Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel will reportedly propose a Pentagon budget that will shrink the U.S. Army to its smallest number since 1940 and eliminate an entire class of Air Force attack jets.
The New York Times reported late Sunday that Hagel's proposal, which will be released to lawmakers and the public on Monday, will call for a reduction in size of the military that will leave it capable of waging war, but unable to carry out protracted occupations of foreign territory, as in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Under Hagel's plan, the number of troops in the Army will drop to between 440,000 and 450,000, a reduction of at least 120,000 soldiers from its post-Sept.11 peak.
Officials told the Times that Hagel's plan has been endorsed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and protects funding for Special Operations forces and cyberwarfare. It also calls for the Navy to maintain all eleven of its aircraft carriers currently in operation. However, the budget proposal mandates the elimination of the entire fleet of Air Force A-10 attack aircraft,
Do you want American soldiers to occupy foreign countries where they are constantly a target?
It doesn't matter how powerful your military is. The US won't win in Afghanistan because the CIA trained the jihad in guerrilla warfare. It was called Operation Cyclone. The Mujaheddin were specifically trained in how to fight a more powerful military over a long period of time. You've now spent $2b/wk for over ten years trying to win hearts and minds in Afghanistan and the US still hasn't won yet. This doesn't tell you anything?Do you want American soldiers to occupy foreign countries where they are constantly a target?
No I want to be the most powerful military in the world always..understand?
It doesn't matter how powerful your military is. The US won't win in Afghanistan because the CIA trained the jihad in guerrilla warfare. It was called Operation Cyclone. The Mujaheddin were specifically trained in how to fight a more powerful military over a long period of time. You've now spent $2b/wk for over ten years trying to win hearts and minds in Afghanistan and the US still hasn't won yet. This doesn't tell you anything?Do you want American soldiers to occupy foreign countries where they are constantly a target?
No I want to be the most powerful military in the world always..understand?
Whine and bitch about spending, then when it's cut whine and bitch. See cons don't want less spending, they just want to fuck the poor and elderly.
Whine and bitch about spending, then when it's cut whine and bitch. See cons don't want less spending, they just want to fuck the poor and elderly.
Military spending is the job of the federal government idiot. All this social spending isnt
Do you want American soldiers to occupy foreign countries where they are constantly a target?
No I want to be the most powerful military in the world always..understand?
Whine and bitch about spending, then when it's cut whine and bitch. See cons don't want less spending, they just want to fuck the poor and elderly.
Military spending is the job of the federal government idiot. All this social spending isnt
A pre WWII Army is a completely different animal from todays modernized force. A 1940 Army was labor intensive and relied heavily on infantry.
Todays Army is highly mechanized and computerized. Makes it much more efficient. To assume that if we have the same manpower as 1940 we have the same military strength is ridiculous.
We have to look at the proposed mission of a Modern Army and how many troops we need to execute that mission
A pre WWII Army is a completely different animal from todays modernized force. A 1940 Army was labor intensive and relied heavily on infantry.
Todays Army is highly mechanized and computerized. Makes it much more efficient. To assume that if we have the same manpower as 1940 we have the same military strength is ridiculous.
We have to look at the proposed mission of a Modern Army and how many troops we need to execute that mission
Indeed, but otherwise how will we find federal employment for thousands of undereducated minority dykes?
They cannot all be mail carriers, you know.
Whine and bitch about spending, then when it's cut whine and bitch. See cons don't want less spending, they just want to fuck the poor and elderly.
Whine and bitch about spending, then when it's cut whine and bitch. See cons don't want less spending, they just want to fuck the poor and elderly.
Military spending is the job of the federal government idiot. All this social spending isnt
I thought Proecting the Nation was the job of the Federal Government.
Now I understand: "Military Spending" is actually the goal here.........
