Why Did the US Drop 26,171 Bombs on the World Last Year (2016)?

[DKW 86 7,411]

Why Did the US Drop 26,171 Bombs on the World Last Year?

The United States started bombing Iraq on January 16, 1991, and, except for a few brief intervals, hasn’t stopped since. Twenty-six years this Monday, more than a quarter of a century, and four US presidents, all of whom have bombed Iraq. Last year, the rate of bombing increased over 20,105. The lion’s share of the 26,171 bombs dropped by the United States on the world was split evenly between Iraq and Syria, though we did reserve a dollop for Yemen. And the United States dropped more on Libya, about 500, in 2016, than in 2015. Trump, and Trumpism, is a symptom of the sickness, not the source.

[TexasTiger 12,811]

Military industrial complex. 

[DKW 86 7,411]

So if that absolves Obama, then what do we do with Trump? Say the same? If we can drop 26k bombs in 2016 and say nothing, then what is dropping 100 bombs and killing an Iranian General? More honest and far more efficient use of bombs? What is the point we are reaching for here? 
 

My point is wth are we doing dropping 26k bombs or even 100 bombs in the Middle East where we are likely doing nothing but wasting tax payer money and the blood of our own people on folks that have been at war for 6000 years? Maybe we should just get the hell out of the Middle East except for supporting the lone democracy, Israel. 

[I_M4_AU 7,772]

5 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

Maybe we should just get the hell out of the Middle East except for supporting the lone democracy, Israel. 

How do you support Israel without deterring the people that shout “Death to America” and “Death to Israel”?

ETA:  It is a mess that, as you stated, has lasted since the dawn of time.

[DKW 86 7,411]

3 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

How do you support Israel without deterring the people that shout “Death to America” and “Death to Israel”?

ETA:  It is a mess that, as you stated, has lasted since the dawn of time.

Offer support $$$, technology, etc.

[DKW 86 7,411]

In the MIC vein:

Most Veterans Say America’s Wars Are a Waste. No One’s Listening to Them.

There's a widening gap between Washington's bipartisan militarism and veterans' bipartisan war-skepticism

By ADAM WEINSTEIN

In spite of his confused account of U.S. history, his partisan snipes, and his dictatorial posturing, Donald Trump’s parading and speechifying in Washington on July 4 attempted to glom onto one of the last consensus issues in a broken American culture: We love to support our troops. “We celebrate our history, our people, and the heroes who proudly defend our flag—the brave men and women of the United States military,” Trump told a crowd of mostly VIPs at the Lincoln Memorial.

The “Long War” that began on September 11, 2001, added to veterans’ already-outsize role in the American narrative. Worship of military service has become an indispensable cog in every politician’s and corporation’s endearment strategy. But on the actual subject of war, almost no one in mainstream politics is actually listening to “the troops.”

That’s the main takeaway from the Pew Research Center’s latest rolling poll of U.S. veterans, published Thursday, in which solid majorities of former troops said the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria were not worth fighting. The gaps between approval and disapproval were not even close to the poll’s 3.9 percent margin of error; barely a third of veterans considered any of those conflicts worthwhile:

Among veterans, 64% say the war in Iraq was not worth fighting considering the costs versus the benefits to the United States, while 33% say it was. The general public’s views are nearly identical: 62% of Americans overall say the Iraq War wasn’t worth it and 32% say it was. Similarly, majorities of both veterans (58%) and the public (59%) say the war in Afghanistan was not worth fighting. About four-in-ten or fewer say it was worth fighting.

Veterans who served in either Iraq or Afghanistan are no more supportive of those engagements than those who did not serve in these wars. And views do not differ based on rank or combat experience.

The only meaningful variation pollsters found among vets was by party identification: Republican-identifying veterans were likelier to approve of the wars. But even a majority of those GOP vets now say the wars were not worth waging.

[TexasTiger 12,811]

11 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

So if that absolves Obama, then what do we do with Trump? Say the same? If we can drop 26k bombs in 2016 and say nothing, then what is dropping 100 bombs and killing an Iranian General? More honest and far more efficient use of bombs? What is the point we are reaching for here? 
 

My point is wth are we doing dropping 26k bombs or even 100 bombs in the Middle East where we are likely doing nothing but wasting tax payer money and the blood of our own people on folks that have been at war for 6000 years? Maybe we should just get the hell out of the Middle East except for supporting the lone democracy, Israel. 

Who absolves Obama? Most of DC has cow towed to the MIC for decades.

[DKW 86 7,411]

32 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Who absolves Obama? Most of DC has cow towed to the MIC for decades.

I absolutely agree.