expat99, on 29 July 2010 - 01:37 PM, said:
So your point is that we should reject anything tangentially associated with the U.S. military because … well, because it’s the U.S. military. If you chose to stand on principal that’s fine as long as you are willing to accept for yourself and others (Costa Ricans in this case) the consequences of your decision.
And what if you are wrong? then what? What if Costa Rica were to go the way of the northern states in Central America in regards to the influence and violence of the Mexican drug cartels?
I hear your argument all the time.
Do you think that Costa Rica would enjoy the fruits of no military if not for the military of the United States? The fact that Costa Rica has voted to partnership with the U.S. and its military and law enforcement efforts on many occasions is evidence that the country sees the wisdom and advantage in dealing with what some refer to as the “Evil Yankee Empire”.
Do you then reject all militaries? Do you then reject all assistance and law enforcement partnership efforts, from any country with a military? Or are you selectively accepting of cold cash from a country that spends some of its revenues on maintaining and training a standing military. Are you willing to trade with the Evil Empire?
Here’s an article from the 26th of July regarding the growing narcotic trafficking problem in Central America.
http://www.washingto...2605661_pf.html
Mexican drug cartels bring violence with them in move to Central America
By Nick Miroff and William Booth
Washington Post staff writers
Tuesday, July 27, 2010; A01
“… The Mexican cartels "are spreading their horizons to states where they feel, quite frankly, more comfortable. These governments in Central America face a very real challenge in confronting these organizations," said David Gaddis, chief of operations for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. …”
What if? Well, what if the Martians invaded and only Hershey bars would stop them? Man, I'd be in favor of Hershey bars! Really, I'm tired of these fictitious scenarios used to defend US military aggression. Right, IF Saddam had had weapons of mass destruction AND was intent upon deploying them against us, there would have been a reason to invade. But guess what? He didn't and he wasn't. So much for the justification for invasion (except for the 300,000 - 600,000 Iraqis the US slaughtered). IF CR actually needed US military support, THEN you would have a point. But it doesn't and you don't.
The drug cartels are already throughout Central America, Guatemala in particular. (And hey, they have a military, what gives? I thought a military would prevent this!) I'm just lost how this can be construed as an argument for a US military presence in CR. Hershey bars I could understand, but the US military? Naw, not good, more problems than it is worth.
And that CR accepts cash from countries with militaries, which I think most do (even Switzerland!), is I suppose for this reason beside the point. Like duh, yeah, the countries from which it accepts money have militaries. I bet the people in those countries also drink milk. Does this mean that milk drinking protects CR? Come on, spell out the connection between a foreign military and CR or shut up.
As for me, yeah, I would live with the consequences. Not that anyone cares, but after much reflection I have decided that I am not a pacifist. I think some countries, probably most, ought to have a military and occasionally deploy it. (However, I also believe that in a republic the military should be largely comprised of citizens through universal conscription. Basically, if everybody had to fight, everybody would think long and hard before entering a war, and we could also shut up the career blowhards who believe that they know better than the rest of us.) That said, there is ample evidence in the world today that pacifism works. Gandhi pulled it off in India, Mandela in South Africa, MLK in the US, and CR hasn't done a bad job of it either. As a pure matter of strategy, sure, I'd go without a military backup if I were CR. It's smarter, more effective, and more humane.
But the opposition keeps asking "What if?" like Alexander the Great is fixing to descend and kill all he men while raping all the women. Well, yeah, it could happen, but it doesn't seem likely to me. Alex and his ilk aren't around anymore. I think they went to Mars to regroup. Worse, I suspect that when they return it will be as bankers, not soldiers, because that's where the real power is and they're not stupid.
As the saying goes, the US military is always prepared to fight the last war but never prepared for the current one. I dunno, but it seems to me that lots of Americans are still sitting around hoping to liberate France and not willing to admit that it was 65 years ago and ain't nobody been liberated by the US military since. It would seem a B movie fiction that the US is poised to protect and defend say CR. Yeah right. I say thanks but no thanks, go back to Tokyo or Frankfurt or wherever the hell you guys feel you're welcome, because it ain't here.
Help
