On Military

On Military
Daniel J. Lavender

War is not a racket. Military is a racket. It doesn’t matter if there is warfare; the point is money and energy are wasted on military formation and killing machines. Honor and integrity are bestowed upon animality. True honor, true integrity should be associated with productive things such as construction and healthcare. Money and energy should be channeled into those activities. Cooperation rather than competition should be championed. Those activities, those approaches should be honored and exalted, not the aforementioned wasteful, mindless nonsense.

In theory military defends a populace from invasion or intrusion. In practice military is a global cabal extorting the world populace through threat of violence.

For centuries ignorant and violent boneheads, with assistance from the corrupt and domineering global power structure, have convinced the masses to relinquish hard-earned money to fund brainless barbarism, fruitless competition and resource-depleting war around the world. Not only have they convinced the masses to capitulate to this, or perhaps more accurately bullied them into accepting this, they have simultaneously persuaded them into honoring and glorifying it.

Military attacks and exploits a populace long before ever protecting it; soldiers, military systems require taxes, they require funds to subsist, funds they coercively extract from the populace through threat of punishment.

A military first plunders its own people and then, with stolen resources and support from just enough dupes to bolster morale, sets off for other lands to further levy its burden.

Barbarians, soldiers, troops aim their weapons at themselves; their preparation is in fear and anticipation of their own absurdity.

The vast majority of soldiers fight not for some ultimate political agenda or moral cause but rather their own personal gain as most of the time soldiers are in the dark, completely unaware of the actual political machinations at play. They are ignorant of the true agendas so they could not possibly be fighting for any purpose other than their own which is channeled to the advantage of the affluent.

Soldiers cannot secure your freedom as they cannot secure their own; they are shackled to the bidding of their masters.

Soldiers do not fight or die for freedom. Soldiers fight and die for laws and systems. In fact their adherence to systems, their desire to uphold laws is the very reason they obediently perish in battle. These death sacrifices are then used to compel obedience to law. Law ensuring the liberty to die for law. Law sustaining an uneven system of hierarchy and dominance in which many possess little and few possess much.

The missiles, the nukes are pointed at the other side to control, to distract the barbarians, to keep them in check, to provide them an enemy, an excuse to organize so they won’t brutalize their own.

The powerful, the affluent, those in the supposed responsible, admirable positions of power around the world could take to the airwaves today, they could all promote a message of peace, of unity, they could begin to dissolve weapons installments and military activity around the world now. But they do not. They continue. They continue to memorialize and celebrate war, to reward war sacrifices, to cling to medieval methods.

The powerful, the affluent do not seek to eliminate violence or conflict; they seek to channel it to their favor.

Conflict is certainly profitable for the ownership class, for the administrators, for the elite. It generates money for corporations and banks. But conflict also thins the global population leaving more resources for the victors. And the victors are always the owners, the administrators, the global elite, those with enough wealth and administrative clout to avoid the tragedies of the battlefield altogether. It’s analogous to the National Football League. The players, the soldiers, fight tooth and nail on the battlefield for survival while the owners, the global elite, watch comfortably from their cozy air-conditioned booths. Law, law enforcement acts as the referee keeping players within the confines of the legal arena so players’ actions are somewhat coherent and beneficial to those in power. If the owners convinced the players not to compete would they make any money? Would they even have a league?

Nation-states, administrations build themselves up as administrators befriend each other. These administrative cohorts leave their subordinates in conflict, agitating them into further development: “The Russians, the Chinese are developing better technology and may invade and conquer!” While on the other side of the globe “The Americans are developing better technology and may invade and conquer!” The results are economic and technological bursts on all sides, people frantically constructing more, generating more revenue and providing advanced technologies for the ownership class. Essentially the subordinates are immersed in labor and conflict. That labor and conflict ultimately sustains and benefits the administrative, higher classes. After all are kings, are presidents, are industrial leaders dying on the frontlines of battle? Are they laboring in the factories and fields?

Boneheads will use the fact destruction exists as an excuse to sustain their weaponized rackets. There is already enough destruction about the world in the form of extreme and damaging weather, accident, drought and disease.

Enlisting in the military makes you an instant hero to the fearful and ignorant, an instant tool to the powerful and imperial.

this is pretty excellent

What about local militias that are assembled to keep the wider military in check?

Right to bear arms and overthrow an unjust government and all that.

What if the unjust government is a supposedly (because not from the ground up) global one? Does that sort of reframe national government militaries in a different light (if from the ground up—if one exists)?

I’m pretty sure they are both rackets.
You have only to compare those that benefit with those that pay the price.

Meh.
I’m pretty sure most US soldiers since 1945 have died to enrich the shareholders of the military / industrial complex.
Please indicate anywhere that they have died to protect law and systems…
I’ll wait.

LOL
Amazing American Myth
Correct me if I am wrong that gun ownership is bolstered by the idea that were a leader to abuse the constitution then there would be a citizens uprising??
Oh - I don’t know… Maybe appointing an unelected person to tear down federal institutions and ignore the democratic representatives?
Maybe several abuses of constitutional power or a string of felonies…
That sort of thing?

I mean. Who has the nukes?

The age of ideology has ended.

People’s cultural and religious identities will be the primary source of conflict, rather than political or economic reasons.

Future wars will be fought not between countries, but between cultures.

“Destructive rivalry” is inevitable between major powers.

There is truth to your statement.

The statement in reference is phrased in response to Smedley Butler’s efforts.

The Military Industrial Complex is a system.

Individuals such as Smedley Butler seek to end war but retain military. However if there were no war why retain military? To pad the pockets. To get an easy paycheck. Without even as much as fighting anymore.

Military is a racket.

Butler sought to appear diligent while sustaining the racket. A common military technique. War is bad. But mindlessly draining taxpayer resources to needlessly militarize men is not?

This is absurd.
Major General Smedley Butler, would not have drawn this absurd distinction

Butler would prefer taking your money without a fight.

From the same statement you abbreviated:

Military is absurd. It doesn’t protect and it cannot protect a populace. The largest, strongest military in the world failed to protect citizens on 9/11, when it mattered the most.

War is a racket. Military is a racket. A waste. Grow up and build us some houses instead.

1 Like

That is precisely the mentality perpetuating conflict.

Why did that “matter the most”? LOL
If the USA had not attacked nearly every Middle Eastern country, they would never have been attacked.
Do you know THE ONLY middle east country to attack the USA?? Take a wild guess.
Isreal.

Invoking the military here is absurd. Police, and intelligence services have the responsibility to protect domestic attacks. Nothing to do with the military.

Because it was the single largest terrorist attack in history. The American military and intelligence apparatus failed to protect the citizenry.

And what U.S. entity would have provoked the Middle East? The military.

That certainly is the responsibility of the military. That’s why they have vessels in the sea and coast guards, for example. The intelligence apparatus is tied in with military intelligence.

The intelligence community and military are essentially a revolving door. Take Tulsi Gabbard for instance. Gabbard has been lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve since 2021 and is now U.S. Director of National Intelligence.

You means bigger than Hiroshima??
:smiley:

Politics control the military.
You are sadly confused.
You berate “military” for failure yet you consider them an absurdity.

it’s pointless arguing with this sillyness.

In other words military works for and with corruption.

One may dwell upon organizational structure, however, the fact remains a body of violent men are actively extracting resources without providing any tangible product or service in return. And at the rate of approximately $850 billion per year in the U.S.

Yes, and largely for that reason.

Do you know what the Department of Defense is? It’s a federal department coordinating military activity relating to U.S. national security. It primarily concerns foreign threats however it also concerns domestic issues. In fact it was initially called the National Military Establishment.

From U.S. Army Oath of Enlistment:

“…support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic”.

https://www.army.mil/values/oath.html

As explained above military intelligence ties in with national intelligence. They are interconnected. To sufficiently secure a nation such as America they would have to be.

Military addresses both foreign and domestic activity. Military was alerted and involved during the events of 9/11:

“After consulting with NEADS command, the crew commander issued the order at 9:23: “Okay . . . scramble Langley. Head them towards the Washington area… . . [I]f they’re there then we’ll run on them… . .These guys are smart.” That order was processed and transmitted to Langley Air Force Base at 9:24. Radar data show the Langley fighters airborne at 9:30. NEADS decided to keep the Otis fighters over New York. The heading of the Langley fighters was adjusted to send them to the Baltimore area. The mission crew commander explained to us that the purpose was to position the Langley fighters between the reported southbound American 11 and the nation’s capital. At the suggestion of the Boston Center’s military liaison, NEADS contacted the FAA’s Washington Center to ask about American 11. In the course of the conversation, a Washington Center manager informed NEADS: “We’re looking-we also lost American 77.” The time was 9:34. This was the first notice to the military that American 77 was missing, and it had come by chance. If NEADS had not placed that call, the NEADS air defenders would have received no information whatsoever that the flight was even missing, although the FAA had been searching for it. No one at FAA headquarters ever asked for military assistance with American 77.”

https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch1.htm