- Joined
- May 28, 2011
- Messages
- 13,813
- Reaction score
- 2,233
- Location
- Huntsville, AL
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Maybe one. Fabian strategy involved avoiding battle. It was remarkably successful. The general case you make is, in my opinion, correct. Here is the link.On that, me and every successfully defended nation, as well as every military theorist in history agree.
Unless, of course, you can provide an historical example that proves me wrong. Um, can you?
Maybe one. Fabian strategy involved avoiding battle. It was remarkably successful. The general case you make is, in my opinion, correct. Here is the link.
Fabian strategy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I don't know about anyone else but it seems to me that the hawkish foreign policy has not been good for our pocket books, among other things (such as our reputation). It's time to reduce the number of wars we are constantly engaged in, and start pulling back our resources to restore our homeland to its former glory. The idea that we could spend whatever we wanted to at home while engaging in so many foreign campaigns might have been a lovely dream for some, but it's time to wake up and smell the roses.
No. Strategic defensive.That's still an offensive strategy.
On that, me and every successfully defended nation, as well as every military theorist in history agree.
Unless, of course, you can provide an historical example that proves me wrong. Um, can you?
Sorry, I have no interest in the whole imperialistic hegemony thing. I support the Libertarian position on Defense - mind our own business and only attack others when we are attacked. We have too many problems here at home than to be flittering away trillions of dollars trying to force people at the end of a gun to run their governments like ours.
Besides creating an unmanageable debt, it is just not the way I was taught to treat others.
I take exception. I don't think our aim is to make other people run their governments like ours. I think we are acquiring natural resources at the end of a gun. Our energy companies seem to own a sufficient supply of our politicians to influence them to use war to acquire centralized distribution of energy control and reap their profits. Note that they do not need to own the energy, just the distribution network to profit handsomely. That way you cannot accuse them of stealing the energy. We need the energy countries to have leaders who will OK the distibution contracts with our Centralized Distribution of Energy monopolists. Geez, they'll probably only profit to the tune a nickel a gallon. Ought to be a song about it , don't you think?
I take exception. I don't think our aim is to make other people run their governments like ours. I think we are acquiring natural resources at the end of a gun. Our energy companies seem to own a sufficient supply of our politicians to influence them to use war to acquire centralized distribution of energy control and reap their profits. Note that they do not need to own the energy, just the distribution network to profit handsomely. That way you cannot accuse them of stealing the energy. We need the energy countries to have leaders who will OK the distibution contracts with our Centralized Distribution of Energy monopolists. Geez, they'll probably only profit to the tune a nickel a gallon. Ought to be a song about it , don't you think?
I've heard this for a decade. I wish we would get these resources already. It's been long enough.
No. Strategic defensive.
Hannibal's army was an army of conquest. Fabius was named defender of the land. He prepared Rome for Hannibal's attack. Then he Began to deal with Hannibal. He had all of the people along Hannibal's expected march routes burn the crops, buildings and despoil their fields. This is a defensive measure. It is not offensive in nature. From that point it was guerrilla tactics of small raids followed by rapid retreats.
For the Romans the Army must remain intact. If defeated Rome's allies would abandon Rome. So Quintus Fabius Maximus avoided battle.
An offensive strategy would have taken the battle to Carthage and pulled Hannibal out of Rome.
I believe the big thing here may not be the amount of cuts, but what the remaining money is spent on.
I would like to see a change in the way Defense Contracts are handled who gets those contracts. I believe that American Companies need to given preference in all cases and the only Nations who should be outside America need to limited to The U,K, Canada, and Australia, thus creating jobs, and insuring the flow of important items we need in times of need.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?