Defense Spending?

[JBeukema]

This isn't just a conservative problem. The problem lies on both sides, neither is willing to give in to less spending. I say 10% across the board....but that's just me.

There is nothing to give from the left, rather there are things that need funding. However, there is 54% of the budget going to the military to chop, and there is plently that can be cut, about 95% wouldn't be missed.

I read in USA Today this week that PFC's are making $39K and US Army Captains with no kids are making +$89K

Um....SHIT!!

Personally, you're going to have a hard time convincing me to cut pay or benefits for anyone who sees combat.

 

[Douger]

Once again the Nazi's will lose.
The Nazi's are YOU

 

[shintao]

This isn't just a conservative problem. The problem lies on both sides, neither is willing to give in to less spending. I say 10% across the board....but that's just me.

There is nothing to give from the left, rather there are things that need funding. However, there is 54% of the budget going to the military to chop, and there is plently that can be cut, about 95% wouldn't be missed.

I see so the never ending tide of entitlements that help get us here are all hands off and everything else takes the pipe?

how about that 4.5 billion for the fatty school prgm. we just passed last week..in the midst of falling into the abyss.

you aware that we have been spending ( reaching ) 12.5 billion on schools food prgms etc for 40 years and obesity has gone up from approx. 5% to 17%.. ?

oh hey whoa, no fair who wants to benchmark right? hands off, we have to serve dinner to kids at school now, 3 meals a day..nope not a dime can be touched...is that the picture? .(next stop- bunks, in the gym, thats worth 10 billion at least and you get to raise my kids for me too, a dem wetdream)......

That is correct, and the sooner you understand that, the better off you will be. Just cut the military 95% and STFU.................

 

[rightwinger]

I actually think that's already happening. We gotta get them recovering first, then we can start talking to them about paying up. "When you owe $100,000 to the bank and you can't pay, you have a problem. When you owe $10,000,000 to the bank and you can't pay, the bank has a problem."

Maybe it already happening. I would need to see a state by state breakdown. But we are giving record amounts of foreign military aid as well. In addition to spending almost as much on defense as the balance of the world we also contribute massive volumes of military aid to nations we need to influence, like Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Kuwait, Iraq, Island alliances in the Pacific, Israel, and Pakistan.

Who provides the security for the oil rich nations? Remember Kuwait? Iraq took over their country and the wealthy oil rich bastards sat it out in London while we won their country back for them.

When the fighting was done, they just moved back to business as usual

 

[RadiomanATL]

The Defense budget has doubled from $316 Billion on 2000 to $693 billion in 2010

The Cold War is over, we were supposed to see an economic benefit

Like it or not, and I don't, we're going to be responsible for regional security for a few more years in Iraq. That's got to eat up a lot of dollars. And then there's Afghanistan.

Thanks George.

You mean Koreas II and III?

Yes. Except maybe we'll actually get out of them in 5 or so years.

 

[miller]

If any person decides to discuss the Yankees baseball team but has never heard of Derek Jeter their participation in the discussion is ridiculous.

The boomer sub is by far the most powerful weapon in the world. This is my reply to the asshole who made this quote.

"Go fuck yourself, Miller. Nobody knows everything and there is nothing dishonorable about asking when you don't know."

The American propaganda brainwashing system that keeps threatening Americans that America will be attacked when most other countries that have minuscule military capacity aren't being attacked would be a very simple and logical observation. Our government keeps taking us for a ride down the drain in order to provide a welfare benefit for the defense industry.

American foreign policy purposely creates hatred. Giving powerful weapons to countries that use those weapons to attack other countries is bound to create hatred.

If people on this forum would begin to watch hearings broadcast by C-span and are in the C-span archives so they can be watched on your computer at your own convenience and stopped watching pundits who work for the propaganda media designed specifically to brainwash the entire USA.

I have the time and the interest to watch hearings and watch the pundit propaganda machine so I can plainly observe how this game really works.

I worked hard for 5 years to write a book that focuses on a very unique experience that no other person (there are 17,000 members on this forum) ever had. Here is a synopsis you can read to understand that I hoped would expose why I had been brainwashed. Intelligence has nothing to do with brainwashing.
Screwed Again: Just Cause Just Facts synopsis

 

[JBeukema]

Like it or not, and I don't, we're going to be responsible for regional security for a few more years in Iraq. That's got to eat up a lot of dollars. And then there's Afghanistan.

Thanks George.

You mean Koreas II and III?

Yes. Except maybe we'll actually get out of them in 5 or so years.

I think we both know the dangers if we leave a power vacuum when we leave.


And yet... America's been encouraging sectarian violence in the hopes of manipulating it to our advantage...



We never learn, do we?

 

[rightwinger]

If any person decides to discuss the Yankees baseball team but has never heard of Derek Jeter their participation in the discussion is ridiculous.

The boomer sub is by far the most powerful weapon in the world. This is my reply to the asshole who made this quote.

"Go fuck yourself, Miller. Nobody knows everything and there is nothing dishonorable about asking when you don't know."

The American propaganda brainwashing system that keeps threatening Americans that America will be attacked when most other countries that have minuscule military capacity aren't being attacked would be a very simple and logical observation. Our government keeps taking us for a ride down the drain in order to provide a welfare benefit for the defense industry.

American foreign policy purposely creates hatred. Giving powerful weapons to countries that use those weapons to attack other countries is bound to create hatred.

If people on this forum would begin to watch hearings broadcast by C-span and are in the C-span archives so they can be watched on your computer at your own convenience and stopped watching pundits who work for the propaganda media designed specifically to brainwash the entire USA.

I have the time and the interest to watch hearings and watch the pundit propaganda machine so I can plainly observe how this game really works.

I worked hard for 5 years to write a book that focuses on a very unique experience that no other person (there are 17,000 members on this forum) ever had. Here is a synopsis you can read to understand that I hoped would expose why I had been brainwashed. Intelligence has nothing to do with brainwashing.
Screwed Again: Just Cause Just Facts synopsis

font too large...didn't read

 

[RadiomanATL]

You mean Koreas II and III?

Yes. Except maybe we'll actually get out of them in 5 or so years.

I think we both know the dangers if we leave a power vacuum when we leave.


And yet... America's been encouraging sectarian violence in the hopes of manipulating it to our advantage...



We never learn, do we?

A power vacuum is created if we leave, too quickly, before the area is stabilized. I'm hoping that within 5 years we'll be able to nearly be out of there militarily.

 

[asterism]

I actually think that's already happening. We gotta get them recovering first, then we can start talking to them about paying up. "When you owe $100,000 to the bank and you can't pay, you have a problem. When you owe $10,000,000 to the bank and you can't pay, the bank has a problem."

Maybe it already happening. I would need to see a state by state breakdown. But we are giving record amounts of foreign military aid as well. In addition to spending almost as much on defense as the balance of the world we also contribute massive volumes of military aid to nations we need to influence, like Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Kuwait, Iraq, Island alliances in the Pacific, Israel, and Pakistan.

Who provides the security for the oil rich nations? Remember Kuwait? Iraq took over their country and the wealthy oil rich bastards sat it out in London while we won their country back for them.

When the fighting was done, they just moved back to business as usual

I disagree. We have stronger allies in the Kuwaiti, Qatari, Bahraini, and the Saudi governments because we answered their plea for help. The relationship with the UAE has gotten especially strong since it's the financial center of the Middle East in my opinion.

 

[Trajan]

Here's a question...just how many Supercarriers do we need to defend ourselves?

well we'll have 3 less than we need and had initially ordered, the gerald ford class super carrier, the next generation for the Nimitz class was initially 5, then 4...then 3 now 2. the need is based on the number of aging carries we have now, the world as it is laid out ala spheres of influence , risk etc. . we have already cut 2 carrier grp.s in the last 4 years.

Projecting power according to the seagoing strategic rules of the cold war isn't needed anymore and sadly, that's what is still happening with our Navy.

In fact, the entire structure of the Marine Expeditionary Unit is flawed because the immediate response is to put the most nimble fighting force on the planet speeding at a whopping 20 knots. Somalia in 1993 was an "emergency" and we had 2 days to rush rush rush, only to show up 3 weeks later.

because you are ot understanding what they are truly for and what they can and cannot due.

they could have put the 82nd airborne on alert and dropped them into Somalia, in a day and a half. BUT, that requires an Air Bridge, a hop to Germany then a hop to Somalia....and landing into the unknown. The Airborne are relatively lightly equipped, they would not have had any air cover, or logistical sppt. , you cannot fly f-15s to Somalia and have them loiter over the battlefield providing on call sppt because they have no airstrips with the logistics necessary to sppt. them.

THAT is where a CAG & a MEU- MAU whatever they call them now comes in, though they may get there days or even a week later depending on how many CAGs with a marine exped. compliment we have, they can provide the troops & long term sppt. - butter, bullets and air cover with a strike capability as well.

 

[Samson]

well we'll have 3 less than we need and had initially ordered, the gerald ford class super carrier, the next generation for the Nimitz class was initially 5, then 4...then 3 now 2. the need is based on the number of aging carries we have now, the world as it is laid out ala spheres of influence , risk etc. . we have already cut 2 carrier grp.s in the last 4 years.

Projecting power according to the seagoing strategic rules of the cold war isn't needed anymore and sadly, that's what is still happening with our Navy.

In fact, the entire structure of the Marine Expeditionary Unit is flawed because the immediate response is to put the most nimble fighting force on the planet speeding at a whopping 20 knots. Somalia in 1993 was an "emergency" and we had 2 days to rush rush rush, only to show up 3 weeks later.

because you are ot understanding what they are truly for and what they can and cannot due.

they could have put the 82nd airborne on alert and dropped them into Somalia, in a day and a half. BUT, that requires an Air Bridge, a hop to Germany then a hop to Somalia....and landing into the unknown. The Airborne are relatively lightly equipped, they would not have had any air cover, or logistical sppt. , you cannot fly f-15s to Somalia and have them loiter over the battlefield providing on call sppt because they have no airstrips with the logistics necessary to sppt. them.

THAT is where a CAG & a MEU- MAU whatever they call them now comes in, though they may get there days or even a week later depending on how many CAGs with a marine exped. compliment we have, they can provide the troops & long term sppt. - butter, bullets and air cover with a strike capability as well.

Somalia....indeed.....

I'm trying to recall: Why did Clinton send US troops there......?

The Army began by assisting in relief operations in Somalia, but by December 1992 it was deeply engaged on the ground in Operation RESTORE HOPE in that chaotic African country. In the spring of the following year, the initial crisis of imminent starvation seemed to be over, and the U.S.-led Unified Task Force (UNITAF) turned over the mission to the United Nations, leaving only a small logistical, aviation, and quick reaction force behind to assist. The American public seemed to forget about Somalia. That sense of "mission accomplished" made the evens of 3-4 October 1993 more startling, as Americans reacted to the spectacle of dead U.S. soldiers being dragged through the streets by cheering Somali mobs-the very people Americans thought they had rescued from starvation.

....now I remember.......Hope and Change.....