Contradictory Messages: Weapons? Bad thing? Good thing?

Contradictory messages create serious problems

When German Chancellor Olaf Scholz made the announcement that Germany is ready to invest billions of Euros to beef up its Armed Forces, he forgot to emphasize that thousands upon thousands of Germany will be expected to be trained to use war weapons in combat.

For many generations since World War Two, the German peoples were showered with messages of guilt because of the events of 70 or so years ago. For many generations, Germans were told how bad going to war was. Trying to change all that because of what is happening in Europe nowadays is a dangerous gamble that might reawake what many have tried to forget and have tried to make others forget.

In the USA, Americans grow up with messages about bearing arms and this is the subject of a major debate nowadays. But now let's look at the facts. America needs people trained and ready to bear arms because it has military bases in practically every corner of the world and is simultaneously involved in conflicts around the world both directly and indirectly. If at any point in time you are going to ask your people to go to war, you cannot tell them that they cannot bear arms or be used to bear arms.

Politicians across the so called Western World must stop sending contradictory messages because contradictory messages will cost lives. If you are going to be asked to go to war, bearing arms and knowing how to deal with weapons is a very good thing indeed.

We need consistency. When we talk about budgets there is always talk about increasing funding for education, health and transport and development project. President Donald Trump's criticism of NATO partners was about NATO countries 'not spending enough in defense and expecting the USA both to pay for defense and to provide manpower to fight wars'. Producing a bigger war machine will not be popular with environmentalists. Heavy industries needed for the war effort and the infrastructure involved will consume vast amounts of energy that will come mainly from fossil fuels.

During a television debate in the process to select a new Conservative Party Leader and Prime Minister, candidates were asked about their environmental credentials. They had to come with the usual politically correct answers. Instead of telling the truth, they had to produce the same politically correct answers that never reflect reality. They needed to tell members of the public what they thought members of the public wanted to hear. To sum up, they had to lie in front of television cameras to appease environmentalists and pseudo environmentalists.

The reality is that we need vast amounts of cheap energy wherever and whenever we can get it. Expensive energy produces inflation that destroys incomes. If you want more for your money, you need cheaper energy in vast amounts. Quite a few people ignore the link between cheap energy and prices or simply pretend that the link does not exist. The same goes for readiness for war. You don't create and have trained Armed Forces overnight. It takes years. People need to be used to bear weapons. They need to know how to use weapons. Pacifist nonsense will get you killed. So you have got to make a choice. If politicians keep issuing threats, sooner that later there will be a major conflict. There are two choices: they can continue issuing threats and invest in the war machinery or they can stop issuing threats and prepare themselves for a diplomatic solution. Once again, we need consistency.