• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama to veto defense bill if the A-10 is allowed to keep flying [W:150]

There are some things that just shouldn't be built.

"Should" doesn't exist in war. Victory is the only value. There is no government in the world that would explain defeat by touting its adherence to the laws of war and avoidance of crimes.:peace
 
He's only claimed to have two jobs; community organizer and street punk.

I suppose his law career doesn't count, nor do his time in the Illinois State Senate or the United States Senate.
 
It would turn into one, because robots don't have emotions; the same emotions that prevent soldiers from committing very cruel acts upon the enemy and the indigenous personel.

But wouldn't the robots still be controlled by humans? They say that some of the people who fly the drones suffer from some of the same stress syndromes that combat soldiers do.
 
Fair enough, but not the point I was making. The A-10 has never been loved by the "right stuff" pilot fraternity. Soldiers and Marines who fight on the ground, however, love that zipper sound.:peace

I agree.

Since WW ll the Army Air Forces and then the U.S. Air Force only wanted to shoot down enemy fighters in air to air combat or drop bombs from bombers at high altitude.

The Air Force never wanted to be in the close air support business. But the National Security Act of 1947 says different.

The U.S. Navy has the same problem. Congress said that the Navy is suppose to provide naval shore fire support for the Marine Corps. The Navy has neglected providing the Marines with NSFS for the past twenty plus years.

POTUS takes an oath to uphold the Constitution which means enforcing the laws that Congress has passed. The current POTUS ignores his oath of office he took, ignores the Constitution or what parts of the Constitution he doesn't agree with and refuses to enforce the laws that Congress has passed or at least those laws he doesn't agree with.
 
But wouldn't the robots still be controlled by humans? They say that some of the people who fly the drones suffer from some of the same stress syndromes that combat soldiers do.

Have you ever lost control of your computer Moot ?
 
"Should" doesn't exist in war. Victory is the only value. There is no government in the world that would explain defeat by touting its adherence to the laws of war and avoidance of crimes.:peace

There is no such thing as victory in a war on terror as GWBush found out.
 
Have you ever lost control of your computer Moot ?

Of course and its very unnerving. Thank goodness my life doesn't depend on it. lol
 
But wouldn't the robots still be controlled by humans? They say that some people who fly the drones suffer from some of the same stress syndromes that combat soldiers do.

Perhaps, but if it doesn't have anymore than the feel of a video game, an environment minus the blood, guts, screams and gore, the operators would--IMO--become detached from the realities of the battlefield and therefore kill off people for fun, or spite, then knocking off and going to the NCO club for a few beers and wake up the next morning, as if nothing ever happened.

When you dehumanize soldiers, you're just asking for atrocities to committed. Evidence of my point: would the bomber crews, who killed hundreds of thousands of Germans and Japanese in bombing raids be as willing to kill those people up close and personal with a machine gun? I say they would never be able to do that.
 
The army loved the A-10, close in air support. The Air Force hated it, too slow and all the wing nuts in the Air Force wanted to fly fast movers. I suppose the army will have to rely on their helicopters now for close in air support which is a heck of a lot more vulnerable.
 
I suppose his law career doesn't count, nor do his time in the Illinois State Senate or the United States Senate.

"Elected politician", isn't a, "job". Gimme a break!
 
That's a separate question. The point remains that there's no value in war beyond victory.:peace

The people who have and are getting rich from war and conflict might disagree with you.
 
"Elected politician", isn't a, "job". Gimme a break!

It's not? So PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES isn't a job? That's an elected politician, after all.
 
Another separate question. The principle remains that only victory matters in war.:peace

What does victory look like? We still don't have enough hospitals or funding for all the wounded vets from the last time 'victory' was declared and we are still fighting that war.
 
Last edited:
The army loved the A-10, close in air support. The Air Force hated it, too slow and all the wing nuts in the Air Force wanted to fly fast movers. I suppose the army will have to rely on their helicopters now for close in air support which is a heck of a lot more vulnerable.
When the fleet isnt grounded.

"But the Apache was sidelined in Kosovo. In 1999, the Pentagon ordered 24 Apache Alphas grounded in Albania after a training accident. The action infuriated Gen. Wesley K. Clark, the NATO commander, who was trying to intensify the air war over Kosovo. But the Clinton administration worried that the Apaches would be too vulnerable to Serbian fire."

A NATION AT WAR - HELICOPTERS - Loss of Apache in Iraq Is Evidence of Vulnerability of Copters to Ground Fire - NYTimes.com
 
What does victory look like? We still don't have enough hospitals or funding for all the wounded vets from the last time 'victory' was declared and we are still fighting that war.

And yet a third separate question. There is no value in war beyond victory.:peace
 
And yet a third separate question. There is no value in war beyond victory.:peace

There is no victory in a war without end. The only true victory in war is peace.
 
Guess what?

The military is run by civilians.

Therefore, you run it.

OK. I'm hereby ordering the withdrawal of all troops from Afghanistan and the cessaion of all drone attacks in Pakistan and throughout the world.

Wow, being CINC is fun :)
 
Another irrelevant comment.

Really, who goes to war expecting to lose? Your claim is an irrelevant distraction from the topic. Your next move of course will be to deny it and then repeat your claim without an ounce of proof to back it up. Wash, rinse, repeat until your opponent gives up and you think you've some kind of victory, is that it Jack? Most wars are won or lost in the court of public opinion and you've already lost that war, Jack.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Make sure you are addressing the topic, not each other.
 
Back
Top Bottom