You don't really make an argument for your point, really not even a bad argument, you just don't address the issue your trying to support at all.
You talk about the Romans and the British (and show pictures of others), but that doesn't say anything about the Americans. Then you say "US troops are stationed world wide", as if that meant anything in this context.
I suppose your trying to imply part of the argument you don't state, but it would be better if you developed your own argument rather than other people having to guess what you mean, and maybe get it wrong and then get criticized for attacking a straw man.
How does the US forces around the world subsidize our economy. You could say "just like the Roman forces did", but you don't say that, and also its not really true.
Roman forces, while often a big drain on Rome, supported the economy in two ways. One was with plunder from places they attacked. That's not an issue today. The other was by conquering areas and bringing their production in to the empire. The US hasn't conquered and annexed anyone in a long time.
Generally, esp. but not only in modern times, military forces soak up money, rather then spit it out. |
