So How Much Military Is 2 Much Military?

[MarcATL]

Well....?!??

 

[veritas]

When it's not our military.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Well....?!??

Peace through Strength.

Does that tell you my opinion?

 

[MarcATL]

Well....?!??

Peace through Strength.

Does that tell you my opinion?

No...it doesn't in the least.

I mean, it tells me where you stand, but it doesn't answer my question at all.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Well....?!??

Peace through Strength.

Does that tell you my opinion?

No...it doesn't in the least.

I mean, it tells me where you stand, but it doesn't answer my question at all.

awww bollocks.

I dont have a real answer....my answer is basically the bigger the better, the more we have the less likely anyone else in the world with F with us.

Plus it is a form of Govt employment that actually doesn't bother me.

 

[Ringel05]

Well....?!??

Why do you want to know? In the absence of knowing how to deploy what one has and what one needs and what to deploy for, isn't it a matter of personal opinion.

 

[MarcATL]

awww bollocks.

I dont have a real answer....my answer is basically the bigger the better, the more we have the less likely anyone else in the world with F with us.

Plus it is a form of Govt employment that actually doesn't bother me.

So are you also of the belief that Military spending is the only spending that can get the country out of a recession?

 

[Fatality]

the entire population of the United States is the militia of the United States, so any more than the entire poulation is too much.

 

[caela]

I don't know how much is too much. In a recession the military is one place that young people can be assured of work, housing, food, money for school later, a roof over their heads. The trade off at the moment is that we have troops deployed on some very violent fronts but in the grand scheme of things most of the military doesn't actually see much in the way of front-line action so they have to decide if that's a risk they're willing to take for themselves.

It's a very open ended and perspective based question. Those that want a smaller military will say that it is already too large and some will say it isn't large enough. I agree with the creed of "Peace through Strength." Being strong enough that the other guys aren't going to think to attack you seems like a good way of keeping all of our own safe...or it would if we'd quit playing the policeman of the world.

 

[garyd]

What do you do when the world is desperately in the need of policing?

 

[xsited1]

Well....?!??

Funny. I was just reading this.

The Failed Attempt to Leash the Dogs of War

In a letter to Thomas Jefferson, Madison lamented the problems in creating a government that protected the country from invasion yet maintained a proper respect for individual liberty:

The management of foreign relations appears to be the most susceptible of abuse, of all the trusts committed to a Government, because they can be concealed or disclosed, or disclosed in such parts & at such times as will best suit particular views; and because the body of the people are less capable of judging & are more under the influence of prejudices, on that branch of their affairs, than of any other. Perhaps it is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to provisions against danger, real or pretended, from abroad.

and this:

Standing armies

The other route to war that the Founders feared was that of a standing army. People today cannot even contemplate not having an enormous standing military, but in the late 18th century, Americans considered a standing army to be a primary tool of despotism.

 

[Big Black Dog]

If you're unlucky enough to be in a foxhole almost getting run over by enemy forces, you can't have too much military. If you're at the EM Club trying to pick up some cute girl, most likely there is too much military around.

 

[garyd]

Given that the military represents roughly 20% of the federal budget since the Gulf War began. It is difficult to make the case that we are spending too much on the military

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Well....?!??

What kind of rhetorical question is this? People who advocate a smaller military or none at all were made laughing stocks in the late 30's when Hitler and Tojo began their plans for world domination.

The simple fact is this. We need a large military because those fucking pansies in Europe are afraid of their own shadows. Someone has to keep the world's bad guys in check.

 

[caela]

What do you do when the world is desperately in the need of policing?

Truthfully I don't know. My gut reaction is to say to tell them to get a life and take care of their own damn problems. I am sick and tired of everyone bitching and whining when we do step in and then bitching and whining if we don't.

If the help is never appreciated why should we continue to offer it?

 

[Navy1960]

Asking how much military is too much military is rather like asking how much much you value your safety and is it worth the cost you pay for it. If you value your own protection very little then advocate for your Military to be cut to such a degree that threats cannot be met and this nation cannot be defended against them. However if your saying that DoD has become this big dark hole where spending has become complete farce, that would be hard one for me to argue. I have for a long time now contended that spending habits at the DoD have not only short changed the warfighter they have also dug deep into the pockets of the American taxpayer with little results and with congressional help as well. Want a few examples?, Let's take a look at the VH-71 presidential helicopter, this on again off again program has cost the taxpayers billions of dollars to produce a replacement for the presidential helicopter. It has yet to produce not a single active duty in flight bird but has spent billions on development to a UK and Italian based company at the expense of an American based one. Want another, congress recently approved an additional 993 million dollars to aquire additional C-17's that the Air Force has since 2005 said they have plenty of and do not need any more of. In fact at the same time they were doing this, they were cutting the F-22, at the expense of 95,000 jobs in 45 states. So how much military is too much, you need enough military to meet the threats that your nation faces and at the moment there are plenty to go around, but you also need a military that gets the proper hardware they need to do the job, and done so in a manner that takes the interests of not only the warfighters in mind but this nation as well. That means, spending our money in a wise manner.

 

[Xenophon]

How little military is 2 little military?

 

[editec]

Asking how much military is too much military is rather like asking how much much you value your safety and is it worth the cost you pay for it. If you value your own protection very little then advocate for your Military to be cut to such a degree that threats cannot be met and this nation cannot be defended against them. However if your saying that DoD has become this big dark hole where spending has become complete farce, that would be hard one for me to argue. I have for a long time now contended that spending habits at the DoD have not only short changed the warfighter they have also dug deep into the pockets of the American taxpayer with little results and with congressional help as well. Want a few examples?, Let's take a look at the VH-71 presidential helicopter, this on again off again program has cost the taxpayers billions of dollars to produce a replacement for the presidential helicopter. It has yet to produce not a single active duty in flight bird but has spent billions on development to a UK and Italian based company at the expense of an American based one. Want another, congress recently approved an additional 993 million dollars to aquire additional C-17's that the Air Force has since 2005 said they have plenty of and do not need any more of. In fact at the same time they were doing this, they were cutting the F-22, at the expense of 95,000 jobs in 45 states. So how much military is too much, you need enough military to meet the threats that your nation faces and at the moment there are plenty to go around, but you also need a military that gets the proper hardware they need to do the job, and done so in a manner that takes the interests of not only the warfighters in mind but this nation as well. That means, spending our money in a wise manner.

Yes, yes all well and good. Nobody denies we need a military to protect the nation.

Now how much military is too much military?

I ask because the military represents the majority of government workers.

If we're asking ourselves how much government is too much government, it naturally behooves us to ask questions more specific to what the government spends its money on.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Size of military depends on the foreign policy options desired and funded by an administration.

Clinton did that well with in the scope of what he wanted to accomplish after the battle of Mogadishu taught him and reminded his advisers that U.S. options must reasonable, well researched, and game played for exit options.

Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld screwed the pooch on such thinking with Iraq.

 

[Xenophon]

Nonsense, Clinton killed those men because he would not allow armor and heavy support because 'it looks bad on TV.'

Don't try to paint Clinton as some military genius, he sucked at it, as did chimpola and now Obama.