I have a question for those that have been in the military for a good while.
Not sure I know how to get this across right but I'll try.
I have seen stories where we pay people (in Afghanistan for instance) to not do things that fund the Taliban such as not growing drug crops. This from what I read is a lot of money, does it work?
We also pay bribes in other ways too.
We pay say one tribe in money and supplies to fight against another for our side. Does that work?
I'm sure someone here knows what I am talking about.
May all beings give and receive compassion, Live free from fear, And dwell in peace. - author unknown
If I'm saying things that aren't true, then I must be lieing. Yes?Because you just claim stuff to be true which isn't?
Look, Vancemack agress with my accessment. Is he a liar, too?
It's an irrefutable fact, the quickest and easiet way for the military to cut costs, is to get rid of personel. The quickest and easiest way to get rid of personel? Take away the bells and whistles along with a soldier's desire to be a member of the armed forces.
Higher standards and fewer perks, such as housing, bonuses etc.
Last edited by mpg; 11-08-10 at 06:30 PM.
If you expect people to be rational, you aren't being rational.
Being wrong(believing things not true) does not mean you are lying, only that you are not right. I gave examples of ways that can and have cut military spending without reducing training or readiness.
(BTW...you might refer to it as something much more dirty...politics. The same thing happens in congress daily)
But I say this: Those who are the quickest to brand others as not real Conservatives need to look in the mirror and make the same accusations to themselves. Of course, cutting and eventually balancing the budget IS a Conservative issue. Those who refuse to include military spending are not Conservatives either, but Neocons, which is the antithesis to Conservatism. We saw this when Bush was president. For those of you who supported Bush, but then stopped drinking the Kool-Aid, I applaud you. But bear in mind, I was bashing Bush when bashing Bush wasn't cool, and it earned me a lot of scorn from some of the very same people who bash him now.
So let's cut to the nitty gritty - What can be cut from the military?
1) Star wars, which has never worked, except under condititions in which we so laboratory-like, that it couldn't help but shoot down missiles. Under real conditions, it wouldn't stand a chance. That's billions right there.
2) The Leopard 2 tank, which is extremely expensive. And guess what? The Taliban has no tanks at all. Why do we need this?
3) The F-22 fighter jets, which the Pentagon itself said it didn't want.
4) The V-22 Osprey, which Dick Cheney himself said was "A turkey".
5) The F-35 Expeditionary vehicle, which is another money waster, but exists because the manufacturing plant is in Barney Frank's district.
6) The Gerald Ford class of aircraft carriers, which need a whole fleet of destroyers and other support ships just to protect them. You are talking about 50 billion alone here.
This is just a start, but what do we do next? We take the words of Dwight D. Eisenhower to heart and just tell the military-industrial complex to shut their ****ing pie holes, and that, from now on, they aren't getting squat. These programs of wasted money are not in the best interests of America, but in the interests of corporate welfare queens instead. Welfare queens who wave the flag and spew fake patriotism, while counting the money they are making by ripping off the taxpayers, and doing their part to screw the economy and the budget. Cut the programs, and if these CEOs don't like it, then maybe they need to get a real job, and work for a living, for the first time in their miserable ****ing lives.
Last edited by danarhea; 11-08-10 at 09:03 PM.
The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016
So if the military budget gets cut by a small amount and the military tries to screw with necessary items for the troops then we as citizens need to rise up and say "no, get rid of your pet projects, get rid of some of the possible 'luxuries', and stop cutting basic necessities for the soldiers to try and strong arm us into giving you more of our money"
"I am appalled that somebody who is the nominee...would take that kind of position"
"A court took away a presidency"
"...the brother of a man running for president was the governor of the state..."
It's horrifying because Trump is blunt instead of making overt implications.
Dan, most of your list is pretty good except the last. All carriers are part of a battle group, with screening ships for defense. The Ford class is a needed upgrade on a 35 year old design. Things like steam catapults are outdated, and the more modern electronic navy needs a new design to accommodate those electronics through a ship. Further, we need a new design for the f-35C. Carriers are inherently expensive, but they provide an absolute ton for the money. The next big military action, it will be a carrier that is first on station, and has been the first on station consistently.