How good is the condition of the U.S. military after 3 years of Trump?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • togor
    Banned
    • Nov 2009
    • 17610

    #31
    Actually, what I describe is exactly the policy coming out of the oval office, and it's gaslighting to suggest otherwise.

    Comment

    • m1ashooter
      Senior Member
      • May 2011
      • 3220

      #32
      Originally posted by togor
      A question is do we really need a $700B/year military? Well what's the mission? How has the mission changed under Trump?
      You have asked the $700B dollar question! I don't believe we need a defense department as big as it is. Who are the threats we need to defend against? We aren't going to invade China or Russia and I doubt they are going to invade us. Besides the force structure isn't big enough to do it. The days of large forces going conventionally head to head are over. We are being invaded over our southern border and we have a failed nation state on that border. That's where our defense focus should be.
      To Error Is Human To Forgive Is Not SAC Policy

      Comment

      • free1954
        Senior Member
        • Feb 2010
        • 1165

        #33
        Originally posted by m1ashooter
        . We are being invaded over our southern border and we have a failed nation state on that border. That's where our defense focus should be.
        yes indeed.

        Comment

        • blackhawknj
          Senior Member
          • Aug 2011
          • 3754

          #34
          A lot of that $700B a year Defense budget goes to bases and their civilian employees, contractors and their employees. I recall some years ago a Democrat California congressman who was a big advocate for cutting the defense budget and spending that money on social programs had his district redrawn to include a large military base. He changed his tune PDQ. I recall a political cartoon from the early 1960s, showed a somewhat angry Congressman wearing a sandwich board which on the front said "Keep cutting defense spending ! " and on the back "But not in MY district!"

          Comment

          • RED
            Very Senior Member - OFC
            • Aug 2009
            • 11689

            #35
            Originally posted by m1ashooter
            You have asked the $700B dollar question! I don't believe we need a defense department as big as it is. Who are the threats we need to defend against? We aren't going to invade China or Russia and I doubt they are going to invade us. Besides the force structure isn't big enough to do it. The days of large forces going conventionally head to head are over. We are being invaded over our southern border and we have a failed nation state on that border. That's where our defense focus should be.
            No but China can take over Taiwan, the Philippines and all of indonesia. Russia can annex the Ukraine. Iran can attack and overcome all of the mideast... including Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

            No, we are not being invaded from the south...it is not an invasion when the Democrats encourage and help illegal criminals come to the USA to help them overthrow our government.

            Comment

            • togor
              Banned
              • Nov 2009
              • 17610

              #36
              Overthrow the government how? Is overthrow the correct word? It has a specific meaning.

              Comment

              • lyman
                Administrator - OFC
                • Aug 2009
                • 11268

                #37
                Originally posted by RED
                No but China can take over Taiwan, the Philippines and all of indonesia. Russia can annex the Ukraine. Iran can attack and overcome all of the mideast... including Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

                No, we are not being invaded from the south...it is not an invasion when the Democrats encourage and help illegal criminals come to the USA to help them overthrow our government.
                curious,

                did the R's or D's put the Shah in power?


                we (both R and D) have a bad habit of messing with other countries politics,, with poor results, esp in the post WW2 years,

                which seems to be OK,, until another country messes with or attempts to mess with ours,,

                Comment

                • m1ashooter
                  Senior Member
                  • May 2011
                  • 3220

                  #38
                  Red

                  I respect your opinion, but Russia could have annexed the Ukraine and they didn't. Iran doesn't have the logistical tail to over run the Middle East nor does China yet. We also don't have the logistical tail. As you are aware you have to move people and parts and we don't have the shipping any longer to do so.
                  To Error Is Human To Forgive Is Not SAC Policy

                  Comment

                  • jon_norstog
                    Senior Member
                    • Sep 2009
                    • 3896

                    #39
                    Originally posted by togor
                    He called me a Communist, which I don't like, but since we lower the bar for Red so he can stay clear of the time-out chair, sure okay why not. Ironic though that he calls me a Communist when he is the one supporting a foreign policy goal of changing the outcome of the Cold War such that Moscow wins and collective security under US leadership retreats globally.
                    Easy there! I get called that sometime too, I just laugh 'cause I'm way worse than that. I'm an Anarchist!

                    jn

                    - - - Updated - - -

                    Originally posted by m1ashooter
                    Red

                    I respect your opinion, but Russia could have annexed the Ukraine and they didn't. Iran doesn't have the logistical tail to over run the Middle East nor does China yet. We also don't have the logistical tail. As you are aware you have to move people and parts and we don't have the shipping any longer to do so.
                    For that you can thank Dick Nixon, who dismantled the Merchant Marine just when I got out of the USCG and was planning on spending my life at sea.

                    jn

                    Comment

                    • togor
                      Banned
                      • Nov 2009
                      • 17610

                      #40
                      Originally posted by jon_norstog
                      Easy there! I get called that sometime too, I just laugh 'cause I'm way worse than that. I'm an Anarchist!

                      jn
                      Anarchists at least have a plan!

                      Comment

                      • jon_norstog
                        Senior Member
                        • Sep 2009
                        • 3896

                        #41
                        Anarchists do it without government interference!

                        jn

                        Comment

                        • Vern Humphrey
                          Administrator - OFC
                          • Aug 2009
                          • 15875

                          #42
                          Originally posted by Allen
                          \

                          Remember Bill Clinton balanced the budget and reduced the deficit briefly. He still brags about it. What he doesn't brag about is that he starved our military doing it enabling countries like China to catch up. Giving and selling them our military secrets helped them as well. It will take decades (if ever) to recover.

                          The Rosenberg's were executed for far less.

                          Our military should always be fully funded but checks put on waste.
                          Actually, the debt increased every year under Clinton (albeit slowly.) His claim to reducing the debt is based on considering Social Security a source of funding, not a trust.

                          Comment

                          • blackhawknj
                            Senior Member
                            • Aug 2011
                            • 3754

                            #43
                            Since so much of Defense spending either involves bases and their civilian employees or contractors and their employees, trying to cut spending there causes job losses and angry voters. So the politicians go after the Operations and Maintenance budget, which leads to incredible short term savings. And long term problems.

                            Comment

                            • Vern Humphrey
                              Administrator - OFC
                              • Aug 2009
                              • 15875

                              #44
                              Originally posted by blackhawknj
                              Since so much of Defense spending either involves bases and their civilian employees or contractors and their employees, trying to cut spending there causes job losses and angry voters. So the politicians go after the Operations and Maintenance budget, which leads to incredible short term savings. And long term problems.
                              It's all so damn' political. For example, contracts require the winning contractor to open an office in a certain congressional district, or that congressman will vote against the program. Fully half of all military spending is done to get votes for congressmen.

                              Comment

                              • blackhawknj
                                Senior Member
                                • Aug 2011
                                • 3754

                                #45
                                Contractors make sure to spread the work around enough so that even anti-defense spenders have to think twice before a "No" vote.

                                Comment

                                Working...