Why should we support wars of choice with no clear goal that have catastrophic consequences for the people in it’s path. With WW2, there was a clear and present danger, not just to Europeans, North Africans, and Asians (and to a much less extent, Americans), but to humanity as a whole. There is plenty of reasons to oppose the current wars we’re engaged in, not to mention wars since the end of WW2.
And supporting arms dealers that help to stoke the wars that are killing both our troops and innocent civilians with graphic novels is just gross.
In short, wars should not ever be conducted. And when they are, they should be aimed at freeing people from tyranny, not propping up gun runners and American empire in the service of private wealth.
That actually depends on your flavor of Cap. Starting around Vietnam (I wonder why…) Cap decided that he didn’t stand for the US government, but for American ideals, or what he decides American ideals are. This is why, for example, he was anti-government in Civil War (well, at the start…)
I’d go further - “freeing people from tyranny” is far too easy to use as an excuse. Also, freedom might not considered the most important value by the people you are attacking.
So, how about: “a war [outside your own borders] can only be justified if it saves lives?”
To me, a lot of American popular writing and TV is militarist propaganda to some degree. It’s so bad that I find it really difficult to draw the line between legitimate expression of popular American viewpoints and paid-for propaganda. Or, for that matter, the line between “who cares, it’s just a story, and I love it” and “this is going too far”.
I mean, Star Trek clearly shows a militarist society. And when I say Star Trek, I’m thinking of ST:TNG. The later shows got worse. And then there was Stargate SG1, with the US Air Force actually having input on script decisions. Still fun to watch, though.
Eh, Korea, Vietnam, the first Persian Gulf war, and the beginning of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan had an identifiable enemy. Vietnam got muddied up by the VC mixing in with the locals rather than the uniformed NVA. Of course Iraq and Afghanistan quickly devolved into fighting insurgents. But yes, I get your point.
Fair point. Though Northrop/Grumman didn’t start the wars, and some of what they do are for our defense. I guess in principle I am not against making F-18s and drones, though I am against their misuse. That and they do a lot of work in stuff like composites which has tons of non military applications.
IIRC that started when he was drafted during WWII and ended up working for their newspaper and then started making manuals.
I am all for putting a message out there to be proud of our country and to enlist to defend it, or take career paths to help with defense. But making a “fun comic” for kids that is essentially a subliminal, sneaky ad for a defense contractor is troubling. The fact that it got as far as it did through Marvel should be more alarming than the partnership itself and says more about them than Northrop/Grumman.
That’s being exceedingly generous considering the Bush administration had 7 employees with direct ties to the company, including the secretary of defense and head of the Air Force (who Bush then nominated to head the Army). And that’s not the exception by far.
To be fair, they aren’t just bombing weddings. I under stand wanting to keep civilians deaths to a minimum, but not every strike includes civilians.
But, you know, that’s war for you. Overall I agree we have more or less failed over there for various reasons.
Eh, not willing to engage is speculation that the Military Industrial Complex is manipulating us into wars with out some proof, but yes, I concur they do have a lot of influence when it comes to budgets.
They were the military leadership going into both Afghanistan and Iraq. Not lobbying for budget or contracts, not consultants, they were the heads of the military and defense department inside the White House when those decisions were made.