Thursday, November 19, 2009
Combat Is Not the Only Threat
I stick by my statement made last year about letting sovereign nations decide for themselves whether they want American occupation. Here is a shocking statistic I recently heard about US deaths in Operation Enduring Freedom: So far in 2009 there have been 292 American combat deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan. During that same time there have been 140 active duty suicides. I hate war, but I respect men and women who are willing to die while serving in the American military. The more I hear stories like this, the more I think the best way to honor them is by bringing them home.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
That is just awful.
ReplyDeleteWhat's awful?
ReplyDelete140 active duty suicides in the last 11 months.
ReplyDeleteCan you think of an example of when war is economically efficient, i.e. when the benefits outweigh the costs relative to the next best alternative?
ReplyDeleteSure, there are plenty of theoretical examples where that's possible. However, I think that exercise is fruitless, as war is never a viable option. Violence only begets violence, the only solution is find a new solution.
ReplyDeleteGreat question Justin. A lot of people claim WWII ended the Great Depression, but that is just nonesense. War is using resources that could have otherwise been used to actually improve people's lives (but I'm guessing you already knew that).
ReplyDeleteBut you asked, if there was ever an example of war having a net benefit. The best I could come up with was the imperialism of the late 1800's. World government had put trade tariffs and the Western countries (Britain, America, etc) forced weaker nations to trade (China, Hawaii, etc). Not that the actions were justified, by I'm willing to bet at least the more powerful countries came out better off.
WWII may not have ended the Great Depression, but is sure as hell ended the Nazis, which resulted in a free, democratized Europe. I'd call that a "net benefit." Perhaps you think there is a market-based "next best" alternative to stopping Hitler/Mussolini/Showa -- I think you'll be hard-pressed to convince me.
ReplyDeleteI also think the Korean conflict ended up being very beneficial for South Korea and the Revolutionary war ended up being very beneficial for the U.S. I'm not sure what the "next best alternatives" would be in those situations either but again, I'm skeptical.
Oh, I took the question as: is there a profitable example of starting a war. World War II was a response to an already started war (same for the Korean).
ReplyDeleteInteresting discussion. Thanks, guys.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes I would have to say my question applies only to initiating war. It's like the differences between shooting someone because you wanted their money versus shooting someone because they were shooting at you or your family.
The question is interesting to me because usually you can make a case against war without even calling upon moral considerations.
Ah, I see.
ReplyDelete