Sequestration and What It Would Do to U.S. Military Power

[rightwinger]

I agree. Start with waste and reacess. Cut foreign aid as well. Time to worry about ourselves.

If our militaries only mission was to protect the mainland US, we could cut our military by 90%. It is our projection of power around the world that eats up most of our budget

I actually agree with Ron Paul on that. If our allies don't pick up their share, it's time to let them fend for themselves.

Every ,mlitary action is always borne by the U.S. Where the hell is Germany, France, Italy?

Their contributions are pitiful.

They certainly can do more.

The European Union should bear the brunt of the defense of Europe, the Medeteranian and the middle east. It was their policies that screwed up those regions anyway

Japan and South Korea should bear the brunt in Asia

Let the US provide tactical support and fill in the gaps

No need for us to be the worlds policeman

 

[martybegan]

The Constitution mandates a permanent navy for the defense of the homeland and protection of trading routes. It doesn't mandate anything else.

"To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;"

And?

You get what that means?

The army was not meant to be a permanent fixture.

Yes, but it was not explicitly banned from being in existance for more than 2 years, just that congress has the ability to disband it if it sees fit, by cancelling its funding.

There is no outright prohibition, however, on maintaining the funding indefinitely, which is the current case.

 

[JWBooth]

If our militaries only mission was to protect the mainland US, we could cut our military by 90%. It is our projection of power around the world that eats up most of our budget

I actually agree with Ron Paul on that. If our allies don't pick up their share, it's time to let them fend for themselves.

Every ,mlitary action is always borne by the U.S. Where the hell is Germany, France, Italy?

Their contributions are pitiful.

They certainly can do more.

The European Union should bear the brunt of the defense of Europe, the Medeteranian and the middle east. It was their policies that screwed up those regions anyway

Japan and South Korea should bear the brunt in Asia

Let the US provide tactical support and fill in the gaps

No need for us to be the worlds policeman

Agreed

 

[rightwinger]

I agree. Start with waste and reacess. Cut foreign aid as well. Time to worry about ourselves.

If our militaries only mission was to protect the mainland US, we could cut our military by 90%. It is our projection of power around the world that eats up most of our budget

A projection of power is needed to maintain a modern technological society. Even if you figure out a way to wean us off foreign oil, there are certain strategic minerals we have to import, as there are no domestic sources.

I agree that in a modern society, the projection of military power is essential. However, other economic powers also need those strategic resources and should bear a greater burden

 

[auditor0007]

The waste is what needs to be addressed not the military being too large. It protects your lame ass so that you can post your stupidity here without having your tongue cut out or your head lopped off.

I wonder which one of these might be a tiny bit over bloated..

A fair argument but nontheless the miliitary is necessary like it or not. Is there a link to the story that goes with that chart?

I don't believe anyone is arguing that the military is unnecessary. The argument is that there is no need for us to spend as much on our military as we do. We spend almost as much as the entire rest of the world combined. It's insanity.

 

[beretta304]

I wonder which one of these might be a tiny bit over bloated..

A fair argument but nontheless the miliitary is necessary like it or not. Is there a link to the story that goes with that chart?

I don't believe anyone is arguing that the military is unnecessary. The argument is that there is no need for us to spend as much on our military as we do. We spend almost as much as the entire rest of the world combined. It's insanity.

No debate from me on that.

 

[martybegan]

If our militaries only mission was to protect the mainland US, we could cut our military by 90%. It is our projection of power around the world that eats up most of our budget

A projection of power is needed to maintain a modern technological society. Even if you figure out a way to wean us off foreign oil, there are certain strategic minerals we have to import, as there are no domestic sources.

I agree that in a modern society, the projection of military power is essential. However, other economic powers also need those strategic resources and should bear a greater burden

It may be a good idea, however, the US has gotten used to the fact that the oceans and the littoral areas of the world are basically under our protection, which means they are under our influence. If we cut back, someone else may enter in the resulting vacumn, and we may not like who it is. This can be an issue considering how much coastline our country has, and how much we depend on our sea routes to maintain our way of life.

 

[Black_Label]

A fair argument but nontheless the miliitary is necessary like it or not. Is there a link to the story that goes with that chart?

I don't believe anyone is arguing that the military is unnecessary. The argument is that there is no need for us to spend as much on our military as we do. We spend almost as much as the entire rest of the world combined. It's insanity.

No debate from me on that.

Then why do you support the GOP that one of their cores is to keep the military industrial complex loaded to the gills with pork, which is sending the debt skyrocketing and they want even more spending for it?

 

[Katzndogz]

Liberals imagine that we have no enemies and no threats so we don't need a military. Spend the money on free birth control. It's more important.

 

[RoadVirus]

Good. the military spending is completely out of control and we can't afford it.

Yes it is out of control, but cutting military spending should be done right, not whacking at it with all the grace of a machete-welding psycho.

 

[JWBooth]

A projection of power is needed to maintain a modern technological society. Even if you figure out a way to wean us off foreign oil, there are certain strategic minerals we have to import, as there are no domestic sources.

I agree that in a modern society, the projection of military power is essential. However, other economic powers also need those strategic resources and should bear a greater burden

It may be a good idea, however, the US has gotten used to the fact that the oceans and the littoral areas of the world are basically under our protection, which means they are under our influence. If we cut back, someone else may enter in the resulting vacumn, and we may not like who it is. This can be an issue considering how much coastline our country has, and how much we depend on our sea routes to maintain our way of life.

One people, one empire, one leader, is that it?

 

[Black_Label]

Liberals imagine that we have no enemies and no threats so we don't need a military. Spend the money on free birth control. It's more important.

Right wingers think we should all be curled up, shaking in the corner grasping onto bibles and muskets because the boogey man is coming to get us at any second, and the only why to stop him is to spend ever single dime we possible can on the military.
To hell with the debt, less freedom and more government is what keeps up safe! Is the motto of the GOP.

 

[rightwinger]

Liberals imagine that we have no enemies and no threats so we don't need a military. Spend the money on free birth control. It's more important.

OK

Lets go with that

Who are our enemies and how much military power do they have? What is the threat to mainland United States? What is the current nuclear threat? Is any nation a threat to our Navy?

 

[martybegan]

I agree that in a modern society, the projection of military power is essential. However, other economic powers also need those strategic resources and should bear a greater burden

It may be a good idea, however, the US has gotten used to the fact that the oceans and the littoral areas of the world are basically under our protection, which means they are under our influence. If we cut back, someone else may enter in the resulting vacumn, and we may not like who it is. This can be an issue considering how much coastline our country has, and how much we depend on our sea routes to maintain our way of life.

One people, one empire, one leader, is that it?

The fact that a democratic republic wields the power is probably reasurring to the rest of the world, and should be reasurring to us. This is not empire in the classical sense.


and you get negative points for going for a godwin slam in a sneaky way. Next time just type in Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Furher.

Also considering Hitler was an idiot when it came to power projection, in particular, sea power, you point has no merit.

 

[Black_Label]

I don't believe anyone is arguing that the military is unnecessary. The argument is that there is no need for us to spend as much on our military as we do. We spend almost as much as the entire rest of the world combined. It's insanity.

No debate from me on that.

Then why do you support the GOP that one of their cores is to keep the military industrial complex loaded to the gills with pork, which is sending the debt skyrocketing and they want even more spending for it?

Looks like beretta vanished

 

[Sallow]

It may be a good idea, however, the US has gotten used to the fact that the oceans and the littoral areas of the world are basically under our protection, which means they are under our influence. If we cut back, someone else may enter in the resulting vacumn, and we may not like who it is. This can be an issue considering how much coastline our country has, and how much we depend on our sea routes to maintain our way of life.

One people, one empire, one leader, is that it?

The fact that a democratic republic wields the power is probably reasurring to the rest of the world, and should be reasurring to us. This is not empire in the classical sense.


and you get negative points for going for a godwin slam in a sneaky way. Next time just type in Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Furher.

Also considering Hitler was an idiot when it came to power projection, in particular, sea power, you point has no merit.

Germany was a "Democratic Republic" as well. Until it wasn't.

Having all the marbles in one nation or state isn't something that "reassures" the world. Quite the opposite. The world tends to rid itself of bullies.

 

[Sallow]

"To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;"

And?

You get what that means?

The army was not meant to be a permanent fixture.

Yes, but it was not explicitly banned from being in existance for more than 2 years, just that congress has the ability to disband it if it sees fit, by cancelling its funding.

There is no outright prohibition, however, on maintaining the funding indefinitely, which is the current case.

There aren't many outright prohibitions on much of anything in the Constitution. It's meant to be a flexible document so that government can robustly deal with issues as they appear.

The point still stands. The army was not meant to be permanent. And there is no fixed expenditure for the military..either.

 

[nodoginnafight]

When you can advocate spending cuts on a program/department that you value - THEN you are serious about cutting government spending.

Until then, you are just pissing in the wind.

 

[martybegan]

And?

You get what that means?

The army was not meant to be a permanent fixture.

Yes, but it was not explicitly banned from being in existance for more than 2 years, just that congress has the ability to disband it if it sees fit, by cancelling its funding.

There is no outright prohibition, however, on maintaining the funding indefinitely, which is the current case.

There aren't many outright prohibitions on much of anything in the Constitution. It's meant to be a flexible document so that government can robustly deal with issues as they appear.

The point still stands. The army was not meant to be permanent. And there is no fixed expenditure for the military..either.

The army was not meant to be permanently FUNDED, it says nothing negative about the congress keeping it in place if it wants to.

And there are plenty of prohibitions in the consitution, most of which are on the government, and alot of which we have tended to ignore the past 80 years or so.

Some of the ones that still stand: The government cannot issue titles of nobility, you cannot search people without a warrant. you cannot convict ppeople without due process, you cannot own slaves, you cannot transpoty liquour into a locality that prohibits it, you cannot be president unless you are native born and over 35 years old.

etc. etc.

 

[GoneBezerk]

Liberals are typial idiots and scumbags. They don't want to really save any money from the budget, they just want to slice up the DoD budget then spend that money on more green energy scams and more welfare handouts to get more votes in the next election.

The DoD budget accounts for 20% of the national budget, but it is taking the brunt of the cuts unlike the welfare/entitlement scams that are being expanded with Obamacare, longer welfare payment periods, etc. The DoD budget already took a $480B cut this past budget, so another $500B is treasonous.

I have no doubt Obamination is doing this on purpose. He wants the US military too weak to counter threats from Iran, China, Russia, etc so he believes he can just tell the American public "we can't afford to get involved" when one of those countries starts invading neighbors in their region.

Obamination's strategy is to take away the guns and bullets needed to do the job, then tell the military that they aren't strong enough and funded to do the job. It's a sneaky method of the socialist that is currently hiding in our White House.

People that elected him either don't care if he makes the world more unsafe or they are too stupid to see the shit storm being created by Obamination. Hopefully Romney wins and we can maintain a strong national defense despite having these scumbags living in our country.