Page 3 of 22 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 215

Thread: ‘Pentagon’s Worst Nightmare’

  1. #21
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,518

    Re: ‘Pentagon’s Worst Nightmare’

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    That's so undeniably incorrect and patently false I don't know where to begin.

    In 1990 Defense spending was roughly just under 6% of GDP. "Two Decades" after it was just over 6% GDP. Even at its absolute lowest, around 98/99, it was still solidly more than 3% GDP so was not "half".

    How about in straight dollars adjusted for inflation? In 1990 we would've been just shy of 500 Billion. In 2010 we would've been just over 800 Billion. That's not cutting in half, that's raising it by more than half and is actually double what it was at its lowest, which would've been a shade under 400 Billion in 98/99.

    How about just flat out dollars, not even adjusted? You go from just over $300 billion to just over $600 billion.

    You got numbers saying otherwise, please present them. But from what I've seen you're math isn't just wrong...its devastatingly wrong depending how you look at it. Best case scenario is that over the past 2 decades we maintained roughly the same amount of average defense spending as a percent of GDP.

    As I said, I'd be happy to see numbers to the contrary, but right now it looks like you're just factually horribly incorrect.

    link
    You can throw up all the GDP numbers you want, but I prefer to reside in the real world.

    The United States military fields half the combat power it did in 1990. You can through those GDP numbers in the enemy's face and he'll shoot your ass. You'll probably die, because the defense cuts didn't allow enough money for dustoff assets to evac you from the battlefield.

  2. #22
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,512

    Re: ‘Pentagon’s Worst Nightmare’

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    You can throw up all the GDP numbers you want, but I prefer to reside in the real world.

    The United States military fields half the combat power it did in 1990. You can through those GDP numbers in the enemy's face and he'll shoot your ass. You'll probably die, because the defense cuts didn't allow enough money for dustoff assets to evac you from the battlefield.
    It's hard to understand exactly what you are debating, because your posts are not very clear...

  3. #23
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,518

    Re: ‘Pentagon’s Worst Nightmare’

    Quote Originally Posted by SheWolf View Post
    It's hard to understand exactly what you are debating, because your posts are not very clear...
    You think that our service members are parasites, so I don't expect you to get it, anyway. The more of them that die on the battlefield, the fewer of them that we have to support when they come home. Right?

  4. #24
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,512

    Re: ‘Pentagon’s Worst Nightmare’

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    You think that our service members are parasites, so I don't expect you to get it, anyway. The more of them that die on the battlefield, the fewer of them that we have to support when they come home. Right?


    Anything else you'd like to tell me that I believe and think about other people?

  5. #25
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,147

    Re: ‘Pentagon’s Worst Nightmare’

    Quote Originally Posted by Risky Thicket View Post
    Not if we pull our ass out of the Middle East.
    excellent idea.


    um.



    so, how do you propose rebuilding the world economy after it collapses following the implementation of your excellent idea?

  6. #26
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: ‘Pentagon’s Worst Nightmare’

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    You can throw up all the GDP numbers you want, but I prefer to reside in the real world.
    That's why I also threw up actual dollars.

    As a percent of GDP, Defense spending has remained on average around the same percentage for the past 2 decades

    As dollars adjusted for inflation, Defense spending has grew over the past 2 decades by more than 50%.

    As just straight dollars, Defense spending has grew over the past 2 decades by more than 100%

    You can talk about residing in the "real world" but apparently the word "real" has a very different meaning in your reality, specifically meaning "imaginary based on my own hyper partisan biases".

    You stated this:

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Our armed forces have been cut in half over the past two decades.
    Now, you specifically just specified our armed forces. Not the active duty men of our armed forces, but the armed forces as a whole. That, frankly, is incorrect. The military has grown substantially, based on some measures its doubled, in the past decade. Where you are correct on is the men in charge of the Pentagon have gotten more and more money and yet have used it less and less on actual soldiers. But even if we allowed your change of goal posts from "The armed forces" to "troops" you'd STILL be factually wrong.

    In the past two decades we've reduced our actual troop size by around 40%, or just over 600 thousand soldiers. During that time, George H.W. Bush accounted for roughly 341k of those troops being cut while Clinton presided over roughly 320k being removed.

    So with LESS money our military had more troops two decades ago than they do now, which seems to suggest that in the past two decades as the military's budget has stayed the same / doubled (depending how you look at it) they've chosen to spend more on things OTHER than the troops than on actual number of troops. That seems to be an issue with the Pentagon, the people running the show, and the people deciding what to do with the budget...not the budget themselves.

    Haven't you and other republicans been screaming about how we shouldn't be giving more money to the government when they're using it ineffectively and wasting it? Well, if you care so much about troop size, your Pentagon has been using the ever growing and ever expanding budget ineffectively and wasting it, yet in this case your solution is to continue to give them more money to waste.

    Link 1 (for 1990 number)
    Link 2 (for current number)

  7. #27
    Professor
    atrasicarius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    12-23-12 @ 05:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    2,227

    Re: ‘Pentagon’s Worst Nightmare’

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    You can throw up all the GDP numbers you want, but I prefer to reside in the real world.

    The United States military fields half the combat power it did in 1990. You can through those GDP numbers in the enemy's face and he'll shoot your ass. You'll probably die, because the defense cuts didn't allow enough money for dustoff assets to evac you from the battlefield.
    Who exactly do you think we're going to be fighting?
    For: legalizing drugs, gay marriage, abortion, guns, universal health care, public sector jobs, nuclear power, free education, progressive taxation
    Against: corporations, make-work, the 40 hour work week, intellectual property, imperialism, "homeland security," censorship

  8. #28
    Professor
    atrasicarius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    12-23-12 @ 05:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    2,227

    Re: ‘Pentagon’s Worst Nightmare’

    Things we could cut from the military with no ill effect:

    Several aircraft carriers - We have as many as everyone else combined. I'm pretty sure we could get by with 5 or 6. It's not our job to police the world. That would also let us get rid of a corresponding number of other ships which make up carrier battle groups.

    The majority of our tank forces - Tanks are useless against irregulars because all they have to do is hide, and air strikes are much more effective against other tanks.

    Strategic bombers - Only useful for two things: Carpet bombing and dropping nukes. Neither of those things are things we really want to be doing.

    Most of our nuclear arsenal - A single Ohio class submarine carries enough nuclear missiles to glass a good sized country. We have 14.

    Overseas bases - Keep a few in unstable areas like Korea and the Middle East. Get rid of all the others.

    A good percentage of our infantry - Increase the size of our special forces to compensate, since they're better at fighting irregulars.

    As many of the pencil pushers at the Pentagon as possible.
    For: legalizing drugs, gay marriage, abortion, guns, universal health care, public sector jobs, nuclear power, free education, progressive taxation
    Against: corporations, make-work, the 40 hour work week, intellectual property, imperialism, "homeland security," censorship

  9. #29
    Global Moderator
    Custom User Title
    LaughAtTheWorld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Seoul/Chicago
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    9,542

    Re: ‘Pentagon’s Worst Nightmare’

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    I bet you wouldn't be saying that if the KPA had just crossed the wire at Yujeong and were cruising down highway 3, through Jeongok and Dongducheon, headed straight for downtown Seoul, in the west and another column in the east going down highway 55, with their sights set on Taegu and then Pusan.

    Let's face facts, bro, the ROKs won't be able to stop them, because when the Kocoms cross the 38th Parallel, they're not coming by the thousands; they're going come by the millions.
    /facepalm
    Read my posts in the Asia-Pacific subforum. You clearly have no idea of the situation at the Korean peninsula.
    "The misery of being exploited by capitalists is nothing compared to the misery of not being exploited at all" - Joan Robinson
    "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries" - Winston Churchill

  10. #30
    Global Moderator
    Custom User Title
    LaughAtTheWorld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Seoul/Chicago
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    9,542

    Re: ‘Pentagon’s Worst Nightmare’

    Quote Originally Posted by atrasicarius View Post
    Things we could cut from the military with no ill effect:

    Several aircraft carriers - We have as many as everyone else combined. I'm pretty sure we could get by with 5 or 6. It's not our job to police the world. That would also let us get rid of a corresponding number of other ships which make up carrier battle groups.

    The majority of our tank forces - Tanks are useless against irregulars because all they have to do is hide, and air strikes are much more effective against other tanks.

    Strategic bombers - Only useful for two things: Carpet bombing and dropping nukes. Neither of those things are things we really want to be doing.

    Most of our nuclear arsenal - A single Ohio class submarine carries enough nuclear missiles to glass a good sized country. We have 14.

    Overseas bases - Keep a few in unstable areas like Korea and the Middle East. Get rid of all the others.

    A good percentage of our infantry - Increase the size of our special forces to compensate, since they're better at fighting irregulars.

    As many of the pencil pushers at the Pentagon as possible.
    Agreed. The war of this age is the unconventional/irregular/asymmetrical warfare. Most of what you stated are useless in that kind of combat.
    All the US needs aside from the weaponry for unconventional warfare are nukes. A few will keep countries like Russia and China in check.
    "The misery of being exploited by capitalists is nothing compared to the misery of not being exploited at all" - Joan Robinson
    "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries" - Winston Churchill

Page 3 of 22 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •