• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 06:10
CEST 12:10
KST 19:10
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202533RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16
Community News
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams4Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8Team TLMC #5 - Submission re-extension4
StarCraft 2
General
RSL Season 1 - Final Week Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Esports World Cup 2025 - Final Player Roster
Tourneys
Esports World Cup 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava
Brood War
General
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams BW General Discussion ASL20 Preliminary Maps BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Flash Announces (and Retracts) Hiatus From ASL
Tourneys
[CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance [Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL 2v2] ProLeague Season 3 - Friday 21:00 CET The Casual Games of the Week Thread
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Games Industry And ATVI Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 781 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 316

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 314 315 316 317 318 10093 Next
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.

In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!

NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious.
Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
sc2superfan101
Profile Blog Joined February 2012
3583 Posts
July 08 2013 18:22 GMT
#6301
On July 09 2013 03:19 Klondikebar wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 09 2013 03:12 sc2superfan101 wrote:
On July 09 2013 02:41 Klondikebar wrote:
On July 09 2013 02:31 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On July 09 2013 02:19 Klondikebar wrote:
On July 09 2013 02:04 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On July 09 2013 01:38 Shiori wrote:
I only ask cause I'm not American lol. I thought the military budget was frighteningly high, but I guess if people want to increase it it must have some perceived lack or something? ><

It's high, but in line with historical norms. Polls like this don't really mean anything other than what people's gut instinct and opinion are on a topic. For any individual budget item (military included) there's always a cohort of people that make money from it so they'll support it just out of self interest.


All of the info I've seen on U.S. military spending is pretty outrageous. Especially with the last 2 wars we've fought and the money we've pissed away from 9/11. The dumb part isn't so much the numbers, it's the percentage of government spending it's becoming. You'd think if we HAD to have government spending we'd want to reduce the amount we spend on intentional violence and increase the amount we spent on at least trying to get healthcare to people.

[image loading]


[image loading]


from http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/

It's high and I'd like it lower, but I can see how some people worry that it's getting low.

Edit: In case it's too hard to read: first graph is military spending as % of GDP, second is % of federal budget.


HAHAHA I like those graphs cause it meant Romney's stupid ass idea to peg defense spending to 4% of GDP would have actually been a spending cut even though he was selling it as an increase.


I don't know if you noticed, but the graph shows projections dipping below 4%


Yeah, projections in the future. Currently it would be a cut. When Romney was running it would have been a pretty severe cut. I did notice thanks, but I can also read the X-axis of a graph.

And you did notice that when Romney was running he was suggesting a "floor" of 4%? That he would go no lower than 4%, not necessarily that he would go no higher?
My fake plants died because I did not pretend to water them.
aksfjh
Profile Joined November 2010
United States4853 Posts
July 08 2013 18:24 GMT
#6302
About sequestration, a lot of people (including myself) were wrong about the effects to government jobs and services. However, that's because the blunt hammer of cuts were finely shaped at the final hour to minimize their visible impact. There's no guarantee that will happen again with the next round of cuts coming up later this year. There are signs departments are up against a wall now.
mordek
Profile Blog Joined December 2010
United States12704 Posts
July 08 2013 18:26 GMT
#6303
Blunt hammer of cuts. Heh
It is vanity to love what passes quickly and not to look ahead where eternal joy abides. Tiberius77 | Mordek #1881 "I took a mint!"
ziggurat
Profile Joined October 2010
Canada847 Posts
July 08 2013 18:33 GMT
#6304
The biggest part of military spending is paying soldiers. It costs a lot of money to pay all those salaries, and to keep the ones on active duty housed and geared up properly. However with the troops home from Afghanistan and Iraq, assuming the US doesn't get into any other wars, it should be possible to continue to reduce military expenditures fairly easily.

The US still maintains thousands of troops in South Korea, Japan, Germany, and several other countries. Many people argue that these troops should be brought home. However, any time there is any humanitarian disaster that happens anywhere as a result of armed conflict, there is always demand for the US to intervene militarily. No other country really has the military capacity to get involved on its own. Still, many people argue that these warzones are not the US's problem and that they should stay out.

The reality is that most of these situations are complicated and there are plausible arguments on both sides.

The other funny thing is that foreign policy seems to be one of the few areas where Democrats and Republicans don't really have much difference between their platforms these days.
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18825 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-07-08 18:43:52
July 08 2013 18:43 GMT
#6305
On July 09 2013 03:33 ziggurat wrote:
The biggest part of military spending is paying soldiers. It costs a lot of money to pay all those salaries, and to keep the ones on active duty housed and geared up properly. However with the troops home from Afghanistan and Iraq, assuming the US doesn't get into any other wars, it should be possible to continue to reduce military expenditures fairly easily.

The US still maintains thousands of troops in South Korea, Japan, Germany, and several other countries. Many people argue that these troops should be brought home. However, any time there is any humanitarian disaster that happens anywhere as a result of armed conflict, there is always demand for the US to intervene militarily. No other country really has the military capacity to get involved on its own. Still, many people argue that these warzones are not the US's problem and that they should stay out.

The reality is that most of these situations are complicated and there are plausible arguments on both sides.

The other funny thing is that foreign policy seems to be one of the few areas where Democrats and Republicans don't really have much difference between their platforms these days.

It's easy to justify military spending when it is characterized as soldier pay. When it becomes clear that millions upon millions are spent on overly-expensive and less reliable contractors as opposed to enlisted/commissioned soldiers, the story changes rather significantly.
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
Zaros
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
United Kingdom3692 Posts
July 08 2013 18:44 GMT
#6306
On July 09 2013 02:47 Klondikebar wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 09 2013 02:43 Zaros wrote:
On July 09 2013 02:41 Klondikebar wrote:
On July 09 2013 02:31 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On July 09 2013 02:19 Klondikebar wrote:
On July 09 2013 02:04 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On July 09 2013 01:38 Shiori wrote:
I only ask cause I'm not American lol. I thought the military budget was frighteningly high, but I guess if people want to increase it it must have some perceived lack or something? ><

It's high, but in line with historical norms. Polls like this don't really mean anything other than what people's gut instinct and opinion are on a topic. For any individual budget item (military included) there's always a cohort of people that make money from it so they'll support it just out of self interest.


All of the info I've seen on U.S. military spending is pretty outrageous. Especially with the last 2 wars we've fought and the money we've pissed away from 9/11. The dumb part isn't so much the numbers, it's the percentage of government spending it's becoming. You'd think if we HAD to have government spending we'd want to reduce the amount we spend on intentional violence and increase the amount we spent on at least trying to get healthcare to people.

[image loading]


[image loading]


from http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/

It's high and I'd like it lower, but I can see how some people worry that it's getting low.

Edit: In case it's too hard to read: first graph is military spending as % of GDP, second is % of federal budget.


HAHAHA I like those graphs cause it meant Romney's stupid ass idea to peg defense spending to 4% of GDP would have actually been a spending cut even though he was selling it as an increase.

Just to be bitchy, starting at 1970 is SO cheating. Obviously it's going to make every other year look like small potatoes. And when you compare our defense spending to other countries, it's off the effing charts.

And how could people worry that it's getting low? It's been going up for about a decade? Unless they think we should be sitting at Cold War levels of spending in which case I have little problem calling them xenophobic nutjobs.


Percentage of GDP wise it isn't way off the charts (but pretty high) but in nominal terms its way ahead of everyone.


If X billion dollars stops terrorists for the majority of the world, why does the U.S. need X^10 to stop those same terrorists?


1) the military isn't much about terrorists I would say that is a small proportion of it.

2) More Land More People Higher Profile means you may need to spend more money.
Klondikebar
Profile Joined October 2011
United States2227 Posts
July 08 2013 18:51 GMT
#6307
On July 09 2013 03:44 Zaros wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 09 2013 02:47 Klondikebar wrote:
On July 09 2013 02:43 Zaros wrote:
On July 09 2013 02:41 Klondikebar wrote:
On July 09 2013 02:31 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On July 09 2013 02:19 Klondikebar wrote:
On July 09 2013 02:04 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On July 09 2013 01:38 Shiori wrote:
I only ask cause I'm not American lol. I thought the military budget was frighteningly high, but I guess if people want to increase it it must have some perceived lack or something? ><

It's high, but in line with historical norms. Polls like this don't really mean anything other than what people's gut instinct and opinion are on a topic. For any individual budget item (military included) there's always a cohort of people that make money from it so they'll support it just out of self interest.


All of the info I've seen on U.S. military spending is pretty outrageous. Especially with the last 2 wars we've fought and the money we've pissed away from 9/11. The dumb part isn't so much the numbers, it's the percentage of government spending it's becoming. You'd think if we HAD to have government spending we'd want to reduce the amount we spend on intentional violence and increase the amount we spent on at least trying to get healthcare to people.

[image loading]


[image loading]


from http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/

It's high and I'd like it lower, but I can see how some people worry that it's getting low.

Edit: In case it's too hard to read: first graph is military spending as % of GDP, second is % of federal budget.


HAHAHA I like those graphs cause it meant Romney's stupid ass idea to peg defense spending to 4% of GDP would have actually been a spending cut even though he was selling it as an increase.

Just to be bitchy, starting at 1970 is SO cheating. Obviously it's going to make every other year look like small potatoes. And when you compare our defense spending to other countries, it's off the effing charts.

And how could people worry that it's getting low? It's been going up for about a decade? Unless they think we should be sitting at Cold War levels of spending in which case I have little problem calling them xenophobic nutjobs.


Percentage of GDP wise it isn't way off the charts (but pretty high) but in nominal terms its way ahead of everyone.


If X billion dollars stops terrorists for the majority of the world, why does the U.S. need X^10 to stop those same terrorists?


1) the military isn't much about terrorists I would say that is a small proportion of it.

2) More Land More People Higher Profile means you may need to spend more money.


I just don't buy that our land and "popularity" are so great that we have to spend hundreds of times what other countries spend.
#2throwed
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
July 08 2013 19:33 GMT
#6308
On July 09 2013 03:24 aksfjh wrote:
About sequestration, a lot of people (including myself) were wrong about the effects to government jobs and services. However, that's because the blunt hammer of cuts were finely shaped at the final hour to minimize their visible impact. There's no guarantee that will happen again with the next round of cuts coming up later this year. There are signs departments are up against a wall now.

They can always try to readjust their budgets for next fiscal year (October 1). If not, and the service is important, a lot of state and local budgets have turned the corner and they can pick up the slack.
Stratos_speAr
Profile Joined May 2009
United States6959 Posts
July 08 2013 19:38 GMT
#6309
On July 09 2013 02:47 Klondikebar wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 09 2013 02:43 Zaros wrote:
On July 09 2013 02:41 Klondikebar wrote:
On July 09 2013 02:31 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On July 09 2013 02:19 Klondikebar wrote:
On July 09 2013 02:04 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On July 09 2013 01:38 Shiori wrote:
I only ask cause I'm not American lol. I thought the military budget was frighteningly high, but I guess if people want to increase it it must have some perceived lack or something? ><

It's high, but in line with historical norms. Polls like this don't really mean anything other than what people's gut instinct and opinion are on a topic. For any individual budget item (military included) there's always a cohort of people that make money from it so they'll support it just out of self interest.


All of the info I've seen on U.S. military spending is pretty outrageous. Especially with the last 2 wars we've fought and the money we've pissed away from 9/11. The dumb part isn't so much the numbers, it's the percentage of government spending it's becoming. You'd think if we HAD to have government spending we'd want to reduce the amount we spend on intentional violence and increase the amount we spent on at least trying to get healthcare to people.

[image loading]


[image loading]


from http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/

It's high and I'd like it lower, but I can see how some people worry that it's getting low.

Edit: In case it's too hard to read: first graph is military spending as % of GDP, second is % of federal budget.


HAHAHA I like those graphs cause it meant Romney's stupid ass idea to peg defense spending to 4% of GDP would have actually been a spending cut even though he was selling it as an increase.

Just to be bitchy, starting at 1970 is SO cheating. Obviously it's going to make every other year look like small potatoes. And when you compare our defense spending to other countries, it's off the effing charts.

And how could people worry that it's getting low? It's been going up for about a decade? Unless they think we should be sitting at Cold War levels of spending in which case I have little problem calling them xenophobic nutjobs.


Percentage of GDP wise it isn't way off the charts (but pretty high) but in nominal terms its way ahead of everyone.


If X billion dollars stops terrorists for the majority of the world, why does the U.S. need X^10 to stop those same terrorists?


Because that ^10 is the extra money that's needed to defend us from the people that despise us for being complete dicks to the rest of the world.

But really, our military spending is absolutely inexcusable. There is no reason for us to spend so much on the military that we could effectively engage in multiple wars on opposite sides of the globe. The U.S. has always had this absurd idea that it needs to be able to crush the entire world under its foot or else it isn't properly defended. It's ridiculous, paranoid, and embarrassing. Many other countries out there have it better than we do and they spend a tiny fraction of what we do on defense.

"But but but but we need to defend ourselves from all the people that hate us!"

Reality check: we wouldn't be so hated if our government wasn't full of a bunch of fucking assholes and we didn't run around the IR scene like a fat bully in 5th grade on the playground.
A sound mind in a sound body, is a short, but full description of a happy state in this World: he that has these two, has little more to wish for; and he that wants either of them, will be little the better for anything else.
WolfintheSheep
Profile Joined June 2011
Canada14127 Posts
July 08 2013 19:59 GMT
#6310
Correct me if my history is wrong, but...has the US ever had a serious threat of invasion?

I know the "defend our nation" and "defend our freedom" rhetoric is used by every single country, but aside from your initial war of independence, when has anyone even attempted to take over US soil?
Average means I'm better than half of you.
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18825 Posts
July 08 2013 20:06 GMT
#6311
On July 09 2013 04:59 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Correct me if my history is wrong, but...has the US ever had a serious threat of invasion?

I know the "defend our nation" and "defend our freedom" rhetoric is used by every single country, but aside from your initial war of independence, when has anyone even attempted to take over US soil?

Pearl Harbor and the War of 1812 come to mind immediately. Both are different enough from contemporary times to render their comparisons fairly toothless though.
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
Klondikebar
Profile Joined October 2011
United States2227 Posts
July 08 2013 20:09 GMT
#6312
On July 09 2013 05:06 farvacola wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 09 2013 04:59 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Correct me if my history is wrong, but...has the US ever had a serious threat of invasion?

I know the "defend our nation" and "defend our freedom" rhetoric is used by every single country, but aside from your initial war of independence, when has anyone even attempted to take over US soil?

Pearl Harbor and the War of 1812 come to mind immediately. Both are different enough from contemporary times to render their comparisons fairly toothless though.


Pearl Harbor was an invasion? I thought it was just an attack. The Japanese didn't try to occupy any of our territory did they?
#2throwed
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18825 Posts
July 08 2013 20:10 GMT
#6313
On July 09 2013 05:09 Klondikebar wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 09 2013 05:06 farvacola wrote:
On July 09 2013 04:59 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Correct me if my history is wrong, but...has the US ever had a serious threat of invasion?

I know the "defend our nation" and "defend our freedom" rhetoric is used by every single country, but aside from your initial war of independence, when has anyone even attempted to take over US soil?

Pearl Harbor and the War of 1812 come to mind immediately. Both are different enough from contemporary times to render their comparisons fairly toothless though.


Pearl Harbor was an invasion? I thought it was just an attack. The Japanese didn't try to occupy any of our territory did they?

The threat of invasion and the actual possibility of it are rather different things.
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
Rassy
Profile Joined August 2010
Netherlands2308 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-07-08 20:19:04
July 08 2013 20:15 GMT
#6314
The usa military is not there for the benefit of the usa alone, it is there to protect the interests of the whole "western" world.
Somehow americans dont mind paying this cost for the rest of their alies, and i dont think anny of the alies realy minds it either.
Isnt the usa obligied by some old threaty to also defend japan btw? (because japan was not allowed to have a big military after the war) i remember reading something about that once.


"The threat of invasion and the actual possibility of it are rather different things."
Well if the actually possibility is not there, then it will be difficult to say that there is a real threat.
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
July 08 2013 20:17 GMT
#6315
On July 09 2013 05:09 Klondikebar wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 09 2013 05:06 farvacola wrote:
On July 09 2013 04:59 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Correct me if my history is wrong, but...has the US ever had a serious threat of invasion?

I know the "defend our nation" and "defend our freedom" rhetoric is used by every single country, but aside from your initial war of independence, when has anyone even attempted to take over US soil?

Pearl Harbor and the War of 1812 come to mind immediately. Both are different enough from contemporary times to render their comparisons fairly toothless though.


Pearl Harbor was an invasion? I thought it was just an attack. The Japanese didn't try to occupy any of our territory did they?

They occupied some islands in Alaska and the Pacific (Guam, Wake Island).
aksfjh
Profile Joined November 2010
United States4853 Posts
July 08 2013 20:23 GMT
#6316
On July 09 2013 04:33 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 09 2013 03:24 aksfjh wrote:
About sequestration, a lot of people (including myself) were wrong about the effects to government jobs and services. However, that's because the blunt hammer of cuts were finely shaped at the final hour to minimize their visible impact. There's no guarantee that will happen again with the next round of cuts coming up later this year. There are signs departments are up against a wall now.

They can always try to readjust their budgets for next fiscal year (October 1). If not, and the service is important, a lot of state and local budgets have turned the corner and they can pick up the slack.

For the first part, that's what I'm talking about. They've done tremendous acrobatics to make the cuts as efficient as possible, but it's going to be much harder to squeeze that last drop out of the budget before having to dig into actual payroll and services.

I doubt the states will be much help, especially if Obamacare is of any indication.
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
July 08 2013 20:55 GMT
#6317
On July 09 2013 05:23 aksfjh wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 09 2013 04:33 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On July 09 2013 03:24 aksfjh wrote:
About sequestration, a lot of people (including myself) were wrong about the effects to government jobs and services. However, that's because the blunt hammer of cuts were finely shaped at the final hour to minimize their visible impact. There's no guarantee that will happen again with the next round of cuts coming up later this year. There are signs departments are up against a wall now.

They can always try to readjust their budgets for next fiscal year (October 1). If not, and the service is important, a lot of state and local budgets have turned the corner and they can pick up the slack.

For the first part, that's what I'm talking about. They've done tremendous acrobatics to make the cuts as efficient as possible, but it's going to be much harder to squeeze that last drop out of the budget before having to dig into actual payroll and services.

I doubt the states will be much help, especially if Obamacare is of any indication.

It'll affect different departments differently. Some will have to make real cuts, others will handle it. So far congress has made a lot accommodations to departments that can't handle it. We may see more of that. There are opportunities for annual budget increases too.
Klondikebar
Profile Joined October 2011
United States2227 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-07-08 20:57:15
July 08 2013 20:56 GMT
#6318
On July 09 2013 05:17 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 09 2013 05:09 Klondikebar wrote:
On July 09 2013 05:06 farvacola wrote:
On July 09 2013 04:59 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Correct me if my history is wrong, but...has the US ever had a serious threat of invasion?

I know the "defend our nation" and "defend our freedom" rhetoric is used by every single country, but aside from your initial war of independence, when has anyone even attempted to take over US soil?

Pearl Harbor and the War of 1812 come to mind immediately. Both are different enough from contemporary times to render their comparisons fairly toothless though.


Pearl Harbor was an invasion? I thought it was just an attack. The Japanese didn't try to occupy any of our territory did they?

They occupied some islands in Alaska and the Pacific (Guam, Wake Island).


TIL. Coolio. So there actually was an invasion of sorts which can be used to justify the current "threat of invasion." I mean, the logic is still incredibly shaky but it's more than I thought existed.
#2throwed
Jormundr
Profile Joined July 2011
United States1678 Posts
July 08 2013 21:15 GMT
#6319
On July 09 2013 05:56 Klondikebar wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 09 2013 05:17 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On July 09 2013 05:09 Klondikebar wrote:
On July 09 2013 05:06 farvacola wrote:
On July 09 2013 04:59 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Correct me if my history is wrong, but...has the US ever had a serious threat of invasion?

I know the "defend our nation" and "defend our freedom" rhetoric is used by every single country, but aside from your initial war of independence, when has anyone even attempted to take over US soil?

Pearl Harbor and the War of 1812 come to mind immediately. Both are different enough from contemporary times to render their comparisons fairly toothless though.


Pearl Harbor was an invasion? I thought it was just an attack. The Japanese didn't try to occupy any of our territory did they?

They occupied some islands in Alaska and the Pacific (Guam, Wake Island).


TIL. Coolio. So there actually was an invasion of sorts which can be used to justify the current "threat of invasion." I mean, the logic is still incredibly shaky but it's more than I thought existed.

Eh. It's about as serious as Britain saying it's being invaded because Argentina is trying to take back the Falkland Islands, in the case of Guam and Wake island.
Capitalism is beneficial for people who work harder than other people. Under capitalism the only way to make more money is to work harder then your competitors whether they be other companies or workers. ~ Vegetarian
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
July 08 2013 21:16 GMT
#6320
On July 09 2013 05:56 Klondikebar wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 09 2013 05:17 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On July 09 2013 05:09 Klondikebar wrote:
On July 09 2013 05:06 farvacola wrote:
On July 09 2013 04:59 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Correct me if my history is wrong, but...has the US ever had a serious threat of invasion?

I know the "defend our nation" and "defend our freedom" rhetoric is used by every single country, but aside from your initial war of independence, when has anyone even attempted to take over US soil?

Pearl Harbor and the War of 1812 come to mind immediately. Both are different enough from contemporary times to render their comparisons fairly toothless though.


Pearl Harbor was an invasion? I thought it was just an attack. The Japanese didn't try to occupy any of our territory did they?

They occupied some islands in Alaska and the Pacific (Guam, Wake Island).


TIL. Coolio. So there actually was an invasion of sorts which can be used to justify the current "threat of invasion." I mean, the logic is still incredibly shaky but it's more than I thought existed.

Modern military threats to the US are things like North Korea invading South Korea, or China aggressively annexing nearby islands, or Israel getting invaded by neighbors, or nuclear proliferation. The US actually being invaded is a far off concern.
Prev 1 314 315 316 317 318 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Esports World Cup
10:00
2025 - Day 2
ByuN vs ZounLIVE!
SHIN vs TriGGeRLIVE!
Cyan vs ShoWTimE
Rogue vs HeRoMaRinE
Clem vs Solar
Reynor vs Maru
herO vs Cure
Serral vs Classic
EWC_Arena2847
ComeBackTV 648
EWC_Arena_2605
Hui .235
3DClanTV 157
TaKeTV 141
CranKy Ducklings96
Rex80
mcanning53
Reynor35
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
EWC_Arena2847
EWC_Arena_2605
Hui .235
Rex 80
ProTech62
mcanning 53
Reynor 35
StarCraft: Brood War
Nal_rA 10659
Hyuk 2326
Barracks 1234
Jaedong 659
ggaemo 418
Mini 337
Bisu 304
ToSsGirL 237
EffOrt 218
Pusan 133
[ Show more ]
Hyun 125
Soma 90
Sacsri 66
soO 51
Rush 50
ZerO 32
Sharp 31
NaDa 31
Last 19
Dewaltoss 18
Bale 16
ajuk12(nOOB) 11
sas.Sziky 10
scan(afreeca) 8
Movie 5
ivOry 5
Britney 0
Dota 2
XcaliburYe262
BananaSlamJamma188
Counter-Strike
sgares283
oskar163
x6flipin69
Super Smash Bros
Westballz17
Other Games
singsing1173
ceh9547
crisheroes171
SortOf166
Fuzer 127
ZerO(Twitch)9
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick1021
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 14 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH493
• LUISG 10
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• WagamamaTV322
• lizZardDota296
Upcoming Events
Esports World Cup
23h 50m
Esports World Cup
2 days
CranKy Ducklings
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
CSO Cup
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
4 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
4 days
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
5 days
[ Show More ]
Online Event
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Xiamen Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.