What would happen if Americas military were dismantled?

Well, there would be many fewer technological advances that trickled down to the civilians. Like, oh, say, the internet.

Which “liberal extremists” are calling for a complete dismantling of the U.S. military? There is a difference between liberals and pure pacifists, and there aren’t too many pure pacifists among liberals, as far as I know.

Oh shit! Canada! They will run through us like a knife to ham steak.

@lillycoyote Oh he’s just mad because I was saying that the military isn’t made up of ‘elite adults’ but young and vulnerable kids. Nobody said anything about dismantling the army, lol.

I have never heard anyone call for the military to be completely dismantled.

@Simone_De_Beauvoir Totally unrelated. Please answer with something that has to do with the question (rolls eyes)

@KatawaGrey Hmm, never thought of that one. Ya think?

@lillycoyote It’s hypothetical… read the last tag.

@judochop hahaha.. yeah right.. too busy hunting for moose or whatever it is they do up there…

@JLeslie Again, read last tag….

@digitalimpression I pretty much imagine you rolling your eyes anyway. The feeling is mutual.
Okay, serious answer: it would never happen but if it did, we’d have lots of money to spend where it’s direly needed.

@digitalimpression If you can still edit take out the part about the liberal extremists maybe so liberals won’t be thinking WTF is he talking about? Just a suggestion.

@JLeslie Nah. If people can’t answer based on the idea of the question without squabbling about the details of the wording I sort of ignore their answers anyway.

I’m curious now that @KatawaGrey brought up the technology thing… What sort of technology would we be missing out on? Because the military I know is always ten years behind! =)

I have no idea what would happen if we had no military. I guess maybe Israel would be in more jeopardy. We would have a lot of young people who were in the military without jobs. Maybe a private army of sorts would be developed. We would be more likely to come under attack by our enemies.

@digitalimpression Well, if it’s just a hypothetical, relaxed conversation then there was really no need for you to lob one at so called “liberal extremists” was there? That was unnecessary and inflammatory if you meant for this to be relaxed. Don’t fire a shot and then tell every one to chill.

Technology:

Internet for one. It eventually would have been developed, but probably later.

Medical advancements. Right now the government has given grants to three companies to come up with materials to heal large bone fractures. Instead of needing pins it hastens the growth of bone, and dissolves into the body, less need for additional surgeries with large breaks. Not sure where in the development it is now. This is soething the military is very interested in, I assume the government put money towards it for military reasons.

We would never have made it to the moon. The international space station would still be a dream on someone’s drawing board. Deep diving robots like the ones that found and photographed the Titanic would not be available.

I will give a serious answer if you are game to read it. I see you are passionate about this so here goes…..

1. Shutting the military down would end thousands of jobs and related job fields, we would though have enough money left over to pay the unemployment for quite a long time.
2. Our schools would finally be properly funded and teachers finally paid what they are worth.
3. The homeless problem could be solved by offering new shelters that could care for thousands.
4. FREE FUCKING HEALTH CARE!!!!
5. Jails would be able to be kept up.
6. College would finally be able to be properly funded for citizens.
7. Once we handled our own issues state side we could offer food services to other countries and health care for massive nature strikes.
8. Can anyone say, bail out struggling independent businesses through grants and reasonable loans?
*We could then focus on advancements for cancer treatment, nano and nuclear medicine, HIV and AIDS treatment. better farming, the list is endless.

@judochop without the military expenditure on ships and transport, our best efforts to respond to natural disasters world wide would be severely limited. Currently only the US military can move massive amounts of food and material to any area of the world within hours of being put on alert.

@WestRiverrat What if we had another group do it? Like, create a group that can do that, that isn’t military?

@judochop Why would schools be funded and teachers paid? You thinkthefederal funds would go to the state for education? Very little federal funds goes to education.

And, I disagree about AIDS research and cancer. My mom worked at NCI, and sometimes they didn’t know what to do with the money.

Also, don’t you think the Republicans would ask for tax cuts if there was no military?

@Simone_De_Beauvoir it would still be more expensive to build, maintain and train the employees and equipment to deal with a 1–2 time a year event as it is to have them part of the military training and to some extent practicing every day to do the job.

And if it was set up as an independant organisation, someone would want to cut funding for it because it hadn’t been used in 8–15 months so it must be unnecessary.

@WestRiverrat Sure, I can see that…except I can’t see how it wouldn’t be used in 8–15 months, you know? Given how many countries are in need.

@WestRiverrat I am sorry, did I miss something? Do we only have military ships? I live near one of the largest Port’s in the country and I hardly ever see military ships.
@JLeslie who knows, maybe they wouldn’t but that was not really the question. The question is hypothetical therefore my answer is as well. That is what I would like to see done with the money.
Did NCI ever give the money to other independently funded programs? Seems to me that would’ve been a good way to use it.
The republicans will ask for whatever they can regardless of where money is being spent, that goes for the Dems as well. The two party system is a total joke.

Well they are the major operators in charge of surveillance through out the world. And unfortunately, even if the U.S. as a whole voted to dismantled it, and we were THAT progressive in thinking, a lot of the commoners of the Middle East would still believe that all U.S. are “White Devils” and progressive to something else and now must be the time to attack America for payback and etc.

I love the idea. But if it happened in my time, like next week. I can honestly say I’d still be afraid of terrorism. I probably wouldn’t fly. Because even without military, it is the way America does business is what the middle east see’s as oppressing the rest of the world. Hence the symbolism behind hitting the twin towers, the business heart of the U.S.A.

Mark my words, we’ll all be speaking Hawaiian within the year.

poly-motherfuckin-esian

The U. S. would become a battleground for every country that wants to control every piece of real estate they can get their hands on.

@judochop Goverrnment did fund private research as well and still does, yes of course. The new discoveries for fighting diseass goes through years when little advances, and then years where there are great advancements. I am always in favor of our government continuing to help fund medical research. The tricky part with the budgets both in government agencies and private research is they make sure they use up all their funds each year to make sure they can ask for the same amount or more next year. This is true of on-profits also. They don’t kitty the money, so more would be available in future years if a great discovery or hypothesis is made. Sometimes government money is given to a project I think, maybe that is not so much by a fiscal year, not sure exactly. The person I know who is a biomedical engineer said the other two companies who got government grant money for the bone healing project received much much more money than his project. He said he should have asked for more money, but he tried to be realistic and fair.

@JLeslie What “term” could be used to describe what you just mentioned. It would make for a fabulous story worthy of Times Magazine. I’d love to research it and give it a whirl!

@judochop Civilian ships are fine when moving products from port to port. But when all the port facilites are destroyed, how do you move the supplies from ship to shore? Currently the Carrier Task Forces of the US navy are the best answer, with their helicopters and amphibious assault vehicles that are designed to work in areas without proper port facilities.

When the Tsunami hit the Indian ocean, which ships in the area were available to provide water, food, medicine, and tents? Would a civilian ship have been able to do the same, even if it was positioned close enough, within 24–72 hours?

Since America has the “Fuck yeah, America!” attitude that is so pervasive, there a lot of pros and cons. We do have and have accomplished a lot of great things, but it was due to our massive super power/industrial characteristics that allowed these things. I really don’t know what America would be like with a severly reduced military, because this is just a part of the culture. The country spends this money for it’s own self interest and they believe we need a large military for that.

Maybe we’ll see what happens in the future with more people realize we can be prosperous without war/using war as an excuse to drain other countries resources.

@all You are all bringing up some excellent points.

I certainly wonder what would have happened to the world if the military wasn’t around during some of the major wars in Americas history.

I am continually amazed at some of the things people say.

Well we know what happened to every society who’s military was “average”

@whitetigress I don’t know. Federal grants or federal research grants would be the name of money given by the federal government for research. It is not just done willy nilly. Scientists review the research parameters, it is often sent back to the company or university to be improved or changed if the government committee believes it to not be put together well. The form that is handed into the government is called a grant proposal.

@whitetigress hahahaha.. funny but true. It’s sort of like saying you’ll have sex without a condom. Sure, you’ll save money by not buying condoms… but chances are.. someday you’ll get crabs! xD (sorry for the crude analogy but… well.. hell I have no excuse.. it’s what I thought of for some reason)

@digitalimpression I don’t think we can keep using the WW and war on terrorism examples much longer. If we keep using these as reasons, it’s the perfect excuse to keep doing this under the pretext of “saving the world” and “spreading democracy”. I mean…...the Iraq war…......

It’s always perfectly mature and acceptable to be diplomatic, except when you’re a country? Doesn’t make sense.

@Blackberry Rest assured Blackberry the world is progressing, thanks in large part to video casting pods and the overall abundance of the youth contacting each other over the internet. I believe everyone just needs some recognition of something, or we need to be unified somehow. I think the arts and sports is how it will be done.

@Blackberry The world is full of examples of countries who did not learn from history. Should America be one of them?

@WestRiverrat I see where you are coming from, I misunderstood at first but I was under the impression that we would still have all of the military vehicles, just minus said bombs, missiles, rockets and guns. I just kind of assumed we would paint over the camo and add a nice subtle hue of blue and green or probably just brown or grey.
@Jlesilie, I hate that it is a standard to use all of a budget in province to gain more funding for the following year. Whom ever developed that form of budgeting and expectation is a total moron. I used to handle sunset contracts between the government and a privately owned wholesale house. Ever year I would see a submergence in spending on parts even if they were not allowed to use them in new builds. They basically would just purchase whatever was in stock. Good for the business but a really stupid practice.

@judochop It is done everywhere, it makes me sick. I worked for companies where the employees sent everything o ernight, when easily some of it could go ground. Or, if they are given a budget of $80 a day for meals, they make sure they use every penny, because they can. These things go along until a company is in crisis, and then everything is slashed, including employees being laid off. I hate the mindset in private industry and in government, and when individuals live that way. Big commission they spend everything, then when business slows they can’t pay their bills.

@digitalimpression I’m not well-versed on this topic, but it seems like we’re pretty set for now. We’ve amassed our wealth and arsenal, so it seems pretty difficult to lose it all in one sucker punch. The U.S. would love another opportunity for war, and they’re always ready, but we’re not going to fall from number 1 to number 10 from scaling back a bit to save money or allocate money elsewhere.

But I know this about significantly scaling back the military, so I actually don’t know how that would work. Even if the U.S. did do this, they would simply draft again. It’s a rhetorical question so it’s hard to answer.

@Blackberry Scaling back is one thing, but that is not the question I asked. And just for the record, I am in no way saying that I agree with all of the military actions that are taken.

I suppose if some hateful country decided to land in Washington state, we could rely on untrained civilians to respond as a cohesive unit and squash the enemies. Uh… or not.

World peace.

@digitalimpression We could see how Canada handles something like that lol. I don’t think they have a huge military, but they seem fine, who knows.

I can think of several nations which would jump at the chance to humiliate us: Argentina, Cuba, North Korea, Iran, Pakistan… not to mention the drug lords across the border in Mexico.

@Blackberry Canada for years has depended on the US military to defend them. NORAD and the DEWS systems defended the whole continent not just the US.

It did come at a cost to Canada however, they usually get sucked into helping us in our dirty wars. They were the chief supplier of ammunition to South Vietnam during the Vietnam war years. They also sent 10,000+ soldiers to fight in that war.

@ragingloli I wish it was that easy. It only takes one person in a position of power to start a war, it takes the will of all nations to maintain a peace. You just have to look at Europe in 1938–39 for an example.

Yeah, we’d get over run by the Mexican mafia.

@WestRiverrat I didn’t know that, very interesting.

Let’s see, if the US never had a military, then there would be a strong possibility that mankind would be missing out on (from the top off my head other than what I saw already posted) a flu vaccine (developed during WW2 by the US military), GPS (for all you directionally challenged people), Polymers (Glass reinforcing fibers research began in WW2), The Sanitary Commission probably wouldn’t have been formed (You can thank the Civil War) which would more or less be the origins of the Red Cross… and that’s all I can think of off the top of my head. Hate it, Love it, the military and conflicts have been able to benefit society at times.

When I candidly referred to “liberal extremists” I was amazed that I got such a negative response (because it would seem to imply that there, in fact, were some liberal extremists in the crowd and that I had offended them in some way) until it was immediately followed by the supposition that it would be a great idea to get rid of the military (which sort of leads me to believe there really are some in the crowd).

Something is.. well.. off about that. It’s funny, but also a bit scary.

I never guessed I would have people jumping at the idea. I falsley assumed that everyone understood that the military was a necessary evil.

Ah well, some great points have been brought up. That’s all I was really looking for.

Civil wars would spring up from private wealthy businesses try to vie for power.
We will have even less freedoms because of internal conflicts.
All of the US would become a war zone.
You might as well say we will become Mexico because the drug trade won’t have to sneak in. They will come in through the front door.
Those who think that schools and medicare and everything else will be taken care of is wrong.
Liberal Extremist are just that. Extremist. They will do what they have to do to keep everyone in check, which would be to keep others from being educated and figuring out ways to over throw them.
Religion will be tossed completely out.
The prisons would become fuller with people who consider themselves patriots.
There are necessary evils in the world and to keep a nation strong and healthy a miltitary presence is needed.

@King_Pariah The US Military didn’t invent the flu vaccine. Vaccines were enforced by scientists by the U.S. Government for the military…

In the 1940s, the US military developed the first approved inactivated vaccines for influenza, which were used in the Second World War

No, they didn’t invent it.. but they played a huge part. Then again the source is wiki.. so I suppose an educated 3 year old could have written it. Meh. Whattyagonnadohuh?

never mind, ninja’d by @digitalimpression and I never said invented by.

@King_Pariah Sorry about that. XD I just happened to be reading up on it because I had no idea. Great point.

@digitalimpression lol, no problem, hell, thanks. :)

God save the Queen. England would welcome the colonies back into the empire. Oh, the modern term is Commonwealth ;-)

Oh, and the term liberal extremist is ultraconservative nonsense.

@mattbrowne

Call it nonsense if you wish, but there truly IS such a thing as “liberal extremism.” Example: insisting on gun ban legislation when it’s a well-documented fact that an increase in private gun ownership results in a corresponding decrease in violent crime.

yeah, that must be why japan has such a high crime rate…oh wait.
that must be why america has the lowest gun crime rate in the western world… oh wait.
fact is that america’s gun crime rate is 100 times that of Japan’s.

@mattbrowne . . . Is that a tongue in cheek way of conversely saying that the term ultraconservative is liberal extremist nonsense?

There is an extreme left all the way to totalitarian communism and there’s an extreme right all the way to totalitarian fascism. To me the term extreme left makes sense while liberal extremism does not. That’s all. Google seems to confirm common usage of the terms. One is mainstream and the other is rarely used political ammunition.