Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 96

Thread: Sen.-elect Paul: GOP must consider military cuts

  1. #41
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:28 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,344
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Sen.-elect Paul: GOP must consider military cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    For someone with an extensive military career, there sure is alotta stuff you don't know. Why is that?
    Because you just claim stuff to be true which isn't? Go ahead, document your claim, show that you are right.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  2. #42
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: Sen.-elect Paul: GOP must consider military cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Well, the thing is that the military is everybody's ox to some extent.

    Even if you're not in the military you're at the very least likely to know somebody in the military. Families which depend on military paychecks aren't going to take Paul's goring all that well. After all, it's not like he ever served. His father did, but he's now a career politician. So as Navy would say 'it's no skin off their backs'.

    I'm all for gutting some social programs as they're ineffective. Cutting the military budget? Depends what we're cutting and how much we're cutting. Anything above 10% would be political suicide for any politician who supports it.
    We could cut 10% from the military budget without batting an eyelash. Continuing to fund the military establishment at wartime levels when we're scaling back our operations is just one more way to grow the government ever larger.
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  3. #43
    Guru
    BWG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    South Coast
    Last Seen
    12-04-17 @ 11:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,203

    Re: Sen.-elect Paul: GOP must consider military cuts

    Rand Paul is just another 'cheerleader'. He's going to say all the things that make the peanut gallery jump up and down and come to their feet to have their shrill voices heard.

    One example is this little exchange yesterday on ABC's This Week.

    AMANPOUR: One of the emergencies is going to be voting to lift the debt ceiling.

    PAUL: Right.

    AMANPOUR: Would you do that?

    PAUL: I don't believe I will vote to raise the debt ceiling.

    AMANPOUR: You won't?

    PAUL: No. I think that we need to send a message -- we need to send a strong message that...

    AMANPOUR: The government would default, then.

    PAUL: Well, only if we won the vote, would they default.

    AMANPOUR: So you think it won't pass?

    PAUL: You know, I think it's unlikely. There are people who vote against the debt ceiling every time to send a message that adding more debt is wrong.

    'This Week' Transcript: Rand Paul, Rep. Mike Pence and David Stockman - ABC News
    He'll vote no because he knows it will pass without his vote and now he has cover and can go back to his constituents and say 'Well I voted against raising the debt'.

    But when there's a close vote, he'll have an 'associate' on his shoulder making sure he votes the 'right way', much the way Cantor held Louisiana's Cao's hand during a health care vote.

    He'll try to be a rebel and they'll let him, all the way up until he tries to impede their agenda. Then he'll conform or be gone.
    “We just simply don’t know how to govern” - Rep. Steve Womack (R-AR) a member of the House Budget Committee

  4. #44
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Sen.-elect Paul: GOP must consider military cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by librep View Post
    There are certainly some areas of military funding that could be cut (weapons modernizaton/development would be a good start), but somehow I get the feeling that Paul is talking about VA benefits and the 20-40 billion spent on foreign aid. Neither of which is a great idea. It would be good to have more transparency regarding the military budget, there is a lot of money floating around under the title of "undisclosed funds" that should be sorted.
    No, he's first talking of the massive bureaucracy which eats up money. Fact of the matter is that we can maintain a strong, technologically advanced military without all the money we're spending now. Certainly if we adopt a more non-interventionist policy. There are lots of places to cut from without harming the efficiency of the military or putting our soldiers in significantly increased danger.

    And if anyone who runs their mouth about a balanced budget or responsible government are serious about those things, they'll understand that this is a necessary path to help get there.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  5. #45
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: Sen.-elect Paul: GOP must consider military cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    After the defense cuts take place, our troops will find themselves embroiled in a protracted conflict and lack equipment. Then what?
    I don't believe this has to be the case. DOD needs to develop a framework that breaks down its expenditures by various function i.e., compensation, combat/combat readiness/training, new equipment/weapons systems/technology, R&D, strategic planning, etc. Once that is done, the importance of each item as to be assessed according to the core mission/strategic goals. Precedent should be given to areas that are most important to the core mission/strategic goals. Other things are expendable if savings need to be achieved. At the same time, the planning for missions/conflicts needs to become far more robust than it presently is. If that requires a separate military-civilian strategic planning group, then so be it.

    All of that may sound obvious, but practices toward those ends are deficient. That the contracting process is largely dysfunctional e.g., the magnitude of cost overruns of the JSF is just one example. That it costs $1.3 million per soldier per year in Afghanistan (an asymmetric cost disadvantage) is another. Those factors are converging to push the U.S. military toward a situation either where it must score a decisive and lasting knockout blow quickly or risk losing early conflict gains in a war of attrition.

    Furthermore, the number of "surprises" i.e., the outbreak of low-level civil conflict in Iraq and rise of a Taliban-led insurgency in Afghanistan (both of which should have been widely anticipated given the history/structure/dynamics of those societies), illustrate a badly flawed planning process. Those two risks were as close to obvious ones as there were. How many more subtle risks are missed? IMO, that flawed process has undermined progress and also consumed resources/time/effort required to devise strategy corrections.

    Finally, the U.S. does not face an existential threat along the lines of that which existed during the latter part of the Cold War. Cold War-level expenditures (relative to GDP) are not necessary. Given long-term fiscal challenges facing the U.S., the Pentagon, like any other governmental unit, will need to become more productive with the resources it obtains.

  6. #46
    pawn in the game of life
    pragmatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    10-17-17 @ 05:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,984

    Re: Sen.-elect Paul: GOP must consider military cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    I was wondering how far the apple fell from the tree

    I expect a massive backlash towards Rand Paul from this statement
    Am of the opposite opinion. Believe there is a large portion of the country has woken up to the fact that this absurd deficit spending pattern has to stop or at least slow down. Both sides of the political spectrum realize this. My guess is that putting military spending on the table will be widely embraced, at least in rhetoric.

    That said, the picture will be somewhat different when it gets down to specifics. Individual congress pricks will be obligated to try and protect their personal turf. That's just the nature of the beast.

    But getting the dialog opened is the first important step. And then worry about the detail fights when we get to it.....


    .


    “Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.”

  7. #47
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Sen.-elect Paul: GOP must consider military cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Close the bases in Europe.
    Absolutely!

    These troops are needed far more on the Southern US border.

    Europeans can look after themselves.

  8. #48
    User librep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    11-08-10 @ 06:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    24

    Re: Sen.-elect Paul: GOP must consider military cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    No, he's first talking of the massive bureaucracy which eats up money. Fact of the matter is that we can maintain a strong, technologically advanced military without all the money we're spending now. Certainly if we adopt a more non-interventionist policy. There are lots of places to cut from without harming the efficiency of the military or putting our soldiers in significantly increased danger.

    And if anyone who runs their mouth about a balanced budget or responsible government are serious about those things, they'll understand that this is a necessary path to help get there.
    Then I certainly hope that this is seriously up for debate, because it would be a good change of pace to see somebody talk seriously about a top-down reduction in military expenditures.
    Economic Left/Right: 0.00
    Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.18

  9. #49
    Guru
    Councilman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Riverside, County, CA.
    Last Seen
    11-04-11 @ 10:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,454
    Blog Entries
    10

    Re: Sen.-elect Paul: GOP must consider military cuts

    Wrong and a really bad idea, and I guess Paul is not Conservative.

    I would say we could hold the line but not cut back.

    Our biggest threat today is not from the outside but the inside and from the Socialist/Marxists at the top.

    We managed to show a few the door but there is a lot of them still to throw out on their Butts.

    There are a lot of places where cuts can be made, and anyone with a brain knows we have got to cut taxes and thus create jobs.

    As long as the DUMB-ASS Obama is still around we are pretty much screwed. We are about to go off the cliff if the PHONY Health Bill isn't stopped, and California voted for State Wide economic suicide and there is no hope left there, at all.

    Why is it so many people have no clue when it comes to the economy. This is not hard to figure out.

  10. #50
    Guru
    JohnWOlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Last Seen
    01-17-17 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    3,594

    Re: Sen.-elect Paul: GOP must consider military cuts

    I did not vote for Mr. Paul I voted for Mr. Conway but I will hold his feet to the fire about this now. I hope him, his father, and a few other Republicans actively try to get this and the intelligence community's budget better managed. This would help solve at least part of what I believe is wrong with our country and our budget.
    "We’re going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that allow some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share. In theory, some of those loopholes were understandable, but in practice they sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying ten percent of his salary, and that’s crazy." -Reagan

Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... 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
  •