Defense Spending?

iow you can't argue your point so you just wave generalizations. Maintaining our worldwide network of obsolete power projection bases is untenable and may very likely break the US just like it broke the SU in the late 80's.

Keep digging that hole.

I'll give you a clue: I never argued for maintaining the current levels or bases. Thats why your argument is a false dichotomy (70% cutting or nothing) and a strawman (I never argued for no cuts).

liar.

Uh-huh :rolleyes:

Care to point out where I DID argue for maintaining current levels?
 
iow you can't argue your point so you just wave generalizations. Maintaining our worldwide network of obsolete power projection bases is untenable and may very likely break the US just like it broke the SU in the late 80's.

Keep digging that hole.

I'll give you a clue: I never argued for maintaining the current levels or bases. Thats why your argument is a false dichotomy (70% cutting or nothing) and a strawman (I never argued for no cuts).

liar.

Fuck that shit! We spent almost 3 trillion dollars in the last two years that we had to borrow from foreigners or from future earnings depending on how you approach it.

End the campaigns in the ME and close at least 60% of our 800 foreign bases and reduce military spending by 70% within 2 years. No ifs, ands or buts.

BTW , we bribed Israel with a grant of some 20 advanced jets worth $20 billion just get them to maintain a settlement construction freeze that they violate even while it is in place, and only for 90 days.

We pour more money down rat holes than 95% of the nations in the world spend, and we spend more on military and defense than the rest of the world combined once you figure in our foreign aid.

Time to live within our means.

Yeah, your recipe is one for disaster. Both economically, defensively and politically. But at least you hit the trifecta!

Hey, thanks for pointing out that false dichotomy and strawman again!

BTW: Saying that cutting by 70% is idiotic is not the same as arguing for not cutting anything.

You and logic really aren't on speaking terms, are you?
 
Keep digging that hole.

I'll give you a clue: I never argued for maintaining the current levels or bases. Thats why your argument is a false dichotomy (70% cutting or nothing) and a strawman (I never argued for no cuts).

liar.

Uh-huh :rolleyes:

Care to point out where I DID argue for maintaining current levels?

There is your red herring. You were arguing my position and you can't hold up that argument so you revert to distraction and misdirection.

I posted the original text, mark your position or flail away with more generalities.
 

Uh-huh :rolleyes:

Care to point out where I DID argue for maintaining current levels?

There is your red herring. You were arguing my position and you can't hold up that argument so you revert to distraction and misdirection.

I posted the original text, mark your position or flail away with more generalities.

Actually, I made that post before you decided to go back and edit yours to add more to it. All you said originally was "liar". Therefore me asking you to point out where I lied is perfectly logical. Something that you have no experience in, it seems.
 
Hey, thanks for pointing out that false dichotomy and strawman again!

BTW: Saying that cutting by 70% is idiotic is not the same as arguing for not cutting anything.

You and logic really aren't on speaking terms, are you?

Idiot, I never said that you did or didn't say "cutting by 70% is idiotic is not the same as arguing for not cutting anything". That is your red herring, not mine.

You have never met logic and she swears she has never met you. She remembers Idiocy claiming to be very close to you tho. Beyond that second hand account she does not know you.
 
Uh-huh :rolleyes:

Care to point out where I DID argue for maintaining current levels?

There is your red herring. You were arguing my position and you can't hold up that argument so you revert to distraction and misdirection.

I posted the original text, mark your position or flail away with more generalities.

Actually, I made that post before you decided to go back and edit yours to add more to it. All you said originally was "liar". Therefore me asking you to point out where I lied is perfectly logical. Something that you have no experience in, it seems.

You lying weasel. All I added was text that I had to scroll back several pages to recover.

Why don't you fuck off and die since you appear to be a serial liar?
 
Hey, thanks for pointing out that false dichotomy and strawman again!

BTW: Saying that cutting by 70% is idiotic is not the same as arguing for not cutting anything.

You and logic really aren't on speaking terms, are you?

Idiot, I never said that you did or didn't say "cutting by 70% is idiotic is not the same as arguing for not cutting anything". That is your red herring, not mine.

The words are in English, but the way you are stringing them together makes no sense. Give it another go, bust out your third grade reader if you have to.

I'll summarize for you:

You said cut everything by 70% in 2 years.

I said thats stupid.

You said that I'm stupid for wanting to maintain current levels.

I pointed out I never did such a thing.

You called me a liar.

I ask you where I lied.

You say red herring.

:rolleyes: You either have a problem with logic or English.
 
There is your red herring. You were arguing my position and you can't hold up that argument so you revert to distraction and misdirection.

I posted the original text, mark your position or flail away with more generalities.

Actually, I made that post before you decided to go back and edit yours to add more to it. All you said originally was "liar". Therefore me asking you to point out where I lied is perfectly logical. Something that you have no experience in, it seems.

You lying weasel. All I added was text that I had to scroll back several pages to recover.

Why don't you fuck off and die since you appear to be a serial liar?

Where did I lie? You did edit it. I did make my post before you edited it.

Your logic deficiency is getting pretty predictable. Whenever it's pointed out to you, you jump around incoherently screaming "liar".
 
reset


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.

Fuck that shit! We spent almost 3 trillion dollars in the last two years that we had to borrow from foreigners or from future earnings depending on how you approach it.

End the campaigns in the ME and close at least 60% of our 800 foreign bases and reduce military spending by 70% within 2 years. No ifs, ands or buts.

BTW , we bribed Israel with a grant of some 20 advanced jets worth $20 billion just get them to maintain a settlement construction freeze that they violate even while it is in place, and only for 90 days.

We pour more money down rat holes than 95% of the nations in the world spend, and we spend more on military and defense than the rest of the world combined once you figure in our foreign aid.

Time to live within our means.

Yeah, your recipe is one for disaster. Both economically, defensively and politically. But at least you hit the trifecta!
 
Having problems posting, huh? This is your second "reset" that you can't seem to get right.

Don't worry, lots of mentally deficient people have problems grasping the way a message board works.
 
Your logic deficiency is getting pretty predictable. Whenever it's pointed out to you, you jump around incoherently screaming "liar".

You are a retard. I have 25 iq points on you easy. Don't lecture me about logic, tardo.

Begin again with no red herrings, strawmen and estupido assumptions on your part, tardo.

And stuff your tude, because you can't hang in a logic rich environment.
 
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)......
 
Last edited:
Your logic deficiency is getting pretty predictable. Whenever it's pointed out to you, you jump around incoherently screaming "liar".

I have 25 iq points on you easy. Don't lecture me about logic, tardo.

Begin again with no red herrings, strawmen and estupido assumptions on your part, tardo.

And stuff your tude, because you can't hang in a logic rich environment.

Uh-huh. :rolleyes:

And yet you can't master a message board, can't follow a conversation, make up positions that you opponent never made, and call people liars without any proof backing you up.

Sure thing, you sure are smart :thup:
 
Your logic deficiency is getting pretty predictable. Whenever it's pointed out to you, you jump around incoherently screaming "liar".

You are a retard. I have 25 iq points on you easy. Don't lecture me about logic, tardo.

Begin again with no red herrings, strawmen and estupido assumptions on your part, tardo.

And stuff your tude, because you can't hang in a logic rich environment.

I don't know if i would brag about being 25 IQ points higher than retarded... just sayin'
 
Your logic deficiency is getting pretty predictable. Whenever it's pointed out to you, you jump around incoherently screaming "liar".

You are a retard. I have 25 iq points on you easy. Don't lecture me about logic, tardo.

Begin again with no red herrings, strawmen and estupido assumptions on your part, tardo.

And stuff your tude, because you can't hang in a logic rich environment.

I don't know if i would brag about being 25 IQ points higher than retarded... just sayin'

Shhhhh. He's smart, he swears :eusa_shhh:
 
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.

We have 11 Super Carrier Task Forces. Nobody else in the world has one of similar capability

no on else has similar responsibilities.




do you understand why they are important? what is your perception of their worth?


hummmmm I come with 10 super carriers:eusa_eh:


Responsibilities? Is that what we're calling American imperialism now?


You do realize that most countries hate when we invade them or use our military might to push them around, install and support dictators, and exploit them, right?


We're bullies. That's why AQ kicked us in the balls and the world cheered.
 
We have 11 Super Carrier Task Forces. Nobody else in the world has one of similar capability

no on else has similar responsibilities.

do you understand why they are important? what is your perception of their worth?

Time to start "out sourcing" those responsibilities.

No reason for us to be the "world's cops" or providing security for oil companies.
index.php
 
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?
 
Time to get out of the Philippines, Germany, and France, too

We haven't had a base in the Philippines since 1991.

USAF:
Afghanistan
Australia
Bulgaria Main article: Bulgarian-American Joint Military Facilities

Germany
Greenland
Guam
Italy
Japan
Qatar
Saudi Arabia Source: Globemaster US Military Aviation Database

Singapore
South Korea
Kyrgyzstan
Taiwan
The Netherlands
Phillipines
Portugal
Spain
Turkey
US Army:
Afghanistan
Australia
Bulgaria Main article: Bulgarian-American Joint Military Facilities

Germany
Greenland
Guam
Italy
Japan
Qatar
Saudi Arabia Source: Globemaster US Military Aviation Database

Singapore
South Korea
Kyrgyzstan
Taiwan
The Netherlands
Phillipines
Portugal
Spain
Turkey
Leathernecks:

Afghanistan
Germany
Japan
Kuwait
US Navy:


British Indian Ocean Territory
Brazil
Cuba
Spain
Japan
Guam
Bahrain
Italy
Greece
South Korea

My point remains valid
 

Forum List

Back
Top