Why have a standing Army Policy?

[shintao]

While 95% is extreme, these are extreme times. If you grouped all of the true defense spending together everything from NASA to DHS, all intel, NSA, DoD etc it might account for 25% of the total budget. If you threw in foreign aid maybe 28-30%.

I have no problem cutting that by 70%, ending both wars tomorrow and closing almost all of our overseas bases. We can share space with allies in their facilities abroad anyway as long as we participate in NATO etc.

Our real defense needs are not being met, and the costs are prohibitive.

But even if you cut military spending entirely, that still won't balance the budget.

There is some comfortable level the US can live with and let the UN do it's job. It might be 80% or 90% or 95%. Put the fleet in moth balls until we need it to defend America. Send the troops home to their mothers. The idea is to pay down the debt by eliminating items that do not pertain to you or me or Americans in general. We don't need a military, or foreign aid, or corporate aid, or bail outs. If we can't cut sufficiently, then raise taxes and pay for the fiddler. That alone should be incentive to cut foreign spending.

We could afford to convert the vast majority of the military into a reserve capacity if not eliminating their activities altogether.

Undoubtedly the majority of our overseas activity serves no useful purpose beyond power projection.

The cold war is looooong over. We have no current need to be on permanent WW level readiness.

Good thread.

Thank you. It just seems like the logical step to take to lift the burden of the middle class taxpayer.

 

[(R)IGHTeous 1]

You are an imbecile, and in a majority with the cons here, not to mention you don't read and comprehend the written word, so you run you mouth with bullshit about what you think I said, and not what I did say. Get a grip.

Really? Is there or is there not a national "militia"? Musta missed that in the news! Stop throwing up smoke and mirrors.

Traditional conservatives are for exploring cuts in defense spending, but clearly NOT for retreat and defeat isolationism as you suggest. I can't count the number of other posts I've seen in this thread calling you insane as I have.

Ima ask you again to put that crack pipe down dude.

You are just dumb as the rest of them that can't get through two posts without loosing your way, and start yaking about shit you think someone said. I can only count a few post here that referred to the topic, so put mah cock down dude, clean the cum from your eyes and read.

You NEVER said National Guard and MILITIA? Really, this your last chance to let all that hot air out dude. I can find where ya said that you know, IT'S RIGHT THERE. LOL you're a bad BSer, take classes or something.

Point was you think the 2nd string is supposed to defend us better against foreign aggression while in REALITY even the 1st string is getting tired.

Your also an idiot Ima put that out there now too, sufficient evidence.

 

[shintao]

No, we don't, you ignorant moron.

He doesn't know. How could he?

It takes a special effort of will to be that stupid.

And yet, you are the imbecile!!! What can I say Dave, you are just ******* wrong again!!!
(9/23/2003) U.S. Troops In Iraq Isolated And Untrained

You are wrong because your ignorant and an asshole who doesn't pay any attention to the troops in the ME. Same goes for your ignorant asshole friend Tits, the two of you make the perfect Carny team supporting one another's ignorance and stupidity.

 

[shintao]

No, we don't, you ignorant moron.

Yes we do, you dumb ******* ****.

(9/23/2003) U.S. Troops In Iraq Isolated And Untrained

oh for god sakes...what a scoop.

"They do not have basic skills in civilian policing, and they are unaware of the law they are supposed to be applying," says Curt Goerig of Amnesty International. At the military camp of the 1st Battalion of the 37th Armored Division in Baghdad, that is very clear.

oh and the looting blurb was ridiculous

also those cooks etc. who were given rifles and sent to the front lines in WW2 weren't trained either, as rifleman....nits and lice.

Just further proof Dave is a liar and runs shit out his mouth with his carny butt buddy Tits.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Bring back the draft and cut enlisted men's pay by about 50% would solve alot of our problems.

 

[shintao]

Really? Is there or is there not a national "militia"? Musta missed that in the news! Stop throwing up smoke and mirrors.

Traditional conservatives are for exploring cuts in defense spending, but clearly NOT for retreat and defeat isolationism as you suggest. I can't count the number of other posts I've seen in this thread calling you insane as I have.

Ima ask you again to put that crack pipe down dude.

You are just dumb as the rest of them that can't get through two posts without loosing your way, and start yaking about shit you think someone said. I can only count a few post here that referred to the topic, so put mah cock down dude, clean the cum from your eyes and read.

You NEVER said National Guard and MILITIA? Really, this your last chance to let all that hot air out dude. I can find where ya said that you know, IT'S RIGHT THERE. LOL you're a bad BSer, take classes or something.

Point was you think the 2nd string is supposed to defend us better against foreign aggression while in REALITY even the 1st string is getting tired.

Your also an idiot Ima put that out there now too, sufficient evidence.

Coming from a Loser what does it matter? I laid out my case and got nothing back but personal attacks, and even support from the right. That tells me I won, you lost the debate, if you could call spouting shit a debate. The pack of you fuckers are dumber than a sack of rocks. Poor Dave was lying his ass off through the full thread while Tits licked his ass, two Losers for sure. And GAO assures us Dav is a liar and talking out his tits-cleaned asshole.


"significant deficiencies in National Guard roundout brigades' capability during their post-mobilization training, and the brigades remained in a training status until the war was over."
(p.2.,http://archive.gao.gov/f0102/146560.pdf)

"these problems are a reflection of the complexity of theskills required of large, ground combat maneuver units and a peacetime training system that simply has not worked."
(p.2.,http://archive.gao.gov/f0102/146560.pdf)

"they may have missions requiring their commitment to a war effort after completing only a few months of post-mobilization training."
(p.2.,http://archive.gao.gov/f0102/146560.pdf)


"we found that (1) peacetime training did not adequately prepare the brigades for their wartime roles, (2) the Army's readiness information greatly underestimated the amount of postmobilization training that would be needed to ready the brigades to deploy, and (3) adverse impacts resulted from the incompatibility of the National Guard's peacetime systems with those of the active Army."
(p.2.,http://archive.gao.gov/f0102/146560.pdf)


"Field training was lacking and as a result doctors and nurses were not familiar with their unit's mission or equipment."
(p.3., http://archive.gao.gov/t2pbat7/145817.pdf)

"An Army "lessons learned" report stated that 1,600 medical officershad not taken the officers' basic course and, therefore, were initially non-deployable."
(p.6., http://archive.gao.gov/t2pbat7/145817.pdf)

 

[loosecannon]

I can't count the number of other posts I've seen in this thread calling you insane as I have.

Ima ask you again to put that crack pipe down dude.

then again you are a self professed "young, urban, Latino, homo REPUBLICAN ".

You can't even serve in the military and you may not even be here legally. Were you an anchor baby?

I aint your baby, you could never handle me, and that name is reserved for those who can.

Surprise dumbass, I was Navy, until I had an asthma attack in basic @ Great Lakes, was medically discharged.

I'm also COLOMBIAN and French.

Wanna embarrass yourself some more?

You can't embarrass me, you can only embarrass you.

So you dodged the question of whether or not you are here legally or whether you were an anchor baby. I will therefore assume the worst. After all only you self profess to being a "young, urban, Latino, homo REPUBLICAN "...who can't serve in the military.

 

[daveman]

We send troops to the ME all the time that have no training.

No, we don't, you ignorant moron.

Yes we do, you dumb ******* ****.

(9/23/2003) U.S. Troops In Iraq Isolated And Untrained

No, we don't, you ignorant moron, and a 7-year-old leftist blog is proof of only your idiocy.

 

[gautama]

I think the best military policy for America right now is to bring all of our US troops home, and cut the Military budget by about 95%, just enough to keep the lights on and maintain equipment. The military represents over 50% of the budget (50-54%).

Then start depending on volunteer militia and National Guard from the states for any in country defense, and forget any outside country which is the jurisdiction of the UN.

SHIT(ow!),

As usual, you're a TOTAL IDIOT.

You wear the apparel of the ULTIMATE MORON with distinction !!!

 

[shintao]

Bring back the draft and cut enlisted men's pay by about 50% would solve alot of our problems.

I would oppose that. These guys deserve ever dime and benefit they get. Compare their wages to Black Water mercaneries and tell me they are over paid.

No, I just feel we can do with the military in peace time, that there is no justification for having troops deployed, and we could cut the military and foreign aid to balance the budget, because neither one helps America or the taxpayers.

Here we go: "Blackwater charges the government $1,222 per day per guard, "equivalent to $445,000 per year, or six times more than the cost of an equivalent U.S. soldier,"

 

[daveman]

The military is a necessary evil, so logically, keeping its existence to the minimum necessary serves the greater good.

Yeah, that worked great until Dec 6, 1941.

 

[daveman]

He doesn't know. How could he?

It takes a special effort of will to be that stupid.

And yet, you are the imbecile!!! What can I say Dave, you are just ******* wrong again!!!
(9/23/2003) U.S. Troops In Iraq Isolated And Untrained

You are wrong because your ignorant and an asshole who doesn't pay any attention to the troops in the ME. Same goes for your ignorant asshole friend Tits, the two of you make the perfect Carny team supporting one another's ignorance and stupidity.

Oh, I pay attention to the troops in the ME. Unlike you, however, I pay attention to the ones there now...not the ones there 7 years ago.

 

[daveman]

Yes we do, you dumb ******* ****.

(9/23/2003) U.S. Troops In Iraq Isolated And Untrained

oh for god sakes...what a scoop.

"They do not have basic skills in civilian policing, and they are unaware of the law they are supposed to be applying," says Curt Goerig of Amnesty International. At the military camp of the 1st Battalion of the 37th Armored Division in Baghdad, that is very clear.

oh and the looting blurb was ridiculous

also those cooks etc. who were given rifles and sent to the front lines in WW2 weren't trained either, as rifleman....nits and lice.

Just further proof Dave is a liar and runs shit out his mouth with his carny butt buddy Tits.

Wrong. A military-hating leftist blog is proof of nothing.

 

[daveman]

Bring back the draft and cut enlisted men's pay by about 50% would solve alot of our problems.

Michael Crook? Is that you?

You're a piece of shit.

 

[shintao]

Bring back the draft and cut enlisted men's pay by about 50% would solve alot of our problems.

The draft would be a good thing to have, as other countries have. After high school, have students do two years of community works where they will learn morals, ethics, work & self-esteem and become attached to their community. Those that score high in this program would be given the choice of going onto college of being enlisted in the military. Those who did poorly would be sent onto training, job placement & apprenticeship.

 

[shintao]

oh for god sakes...what a scoop.

"They do not have basic skills in civilian policing, and they are unaware of the law they are supposed to be applying," says Curt Goerig of Amnesty International. At the military camp of the 1st Battalion of the 37th Armored Division in Baghdad, that is very clear.

oh and the looting blurb was ridiculous

also those cooks etc. who were given rifles and sent to the front lines in WW2 weren't trained either, as rifleman....nits and lice.

Just further proof Dave is a liar and runs shit out his mouth with his carny butt buddy Tits.

Wrong. A military-hating leftist blog is proof of nothing.

Further Dave doesn't read or comprehend, and is just a babbling idiot with his carny partner Tits. LOL! Should have read page 10 Dave. You are not keeping up.......

The pack of you fuckers are dumber than a sack of rocks. Poor Dave was lying his ass off through the full thread while Tits licked his ass, two Losers for sure. And GAO assures us Dav is a liar and talking out his tits-cleaned asshole.


"significant deficiencies in National Guard roundout brigades' capability during their post-mobilization training, and the brigades remained in a training status until the war was over."
(p.2.,http://archive.gao.gov/f0102/146560.pdf)

"these problems are a reflection of the complexity of theskills required of large, ground combat maneuver units and a peacetime training system that simply has not worked."
(p.2.,http://archive.gao.gov/f0102/146560.pdf)

"they may have missions requiring their commitment to a war effort after completing only a few months of post-mobilization training."
(p.2.,http://archive.gao.gov/f0102/146560.pdf)


"we found that (1) peacetime training did not adequately prepare the brigades for their wartime roles, (2) the Army's readiness information greatly underestimated the amount of postmobilization training that would be needed to ready the brigades to deploy, and (3) adverse impacts resulted from the incompatibility of the National Guard's peacetime systems with those of the active Army."
(p.2.,http://archive.gao.gov/f0102/146560.pdf)


"Field training was lacking and as a result doctors and nurses were not familiar with their unit's mission or equipment."
(p.3., http://archive.gao.gov/t2pbat7/145817.pdf)

"An Army "lessons learned" report stated that 1,600 medical officershad not taken the officers' basic course and, therefore, were initially non-deployable."
(p.6., http://archive.gao.gov/t2pbat7/145817.pdf)

 

[(R)IGHTeous 1]

You are just dumb as the rest of them that can't get through two posts without loosing your way, and start yaking about shit you think someone said. I can only count a few post here that referred to the topic, so put mah cock down dude, clean the cum from your eyes and read.

You NEVER said National Guard and MILITIA? Really, this your last chance to let all that hot air out dude. I can find where ya said that you know, IT'S RIGHT THERE. LOL you're a bad BSer, take classes or something.

Point was you think the 2nd string is supposed to defend us better against foreign aggression while in REALITY even the 1st string is getting tired.

Your also an idiot Ima put that out there now too, sufficient evidence.

Coming from a Loser what does it matter? I laid out my case and got nothing back but personal attacks, and even support from the right. That tells me I won, you lost the debate, if you could call spouting shit a debate. The pack of you fuckers are dumber than a sack of rocks. Poor Dave was lying his ass off through the full thread while Tits licked his ass, two Losers for sure. And GAO assures us Dav is a liar and talking out his tits-cleaned asshole.


"significant deficiencies in National Guard roundout brigades' capability during their post-mobilization training, and the brigades remained in a training status until the war was over."
(p.2.,http://archive.gao.gov/f0102/146560.pdf)

"these problems are a reflection of the complexity of theskills required of large, ground combat maneuver units and a peacetime training system that simply has not worked."
(p.2.,http://archive.gao.gov/f0102/146560.pdf)

"they may have missions requiring their commitment to a war effort after completing only a few months of post-mobilization training."
(p.2.,http://archive.gao.gov/f0102/146560.pdf)


"we found that (1) peacetime training did not adequately prepare the brigades for their wartime roles, (2) the Army's readiness information greatly underestimated the amount of postmobilization training that would be needed to ready the brigades to deploy, and (3) adverse impacts resulted from the incompatibility of the National Guard's peacetime systems with those of the active Army."
(p.2.,http://archive.gao.gov/f0102/146560.pdf)


"Field training was lacking and as a result doctors and nurses were not familiar with their unit's mission or equipment."
(p.3., http://archive.gao.gov/t2pbat7/145817.pdf)

"An Army "lessons learned" report stated that 1,600 medical officershad not taken the officers' basic course and, therefore, were initially non-deployable."
(p.6., http://archive.gao.gov/t2pbat7/145817.pdf)

Nevertheless, despite these improvements, the Army found significant deficiencies in National Guard roundout brigades' capability during their post-mobilization training, and the brigades remained in a training status until the war was over.

From your 1st link.

Accordingly, we believe that if the Army is to confidently rely on its combat reserves in future conflicts, it must work on its combat reserves in future conflicts, it must work Ito correct the fundamental problems that have long hampered these forces.

From your 2nd link.

(1) peacetime training did not adequately prepare the brigades for their wartime roles, (2) the Army's readiness information greatly underestimated the amount of postmobilization training that would be needed to ready the brigades to deploy, and (3) adverse impacts resulted from the incompatibility of the National Guard's peacetime systems with those of the active Army.

From the 3rd link.

Aey thanks! Fir further proving my point and totally humiliating yourself, if I need any help in my next debate I'll let you know, not likely tho, I been doing this too well goin on 6 years now.

Like I said, insane, a flamer, and resorts to petty lies when you loose, typical, hippy lefty.

Now go lick your wounds k.

 

[shintao]

You NEVER said National Guard and MILITIA? Really, this your last chance to let all that hot air out dude. I can find where ya said that you know, IT'S RIGHT THERE. LOL you're a bad BSer, take classes or something.

Point was you think the 2nd string is supposed to defend us better against foreign aggression while in REALITY even the 1st string is getting tired.

Your also an idiot Ima put that out there now too, sufficient evidence.

Coming from a Loser what does it matter? I laid out my case and got nothing back but personal attacks, and even support from the right. That tells me I won, you lost the debate, if you could call spouting shit a debate. The pack of you fuckers are dumber than a sack of rocks. Poor Dave was lying his ass off through the full thread while Tits licked his ass, two Losers for sure. And GAO assures us Dav is a liar and talking out his tits-cleaned asshole.


"significant deficiencies in National Guard roundout brigades' capability during their post-mobilization training, and the brigades remained in a training status until the war was over."
(p.2.,http://archive.gao.gov/f0102/146560.pdf)

"these problems are a reflection of the complexity of theskills required of large, ground combat maneuver units and a peacetime training system that simply has not worked."
(p.2.,http://archive.gao.gov/f0102/146560.pdf)

"they may have missions requiring their commitment to a war effort after completing only a few months of post-mobilization training."
(p.2.,http://archive.gao.gov/f0102/146560.pdf)


"we found that (1) peacetime training did not adequately prepare the brigades for their wartime roles, (2) the Army's readiness information greatly underestimated the amount of postmobilization training that would be needed to ready the brigades to deploy, and (3) adverse impacts resulted from the incompatibility of the National Guard's peacetime systems with those of the active Army."
(p.2.,http://archive.gao.gov/f0102/146560.pdf)


"Field training was lacking and as a result doctors and nurses were not familiar with their unit's mission or equipment."
(p.3., http://archive.gao.gov/t2pbat7/145817.pdf)

"An Army "lessons learned" report stated that 1,600 medical officershad not taken the officers' basic course and, therefore, were initially non-deployable."
(p.6., http://archive.gao.gov/t2pbat7/145817.pdf)

From your 1st link.

Accordingly, we believe that if the Army is to confidently rely on its combat reserves in future conflicts, it must work on its combat reserves in future conflicts, it must work Ito correct the fundamental problems that have long hampered these forces.

From your 2nd link.

(1) peacetime training did not adequately prepare the brigades for their wartime roles, (2) the Army's readiness information greatly underestimated the amount of postmobilization training that would be needed to ready the brigades to deploy, and (3) adverse impacts resulted from the incompatibility of the National Guard's peacetime systems with those of the active Army.

From the 3rd link.

Aey thanks! Fir further proving my point and totally humiliating yourself, if I need any help in my next debate I'll let you know, not likely tho, I been doing this too well goin on 6 years now.

Actually it proves my point and makes you look like a bigger fool than you were on page ten. LMAO!!! The troops were not trained sufficiently for combat. Yadda Yadda.

Like I said, insane, a flamer, and resorts to petty lies when you loose, typical, hippy lefty.

Now go lick your wounds k.

Like I said, a complete imbecile rolling around in fantasy land with a Unicorn, who trys to take subject matter out of context, and should go lick her balls.

 

[Cain]

.

Guess you didn't understand that US Troops means US Troops on US Soil. Let the UN do their job, and stop playing policeman at great expense of tax payers & US Troops. Just stand on the side line, keep your nose out of others affairs, and yell Go Man Go! Whenever you see the military budget for a given year, know tht the figure only represents about 1/3 or so of what is needed. They are always back at the trough in 3-4 months for more, just milking away.

.....................
Another part of this problem is most of the money is not spent in the United States, it goes to foreign corporations like Haliburton who deposit in Saudi Arabia banks, so their bankers can loan to Arab sheiks to build islands to stick houses on. When a welfare mama spends, it goes to a US store for food, etc., it circulates in the economy when the store uses the money to buy food, or goes into the bank so you can borrow it to build that pool in your back yard that put workers on the job. See the difference? Same when we hand out foreign aid, or corporate aid, etc. Corporations for instance run advertising in foreign countries at your expense, using foreigners, and not a dime is spent here. So that is why social programs for our own people is not as big a hit on us, and the money stays here. Take Obama stimulus that hires a worker for $20. an hour. He pays back in $7., so he actually only cost us $13. dollars. The overseas worker pays no US taxes, he pays Afghan taxes which doesn't stimulate anything at home.

This is the core reason, if we are going to make budget cuts, make it to items that are not benefitting the American people.

* Source: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html & http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy11/pdf/budget/defense.pdf & Federal Budget Spending and the National Debt
** Source: DoD 101 An Introductory Overview of the Department of Defense - U.S. Department of Defense Official Website

#1: Hi Cain. The 2009 figure was prepared by the University of Berkeley, as well as the graph shown here.

#2: "Military embraces all it's spending, so homeland security, cia/fbi, VA & disabled & retirements, etc. If you are using that argument, it is insane. Murdering humans to save jobs? LMAO!!! sorry....."

#3: If we were the target, we would have already been hit. IMO. It takes more than a thought to justify 54% of the budget. And I left the militia & National Guard activated, so allowed -10% credit, and saying at 90% cut and more if possible. Further, the US has been cutting bases and military since George Bush Sr.. There is no way anyone could attack us by a major force, other than nuke, and they have that option now.

#4: Guess you didn't understand that US Troops means US Troops on US Soil. Let the UN do their job, and stop playing policeman at great expense of tax payers & US Troops. Just stand on the side line, keep your nose out of others affairs, and yell Go Man Go! Whenever you see the military budget for a given year, know tht the figure only represents about 1/3 or so of what is needed. They are always back at the trough in 3-4 months for more, just milking away.

To #1: Hmm, I am seeing other graphs shown that show differently, what exactly is the big X for? Also, do you have a graph for the 2010 budget?

To #2: No offense, but that isn't the mission of the US Military. Their mission is to protect and defend the Constutition. I had to take that oath, and I believe it, yes their is corruption, but that is life and its everywhere. I do not see how murdering people can create more jobs, war can create jobs, conflicts can, but the murder rate I do not see how that relates. I could see how a large war could cause a draft, which would create jobs, but not plain murder.

To #3: I am afraid to say I bet the US Government thought the same thing pre-ww2. Then the Japanese surprise attacked Pearl Harbor. We are a target, that is a fact of the world. 9/11 wasn't random, it was a target. Same for other terrorist attacks, and if those same people had the military backing, they would have been much larger scale I would think.

To #4: I am not arguing that the budget is a large sum to the DoD, but you do realize, if we leave NATO or the UN, that we would lose relationships within it, and also probably the credibility of many other nations? Also, you cannot just "pull" out troops, it takes planning, their are US Troops everywhere, I mean the Air Force alone has 13 bases outside of the US. Let's say that it's just 10,000 Airman per base, not counting civilian contractors, etc, that is 130,000 people to bring back to the US and then, if the 90% cut is done, laid off. That isn't counting the civilian employees laid off, which the US employees quite a amount of, even for security at bases.

The US Military does benefit the American people though. It sure benefits me. I get to do a job I have always wanted, I get my college paid for, and I have a career path set for the next 20 or more years. It does that for many others, gives them the ability to go to college, learn respect and discipline, to become better human beings.

I understand the budget cut, to a extent. 90% sounds radical, I could see 10-25%, if that, but 90% would be basically laying off the largest employer in the US and making unemployment now look like a joke compared to then. I am not claiming to know everything, but laying off that many people, all of whom have signed contracts, sounds rough & a bad idea.

Also, it isn't easy to get in the military either. I had to go to MEPS and if you even whispered the word "hospital" or "injury" you where automatically sent to a doctor who would quiz you for no joke, at least a hour, on everything wrong ever happened to you. MEPS culls out a lot of people. I went to MEPS in Memphis, Tennessee, out of 105, 31 people where kicked out at MEPS alone. That isn't counting the drop-outs from the DEP, and the one's who fail Basic.

Please if you reply to my posts, don't quote over quote, it makes it impossible to quote yours on my quote button, I do not know why, rather strange. Thanks.

 

[shintao]

.

Guess you didn't understand that US Troops means US Troops on US Soil. Let the UN do their job, and stop playing policeman at great expense of tax payers & US Troops. Just stand on the side line, keep your nose out of others affairs, and yell Go Man Go! Whenever you see the military budget for a given year, know tht the figure only represents about 1/3 or so of what is needed. They are always back at the trough in 3-4 months for more, just milking away.

.....................
Another part of this problem is most of the money is not spent in the United States, it goes to foreign corporations like Haliburton who deposit in Saudi Arabia banks, so their bankers can loan to Arab sheiks to build islands to stick houses on. When a welfare mama spends, it goes to a US store for food, etc., it circulates in the economy when the store uses the money to buy food, or goes into the bank so you can borrow it to build that pool in your back yard that put workers on the job. See the difference? Same when we hand out foreign aid, or corporate aid, etc. Corporations for instance run advertising in foreign countries at your expense, using foreigners, and not a dime is spent here. So that is why social programs for our own people is not as big a hit on us, and the money stays here. Take Obama stimulus that hires a worker for $20. an hour. He pays back in $7., so he actually only cost us $13. dollars. The overseas worker pays no US taxes, he pays Afghan taxes which doesn't stimulate anything at home.

This is the core reason, if we are going to make budget cuts, make it to items that are not benefitting the American people.

* Source: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html & http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy11/pdf/budget/defense.pdf & Federal Budget Spending and the National Debt
** Source: DoD 101 An Introductory Overview of the Department of Defense - U.S. Department of Defense Official Website

#1: Hi Cain. The 2009 figure was prepared by the University of Berkeley, as well as the graph shown here.

#2: "Military embraces all it's spending, so homeland security, cia/fbi, VA & disabled & retirements, etc. If you are using that argument, it is insane. Murdering humans to save jobs? LMAO!!! sorry....."

#3: If we were the target, we would have already been hit. IMO. It takes more than a thought to justify 54% of the budget. And I left the militia & National Guard activated, so allowed -10% credit, and saying at 90% cut and more if possible. Further, the US has been cutting bases and military since George Bush Sr.. There is no way anyone could attack us by a major force, other than nuke, and they have that option now.

#4: Guess you didn't understand that US Troops means US Troops on US Soil. Let the UN do their job, and stop playing policeman at great expense of tax payers & US Troops. Just stand on the side line, keep your nose out of others affairs, and yell Go Man Go! Whenever you see the military budget for a given year, know tht the figure only represents about 1/3 or so of what is needed. They are always back at the trough in 3-4 months for more, just milking away.

To #1: Hmm, I am seeing other graphs shown that show differently, what exactly is the big X for? Also, do you have a graph for the 2010 budget?

To #2: No offense, but that isn't the mission of the US Military. Their mission is to protect and defend the Constutition. I had to take that oath, and I believe it, yes their is corruption, but that is life and its everywhere. I do not see how murdering people can create more jobs, war can create jobs, conflicts can, but the murder rate I do not see how that relates. I could see how a large war could cause a draft, which would create jobs, but not plain murder.

To #3: I am afraid to say I bet the US Government thought the same thing pre-ww2. Then the Japanese surprise attacked Pearl Harbor. We are a target, that is a fact of the world. 9/11 wasn't random, it was a target. Same for other terrorist attacks, and if those same people had the military backing, they would have been much larger scale I would think.

To #4: I am not arguing that the budget is a large sum to the DoD, but you do realize, if we leave NATO or the UN, that we would lose relationships within it, and also probably the credibility of many other nations? Also, you cannot just "pull" out troops, it takes planning, their are US Troops everywhere, I mean the Air Force alone has 13 bases outside of the US. Let's say that it's just 10,000 Airman per base, not counting civilian contractors, etc, that is 130,000 people to bring back to the US and then, if the 90% cut is done, laid off. That isn't counting the civilian employees laid off, which the US employees quite a amount of, even for security at bases.

The US Military does benefit the American people though. It sure benefits me. I get to do a job I have always wanted, I get my college paid for, and I have a career path set for the next 20 or more years. It does that for many others, gives them the ability to go to college, learn respect and discipline, to become better human beings.

#5.I understand the budget cut, to a extent. 90% sounds radical, I could see 10-25%, if that, but 90% would be basically laying off the largest employer in the US and making unemployment now look like a joke compared to then. I am not claiming to know everything, but laying off that many people, all of whom have signed contracts, sounds rough & a bad idea.

Also, it isn't easy to get in the military either. I had to go to MEPS and if you even whispered the word "hospital" or "injury" you where automatically sent to a doctor who would quiz you for no joke, at least a hour, on everything wrong ever happened to you. MEPS culls out a lot of people. I went to MEPS in Memphis, Tennessee, out of 105, 31 people where kicked out at MEPS alone. That isn't counting the drop-outs from the DEP, and the one's who fail Basic.

Please if you reply to my posts, don't quote over quote, it makes it impossible to quote yours on my quote button, I do not know why, rather strange. Thanks.

1.I suppose it is just more of the defense items, as you will see in several of these graphs and in the quote stating the military spends over 1/2 the budget.

Current Military
$965 billion:
• Military Personnel $129 billion
• Operation & Maint. $241 billion
• Procurement $143 billion
• Research & Dev. $79 billion
• Construction $15 billion
• Family Housing $3 billion
• DoD misc. $4 billion
• Retired Pay $70 billion
• DoE nuclear weapons $17 billion
• NASA (50%) $9 billion
• International Security $9 billion
• Homeland Secur. (military) $35 billion
• State Dept. (partial) $6 billion
• other military (non-DoD) $5 billion
• “Global War on Terror” $200 billion [We added $162 billion to the last item to supplement the Budget’s grossly underestimated $38 billion in “allowances” to be spent in 2009 for the “War on Terror,” which includes the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan]

Past Military,
$484 billion:
• Veterans’ Benefits $94 billion
• Interest on national debt (80%) created by military spending, $390 billion

Linked. http://www.radiohogan.com/index.php?p=articles&id=159


"The US Federal Budget for 2010 was released today, February 26,2009. This article focuses primarily on the discretionary spending. Of the discretionary budget, roughly half of spending goes to the US Department of Defense with the remaining money divided among 22 other departments."

2.I agree with you. The other guy was trying to say it is the national interest, so that he can argue a right to murder troops in the ME where we don't belong. It doesn't create jobs here, per say. It creates jobs in the ME for thousands of contractors. IF troops are dying outside of America, you can bet they are dying for corporations. It is just that clear and simple. I call it murder.

3.When you stop playing policeman and mind your own business, people will leave you alone. All countries are a target, but not for any large scale war that would require US Troops. You can deal with terrorists just like Clinton said, with the FBI. People can spend their lives in unwarranted paranoia, and spend all their money one to point the American are spending there way in debt, and we are the biggest debtor nation on the globe. Time to start thinking a new way, and enjoying life instead of death.

4.I don't argue to leave NATO or the UN. I argue to reduce our US troops to a 90% budget. So make the choice to reduce the budget & plan to leave for American soil. We can put them to work on several socialist plans I have lined up for them to benefit America and restart the economy. Let the civilians get a non-military job.You should be getting a free education and a clear career path, and that doesn't mean we need a military. Want power, go to work for the police department or a prison.

#5.It won't sound radical when your pocket is jingling with your own money again. We can bring them home and put them to work on socialist projects. Build a grand canal and fortified wall on our southern border, round up the illegals & deport them, build 300 nuclear & desaltination plants on our three coast lines, build a glass highway, build water ways across the most barren lands of America and start farm lands and citys. The military would make a good work crew for that, and later deploy them to guard the Southern wall and three beach heads of America.

Not sure why you are telling me about how hard it is to get in the military. When they want people, they let anyone in. ie. nam