If The US spends over $600 billion on their military...

[Borillar]

... and can't get the job done against countries that spend 100 times less that they need to inject another $50 billion, isn't there something fundamentally wrong with the military and the way it's set up and operates?

/---- What countries are we fighting? I don't mean Jihadist that have no country I mean countries (Like Germany, Japan, Italy)
View attachment 131064

The US has troops in Germany and Japan still, a total waste of resources. But the US couldn't beat Viet Nam where they were fighting in flip-flops!!! Nor Iraq or Afghanistan, and even got its ass kicked by Somalia. SOMALIA!!!!!!

That's a lie. Liberal politicians micro-managed Vietnam and did the troops an extreme disservice by putting them in harm's way and tying their hands. Trump is letting the military micro-manage his orders. Libs don't like military spending, we get it, starving babies, granny over the cliff and all that...

So we spend over $600 billion/year and can't get the job done in Afghanistan, who don't have any planes, tanks, or heavy artillery... How do you explain that?

I don't recall lefties wringing their hands over it the previous 8 years so I have to dismiss it for what it is.

The right was wetting the bed claiming Obama was gutting the military when we always have been spending in excess of half a trillion dollars on it every year.

 

[Borillar]

/---- What countries are we fighting? I don't mean Jihadist that have no country I mean countries (Like Germany, Japan, Italy)
View attachment 131064

The US has troops in Germany and Japan still, a total waste of resources. But the US couldn't beat Viet Nam where they were fighting in flip-flops!!! Nor Iraq or Afghanistan, and even got its ass kicked by Somalia. SOMALIA!!!!!!

That's a lie. Liberal politicians micro-managed Vietnam and did the troops an extreme disservice by putting them in harm's way and tying their hands. Trump is letting the military micro-manage his orders. Libs don't like military spending, we get it, starving babies, granny over the cliff and all that...

So we spend over $600 billion/year and can't get the job done in Afghanistan, who don't have any planes, tanks, or heavy artillery... How do you explain that?

I don't recall lefties wringing their hands over it the previous 8 years so I have to dismiss it for what it is.

Not talking partisan-ly, just in general, with a $600 billion+ budget, we can't take Afghanistan? Why?

Well, we're not spending it all on Afghanistan. Maintaining a global military empire costs a lot of money too.

 

[Borillar]

So we spend over $600 billion/year and can't get the job done in Afghanistan, who don't have any planes, tanks, or heavy artillery... How do you explain that?

I don't recall lefties wringing their hands over it the previous 8 years so I have to dismiss it for what it is.

Not talking partisan-ly, just in general, with a $600 billion+ budget, we can't take Afghanistan? Why?

Where is at issue?

Can someone please translate this in English for me?

Remember that bear is hungarian or sumpin, so none of us know either.

He's probably one of those Russian Trump supporters.

 

[yiostheoy]

... and can't get the job done against countries that spend 100 times less that they need to inject another $50 billion, isn't there something fundamentally wrong with the military and the way it's set up and operates?

You need at least 2 or 3 links.

You have none.

This is spam and trolling.

Do you get paid to spam and troll ??

 

[Borillar]

The US has troops in Germany and Japan still, a total waste of resources. But the US couldn't beat Viet Nam where they were fighting in flip-flops!!! Nor Iraq or Afghanistan, and even got its ass kicked by Somalia. SOMALIA!!!!!!

That's a lie. Liberal politicians micro-managed Vietnam and did the troops an extreme disservice by putting them in harm's way and tying their hands. Trump is letting the military micro-manage his orders. Libs don't like military spending, we get it, starving babies, granny over the cliff and all that...

it is more about, cutting taxes for rich and cutting food stamps for the poor; so we can create more terrorists with our exorbitantly expensive, superpower.

Obozo spent 9 trillion dollars and couldn't get the job done.

Ok, but WHY can't the US army ever win?

Do you realize that in Vietnam, we never lost a battle? Yet, we lost the war because liberals here in the US did not have a stomach for what needed to be done.

What needed to be done? Why didn't Ike do it? Why didn't Nixon do it? Why didn't Ford do it? But it's all because of the hippies?

 

[Borillar]

The US has troops in Germany and Japan still, a total waste of resources. But the US couldn't beat Viet Nam where they were fighting in flip-flops!!! Nor Iraq or Afghanistan, and even got its ass kicked by Somalia. SOMALIA!!!!!!

That's a lie. Liberal politicians micro-managed Vietnam and did the troops an extreme disservice by putting them in harm's way and tying their hands. Trump is letting the military micro-manage his orders. Libs don't like military spending, we get it, starving babies, granny over the cliff and all that...

So we spend over $600 billion/year and can't get the job done in Afghanistan, who don't have any planes, tanks, or heavy artillery... How do you explain that?

You don't know much about counter-insurgency warfare, do you?

Those planes we have often fly too high and too fast. The roads and villages cannot handle the tanks. How do you use artillery without taking a chance on collateral damage.

The best thing to take out a Taliban fighter with an AK-47 is a American soldier, sailor or Marine with an M-4/M-16, face-to face.

I have helped train them do that for years.

Then you suck at training soldiers because we're not winning in Afghanistan.

You can't win a fight with your hands tied behind your back.

How are their arms being tied behind their backs? Why is Trump and the republican government doing this?

 

[Borillar]

Do you realize that in Vietnam, we never lost a battle? Yet, we lost the war because liberals here in the US did not have a stomach for what needed to be done.

So we lost in Nam. To people wearing flip-flops. Agreed.

Your ignorance on this topic appears to be unequaled. Congratulations!

We also couldn't beat North Korea, and they're starving!

South Korea is free.

We still couldn't beat a starving people, and could only manage a draw!!

And that's with a republican McArthur running the military and republican Eisenhower as president!

 

[Iceweasel]

/---- What countries are we fighting? I don't mean Jihadist that have no country I mean countries (Like Germany, Japan, Italy)
View attachment 131064

The US has troops in Germany and Japan still, a total waste of resources. But the US couldn't beat Viet Nam where they were fighting in flip-flops!!! Nor Iraq or Afghanistan, and even got its ass kicked by Somalia. SOMALIA!!!!!!

That's a lie. Liberal politicians micro-managed Vietnam and did the troops an extreme disservice by putting them in harm's way and tying their hands. Trump is letting the military micro-manage his orders. Libs don't like military spending, we get it, starving babies, granny over the cliff and all that...

So we spend over $600 billion/year and can't get the job done in Afghanistan, who don't have any planes, tanks, or heavy artillery... How do you explain that?

I don't recall lefties wringing their hands over it the previous 8 years so I have to dismiss it for what it is.

The right was wetting the bed claiming Obama was gutting the military when we always have been spending in excess of half a trillion dollars on it every year.

Your bed wetting can't change facts. We heard many stories of parts being scavenged and leaving many planes inoperable.



http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/24/us-military-decimated-under-obama-only-marginally-/
Rowan Scarborough - The Washington Times - Tuesday, February 24, 2015

The U.S. military is shedding so many troops and weapons it is only “marginally able” to defend the nation and falls short of the Obama administration’s national security strategy, according to a new report by The Heritage Foundation on Tuesday.

“The U.S. military itself is aging. It’s shrinking in size,” said Dakota Wood, a Heritage analyst. “And it’s quickly becoming problematic in terms of being able to address more than one major conflict.”

President Obama’s latest strategy is to size the armed forces so that the four military branches have sufficient troops, ships, tanks and aircraft to win a large war, while simultaneously acting to “deny the objectives of — or impose unacceptable costs on — another aggressor in another region.”

In other words, the Quadrennial Defense Review says the military can essentially fight two major conflicts at once. It could defeat an invasion of South Korea by the North, for example, and stop Russia from invading Western Europe or Iran from conquering a Persian Gulf state.

But Heritage’s “2015 Index of U.S. Military Strength” took a look, in detail, at units and weapons, region by region, and came to a different conclusion.

“The U.S. military is rapidly approaching a one-war-capable force,” said Mr. Wood, a former Marine Corps

 

[Mudda]

... and can't get the job done against countries that spend 100 times less that they need to inject another $50 billion, isn't there something fundamentally wrong with the military and the way it's set up and operates?

You need at least 2 or 3 links.

You have none.

This is spam and trolling.

Do you get paid to spam and troll ??

Look it up, you troll.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

That's a lie. Liberal politicians micro-managed Vietnam and did the troops an extreme disservice by putting them in harm's way and tying their hands. Trump is letting the military micro-manage his orders. Libs don't like military spending, we get it, starving babies, granny over the cliff and all that...

So we spend over $600 billion/year and can't get the job done in Afghanistan, who don't have any planes, tanks, or heavy artillery... How do you explain that?

You don't know much about counter-insurgency warfare, do you?

Those planes we have often fly too high and too fast. The roads and villages cannot handle the tanks. How do you use artillery without taking a chance on collateral damage.

The best thing to take out a Taliban fighter with an AK-47 is a American soldier, sailor or Marine with an M-4/M-16, face-to face.

I have helped train them do that for years.

Then you suck at training soldiers because we're not winning in Afghanistan.

You can't win a fight with your hands tied behind your back.

How are their arms being tied behind their backs? Why is Trump and the republican government doing this?

Are we talking now, or in the past?

In the past, the ROEs got our troops killed and let insurgents escape. Not any more, with Mad Dog at the helm!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

/---- What countries are we fighting? I don't mean Jihadist that have no country I mean countries (Like Germany, Japan, Italy)
View attachment 131064

The US has troops in Germany and Japan still, a total waste of resources. But the US couldn't beat Viet Nam where they were fighting in flip-flops!!! Nor Iraq or Afghanistan, and even got its ass kicked by Somalia. SOMALIA!!!!!!

That's a lie. Liberal politicians micro-managed Vietnam and did the troops an extreme disservice by putting them in harm's way and tying their hands. Trump is letting the military micro-manage his orders. Libs don't like military spending, we get it, starving babies, granny over the cliff and all that...

So we spend over $600 billion/year and can't get the job done in Afghanistan, who don't have any planes, tanks, or heavy artillery... How do you explain that?

I don't recall lefties wringing their hands over it the previous 8 years so I have to dismiss it for what it is.

The right was wetting the bed claiming Obama was gutting the military when we always have been spending in excess of half a trillion dollars on it every year.

Look at the physical size of our military. I am sitting at Fort Hood TX right now. It is the largest Army post we have. Base housing units sits empty, motor pools are growing weeds, and numerous buildings sit empty, and schools for dependents are closing. At the same time, my daughter's unit just returned from Afghanistan less than 6 months go and they are already gearing up for a return trip very soon.

 

[Mudda]

The US has troops in Germany and Japan still, a total waste of resources. But the US couldn't beat Viet Nam where they were fighting in flip-flops!!! Nor Iraq or Afghanistan, and even got its ass kicked by Somalia. SOMALIA!!!!!!

That's a lie. Liberal politicians micro-managed Vietnam and did the troops an extreme disservice by putting them in harm's way and tying their hands. Trump is letting the military micro-manage his orders. Libs don't like military spending, we get it, starving babies, granny over the cliff and all that...

So we spend over $600 billion/year and can't get the job done in Afghanistan, who don't have any planes, tanks, or heavy artillery... How do you explain that?

I don't recall lefties wringing their hands over it the previous 8 years so I have to dismiss it for what it is.

The right was wetting the bed claiming Obama was gutting the military when we always have been spending in excess of half a trillion dollars on it every year.

Look at the physical size of our military. I am sitting at Fort Hood TX right now. It is the largest Army post we have. Base housing units sits empty, motor pools are growing weeds, and numerous buildings sit empty, and schools for dependents are closing. At the same time, my daughter's unit just returned from Afghanistan less than 6 months go and they are already gearing up for a return trip very soon.

They need to go get all those soldiers sitting on their hands in places like Japan, Germany and South Korea.

 

[Borillar]

The US has troops in Germany and Japan still, a total waste of resources. But the US couldn't beat Viet Nam where they were fighting in flip-flops!!! Nor Iraq or Afghanistan, and even got its ass kicked by Somalia. SOMALIA!!!!!!

That's a lie. Liberal politicians micro-managed Vietnam and did the troops an extreme disservice by putting them in harm's way and tying their hands. Trump is letting the military micro-manage his orders. Libs don't like military spending, we get it, starving babies, granny over the cliff and all that...

So we spend over $600 billion/year and can't get the job done in Afghanistan, who don't have any planes, tanks, or heavy artillery... How do you explain that?

I don't recall lefties wringing their hands over it the previous 8 years so I have to dismiss it for what it is.

The right was wetting the bed claiming Obama was gutting the military when we always have been spending in excess of half a trillion dollars on it every year.

Your bed wetting can't change facts. We heard many stories of parts being scavenged and leaving many planes inoperable.



http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/24/us-military-decimated-under-obama-only-marginally-/
Rowan Scarborough - The Washington Times - Tuesday, February 24, 2015

The U.S. military is shedding so many troops and weapons it is only “marginally able” to defend the nation and falls short of the Obama administration’s national security strategy, according to a new report by The Heritage Foundation on Tuesday.

“The U.S. military itself is aging. It’s shrinking in size,” said Dakota Wood, a Heritage analyst. “And it’s quickly becoming problematic in terms of being able to address more than one major conflict.”

President Obama’s latest strategy is to size the armed forces so that the four military branches have sufficient troops, ships, tanks and aircraft to win a large war, while simultaneously acting to “deny the objectives of — or impose unacceptable costs on — another aggressor in another region.”

In other words, the Quadrennial Defense Review says the military can essentially fight two major conflicts at once. It could defeat an invasion of South Korea by the North, for example, and stop Russia from invading Western Europe or Iran from conquering a Persian Gulf state.

But Heritage’s “2015 Index of U.S. Military Strength” took a look, in detail, at units and weapons, region by region, and came to a different conclusion.

“The U.S. military is rapidly approaching a one-war-capable force,” said Mr. Wood, a former Marine Corps

And with a republican congress controlling the purse strings too.

 

[Borillar]

The US has troops in Germany and Japan still, a total waste of resources. But the US couldn't beat Viet Nam where they were fighting in flip-flops!!! Nor Iraq or Afghanistan, and even got its ass kicked by Somalia. SOMALIA!!!!!!

That's a lie. Liberal politicians micro-managed Vietnam and did the troops an extreme disservice by putting them in harm's way and tying their hands. Trump is letting the military micro-manage his orders. Libs don't like military spending, we get it, starving babies, granny over the cliff and all that...

So we spend over $600 billion/year and can't get the job done in Afghanistan, who don't have any planes, tanks, or heavy artillery... How do you explain that?

I don't recall lefties wringing their hands over it the previous 8 years so I have to dismiss it for what it is.

The right was wetting the bed claiming Obama was gutting the military when we always have been spending in excess of half a trillion dollars on it every year.

Look at the physical size of our military. I am sitting at Fort Hood TX right now. It is the largest Army post we have. Base housing units sits empty, motor pools are growing weeds, and numerous buildings sit empty, and schools for dependents are closing. At the same time, my daughter's unit just returned from Afghanistan less than 6 months go and they are already gearing up for a return trip very soon.

So, what is the military spending $600,000,000,000.00 on then?

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

... and can't get the job done against countries that spend 100 times less that they need to inject another $50 billion, isn't there something fundamentally wrong with the military and the way it's set up and operates?

War on poverty cost
The War on Poverty has cost $22 trillion -- three times more than what the government has spent on all wars in American history. Federal and state governments spend $1 trillion in taxpayer dollars on America's 80 means-tested welfare programs annually.
The War on Poverty Has Cost $22 Trillion - NCPA
ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?article_id=25288

We have spent trillions of dollars to fight the WAR ON POVERTY and today after 8 years of the first bi racial, Muslim loving, Homoseuxal, community agitator, he put more in poverty than when the war started. The OP here is bitching about the military, which those who are in it, actually WORK, while those who sit on their asses and suck off Uncle Sugars Tits, bitch and moan how their lives suck. The liberals want the US to fail, then they can be slaves of the government the rest of their lives, which means the liberals wont have to think, just do, as liberals have minds of children and must be told what to do.

HOLY DEFLECTION BATMAN! It's a thread about what could be wrong with the military and maybe offer some solutions to set it right. Is that too much to ask of you?

Every thread needs an obligatory "But Obama!" post by a bed-wetter.

So we pay 600 billion on the military, employing 100s of thousands of people who learn job related skills, also protecting this country from liberal scum who want to destroy US and you bitch about that, yet I put up a post about 1 trillion dollars spent on "the war on poverty" which the last president increased, and you call me a bed wetter. Yep, liberal thinking once again.