- Joined
- Jun 4, 2010
- Messages
- 133,429
- Reaction score
- 43,228
- Location
- Miami
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
When the gutter is genocidal dictatorship, you have no point whatsoever.
Don't know about him...but for me....Yes. In fact until we get our own country in order that would be a HELL YES. There's an old saying. You cannot help others out of the gutter unless you can help yourself first. If you can't then you will just get dragged into the gutter also.
Obama not only let Putin invade Georgia, he praised him for it.
I wouldn't feel to 'safe' if I were you.
RussiaU.S. president George W. Bush's statement to Russia was: "Bullying and intimidation are not acceptable ways to conduct foreign policy in the 21st century."[345] "Russia has invaded a sovereign neighbouring state and threatens a democratic government elected by its people," said Mr Bush. "Such an action is unacceptable in the 21st century." [346]
And we know who to blame for this.
shrug...
These cut are typical and unsurprising. When liberals are in control, the soldier gets the ax.
To keep referring to the next generation military equipment as "toys" makes me wonder whether you really do agree with me. Vast technological superiority IS the deterrence I was speaking about. It's not total troops (China and North Korea trounce us), it is the huge gap between US military technology and everyone else.
As for the soldiers pay, it is really a separate issue. Ask the soldier on the front line if he would give up hellfire missile support for an extra $50 in his paycheck.
Yes, paying soldiers more is a noble goal that I support, but not at the cost of technological superiority that helps the US keep those soldiers alive both on the battlefield and by keeping them off the battlefield all together through deterrence.
These aren't "toys".
Fair enough. We already have superior war weapons. Presumably we keep an adequate inventory. Presumably we continue research on improved versions but stop funding huge purchases, particularly those that the military really don't want and are developed to pork an area and re-elect a Congressperson and invest in the upgrades to current equipment that improves the safety of our current military.
So, I retract the term "toys".
The Airforce has a habit of updating their airframes every few decades and the F-16 and F-18 are both showing their age. Improvements only go so far until you find the airframe needs replacement. VTOL aircraft like the F-35 are the natural replacement to the old style airframes, increasing the flexibility of the military tremendously.
I mean, you can argue that the "military" really doesn't want these new airframes and vehicles... but then they also didn't want airplanes, aircraft carriers, tanks, rifled muskets, etc.
I wonder. Is the journalist reporting this being deceptive or ignorant? Food prices are handled on a different line item than base pay. Base pay went up by 1% from 2013 to 2014, but BAS (basic allowance for subsidy) went up by 1.5%. Granted, not the same as the 2.5% to 3%, but the article is in error. What else from these people are in error?Wall Street Journal said:The military received a 1% increase for 2014 with food prices alone projected to go up 2.5% to 3.5% this year. These people risk their lives everyday for all of us and yet live at or near the poverty level and now some want to cut their pay and increase their costs even more.
Interesting the cuts will bring us down to levels we had 'before' WWII. With a poontang like Obama in charge with his track record, the rest of the world will likely start displaying their aggressiveness.
The Airforce has a habit of updating their airframes every few decades and the F-16 and F-18 are both showing their age. Improvements only go so far until you find the airframe needs replacement. VTOL aircraft like the F-35 are the natural replacement to the old style airframes, increasing the flexibility of the military tremendously.
I mean, you can argue that the "military" really doesn't want these new airframes and vehicles... but then they also didn't want airplanes, aircraft carriers, tanks, rifled muskets, etc.
Does not work that way. There is a huge difference between having superior weapons, and having vastly superior weapons. How many lives are saved by one improvement to a weapons system? Sometimes alot, and that is so even if you already have the best weapon system in the world.
I cannot thank this post enough. Soldiers are an absolutely critical part of our military and I dislike any cuts to their pay, or even subpar raises. However, the position we are in is that government spending is going to be cut. If you do that, you have to cut from the military, and if you do that, you have to do it in a way that gives you the best possible military for the money. That means hard choices have to be made. Until I see the full list of how this is done, I cannot really comment on whether I think it is the right plan, but that soldier pay and benefits are going to be negatively impacted is something that was inevitable.
I think (as a non American) the cuts are manpower cuts to reduce down to pre WW2 levels - not to reduce equipment down to pre WW2 levels.
This graph may help you understand how you're still spending at least as much as the next 14 biggest spenders on the military and that includes Russia and China's budget combined.
Why do you "need" to spend 3 times as much as China and Russia's total yearly expenditure anyway?
Partially because we protect our allies that don't spend so much. Besides. How much do the people making military equipment in China make vs. our union labor in Boeing et al?I think (as a non American) the cuts are manpower cuts to reduce down to pre WW2 levels - not to reduce equipment down to pre WW2 levels.
This graph may help you understand how you're still spending at least as much as the next 14 biggest spenders on the military and that includes Russia and China's budget combined.
Why do you "need" to spend 3 times as much as China and Russia's total yearly expenditure anyway?
I think before we again start talking about cutting the military, we should hold the governments feet to the fire over fixing entitlements....It's kind of like this whole immigration thing. Fix the border security first then talk about the rest....
Absolutely.
At least the military personnel are working for the tax payer money they get. I say the first cuts should go to the non producers of society.
Congress?
I think two years in the military should be mandatory at age 18.
No, it was Obama's plan.
I would like everyone to sever, but it isn't practical in our nation.I think two years in the military should be mandatory at age 18.
I would never want to serve with slaves. Conscripts are, throughout history, unreliable.
I think before we again start talking about cutting the military, we should hold the governments feet to the fire over fixing entitlements....It's kind of like this whole immigration thing. Fix the border security first then talk about the rest....
Because as soon as you start on the "cut everything...except stuff I like" mantra, nothing gets cut.
Especially when illegal aliens get them too. Where is the fiscal control on these?No one is saying that...Entitlements are far and away the largest drain on our budget, it only makes sense to look at that first.
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?