anything I have ever heard! You're brilliant!

:blush:

Thanks for the compliments! :)

Thank you for a reasonable explanation for what looks like insanity. It helps.

Wars are a net drag on job creation. In terms of Federal fiscal stimulus, war is near the bottom of the list for jobs added per dollar spent.

Here's a good article which explores the issue:

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/11/guest-post-military-spending-is-increasing-unemployment-and-reducing-gdp.html">Military Spending is INCREASING Unemployment and REDUCING Economic Growth

From poking around that blog, I see the term "military Keynesianism" describes what I was talking about. That's something new I have learned today, so thanks. :fistbump:

As for the administration, I freely admit I have no clue, but it sure looks that way to me.

As president Obama IS following Republican game plan and suggestion... This is A wonderful time to Hold your suspected Bigots feet to the Fire. They claim they cannot disagree with President Obama without being labeled a bigot... well if they cannot agree with President Obama on Their OWN game plan they are BIGOTS.

The republican/neo-cons Hate President Obama soo much they will not ever agree with him, even on this republicanesq war plan.

If they still cannot agree with this plan of action then they are Bigots and would never ever agree with anything President Obama does. even if he should defect to the Republican party. :sarcasm:

seriously though their hate prohibits them to agree with President Obama on any Idea, action, front or topic. = RACIST BIGOTRY.

:rofl:

The U.S. army won't be disbanded like the Iraqi army.

But of course you knew that.

Got any non-strawman arguments against my main point? (Hint: look at the subject line.)

But an army that is freshly unemployed? That can cause all kinds of havoc, as they found out when that dumbass Jay Garner dismissed the Iraqi army.

silly stuff. whatever the reason behind the escalation in Afghanistan, it's not because of a poor job market. it's simply moronic to believe that.

As I said, it was the only explanation I could think of that made any sense.

Do you have a better one, or is repeating the descriptor "moronic" all you got? (Hint: it doesn't make you look smart to lob contentless shit at my speculation. It just makes you look like an asshole.)

We had an unemployed army that marched on Washington DC in 1932, it consisted of out of works vets and their families they numbered 43,000 and called themselves the "Bonus Army". They came to DC and set up camp demanding pay for their services.The war veterans, many of whom had been out of work since the beginning of the Great Depression, sought immediate cash payment of Service Certificates granted to them eight years earlier

Hoover was president at the time, he decided to end the protest by ordering in the United States Army. "On 28 July, 1932, Attorney General Mitchell ordered the police evacuation of the Bonus Army veterans, who resisted; the police shot at them, and killed two. When told of the killings, President Hoover ordered the U.S. Army to effect the evacuation of the Bonus Army from Washington, D.C.

"At 4:45 p.m., commanded by Gen. Douglas MacArthur, the 12th Infantry Regiment, Fort Howard, Maryland, and the 3rd Cavalry Regiment, supported by six battle tanks commanded by Maj. George S. Patton, Fort Myer, Virginia, formed in Pennsylvania Avenue while thousands of Civil Service employees left work to line the street and watch the U.S. Army attack its own veterans. The Bonus Marchers, believing the display was in their honour, cheered the troops until Maj. Patton charged the cavalry against them — an action which prompted the Civil Service employee spectators to yell, "Shame! Shame!"

"After the cavalry charge, infantry, with fixed bayonets and adamsite gas, entered the Bonus Army camps, evicting veterans, families, and camp followers. The veterans fled across the Anacostia River, to their largest camp; President Hoover ordered the Army assault stopped, however, Gen. MacArthur—feeling this free-speech exercise was a Communist attempt at overthrowing the U.S. Government—ignored the President and ordered a new attack. Hundreds of veterans were injured, several were killed — including William Hushka and Eric Carlson; a veteran's wife miscarried; and many other veterans were hurt."

"The Posse Comitatus Act — forbidding civilian police work by the U.S. military — did not apply to Washington, D.C., because it is the federal district directly governed by the U.S. Congress (U.S. Constitution, Article I. Section 8. Clause 17). The exemption was created because of an earlier "Bonus March". In 1781, most of the Continental Army was demobilized without pay, two years later, in 1783, hundreds of Pennsylvania war veterans marched on Philadelphia, surrounded the State House wherein Congress was in session, and demanded their pay. The U.S. Congress fled to Princeton, New Jersey, and, several weeks later, the U.S. Army expelled the war veterans back to home, out of the national capital." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonus_Army

I think what you speculated on maybe quite closer to the truth, then we all realize.

Do you want that on your conscious? I don't. Further, every day we occupy those two Muslim nations with our combat troops, Americans at home and abroad are LESS SAFE.

It's the mercenaries and all the people making the bombs, the guns, the airplanes, providing services, etc. Many more jobs are dependent on these wars than just the soldiers'. A lot of people are making money off these wars.

And the contractionary effect on the economy of ending a war is well known. Stop these wars and you probably add at least .5% onto the unemployment rate.

Still, it's immoral to keep a war going for economic reasons.

You ask, what other reason could there be for an escalation? Political. Obama doesn't want to risk the possible adverse consequences of stopping the war and being accused by the right of "losing the war," and all that goes with that. So instead, for political purposes, he follows Nixon's strategy of escalating the war while at the same time vietnamizing the conflict, i.e. training the locals to take over the fighting so we can leave. Nixon escalated for ~2 years, while increasing and training the Vietnamese army , then turned it over to them and withdrew our soldiers in the period leading up to the 1972 election. It worked out perfectly for his re-election in 1972 -- pictures of soldiers returning home in droves were on every tv news broadcast, just at the votes were being cast. I can see Obama doing the same thing. We already know a big component of the new strategy will be to rapidly train large numbers of Afghan soldiers, with the idea of turning the conflict over to them so we can withdraw. I've read several sources quoted in the last week saying we should be able to bring at least some soldiers home "starting before 2013." The year before 2013 just happens to be the election year 2012.

So the scenario is escalate now, train the Afghan soldiers, then withdraw our soldiers lleading into the 2012 election. That way if things turn to shit when we leave, Obama will already be in his 2nd term. A totally despicable politically nmotivated strategy.

It could very well be political. The problem with that strategy, however, is that there's too much potential for blowback, both over there and over here. I mean...training Afghan soldiers? Pardon my dialect, but them motherfuckers just ended a 30 year civil war 5 years before we showed up, what can we tell 'em, go buy bigger guns? That things will turn to shit (or rather, remain shit) when we leave is pretty much a given.

Meanwhile, back home, Obama's blowing political capital trying to placate motherfuckers who will not be placated no matter what happens, not until we get our own civil war. The accusations of the right have no power when even the average Joe on the street knows they're fucking crazy.

I dunno...the economic reason just makes more sense to me, especially here in the DC area which would be fucked right in half, but you could be right.

It was the law Ceaser broke which brought about the end of the Roman Republic.

I'll be over here. :boring:

:*

I'd much rather the troops, especially the Guard be working on projects here, but it would blow unemployment out of the water to bring them all home now. That's probably the slant that the Administration sees for continuing the war at all.

clean up their own bases. all the military bases and sites are toxic.

so, FAIL.