View Poll Results: Should the US reduce its global military presence?

Voters
94. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, drastically

    64 68.09%
  • Yes, just slightly

    12 12.77%
  • I don't know

    4 4.26%
  • No, the current situation is fine

    2 2.13%
  • No, even more troops should be deployed overseas

    12 12.77%
Page 6 of 19 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 181

Thread: Should the US reduce its global military presence?

  1. #51
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    New York, New York
    Last Seen
    03-11-16 @ 11:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    551

    Re: Should the US reduce its global military presence?

    Quote Originally Posted by shiang View Post
    It's simply costing us WAY too much, half is more than sufficient. Better spent on other things like education, infrastructure, and science and tech.
    Yeah, a lot of the current resources and personnel could be used for exactly those things you listed above.

  2. #52
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,505

    Re: Should the US reduce its global military presence?

    Quote Originally Posted by shiang View Post
    It's simply costing us WAY too much, half is more than sufficient. Better spent on other things like education, infrastructure, and science and tech.
    or applied to deficit reduction.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  3. #53
    Student
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Fremont, CA
    Last Seen
    06-18-15 @ 03:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    155

    Re: Should the US reduce its global military presence?

    Quote Originally Posted by FluffyNinja View Post
    Thank you for your service! My father is a Vietnam vet (1967-68 - through the Tet Offensive) and I never truly appreciated his service until I learned a little history and was later activated myself as an Army Reservist to serve a year-long tour in Iraq/Saudi in 1990. I feel badly that our troops during the 'Nam era were placed in the position in which they were by bumbling politicians. I feel badly that the talking heads in Washington created a scenario in which our military could win individual battles.....but sadly, could never truly win the war.

    In my reference, I was simply attempting to illustrate to another poster the ineffectiveness of the policy of sending in small numbers of troops to act as advisors. It did not work well in Nam as it certainly did not deter a build-up of the NVA nor did it efficiently encourage the ARVN to stand up and fight the North. I'm certain that the trainers/advisors were outstanding soldiers and did the best that they could under the conditions and considering what/who they had to work with. It was the approach laid out by Eisenhower, propagated by Kennedy, and then escalated by Johnson that was flawed from the beginning.
    Apparently Obama believes sending them as advisors, yet our men die. President Bush changed his two missions. Part of what he did was brilliant in carrying out the stated law passed by Congress and Bill Clinton signed. The law only stated to get rid of Saddam and did not state the mission was to build schools, fix infrastructure nor train troops. Bush added that. I understand some of the left whining over Iraq, escept it was them setting this up to begin with. Once executed, they were overjoyed Bush got rid of Saddam. Only when they realized they could make it only about not located WMD did they realize their obstruction could lead to some Democrat becomming president. Which is what happened. Now they whine the same thing is turned back against Democrats. This is so much fun.

  4. #54
    Professor
    iacardsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Last Seen
    11-24-17 @ 09:51 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,981

    Re: Should the US reduce its global military presence?

    Leave them in places we NEED them. Afghanistan, maybe South Korea, and maybe Kuwait. Other then that, why do we need people in Japan, UK, Germany, Italy?
    "Conservatism is the blind and fear-filled worship of dead radicals."
    - Mark Twain
    Run your own nation, play Cybernations.

  5. #55
    Professor

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    08-19-14 @ 02:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,824

    Re: Should the US reduce its global military presence?

    Quote Originally Posted by FluffyNinja View Post
    Anyone care to venture a guess as to what may happen the instant we completely remove our military presence in South Korea.

    Also, are you implying by this poll that there are no sovereign nations who ask for/welcome a US presence within their borders?
    Just say no when they ask us to defend any country other than our own.
    On the outside, trickling down on the insiders.
    We won't live free until the 1% live in fear.
    Hey, richboys! Imagine the boot of democracy stomping on your faces, forever.

  6. #56
    Professor

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    08-19-14 @ 02:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,824

    Re: Should the US reduce its global military presence?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty Deuce View Post
    Agreed. The only place we need bullets much anymore are in countering insurgencies. And we essentailly have no need to be caught up in any insurgencies anywhere. No need to be losing troops to IED's and being killed by infiltrators in the uniform of friendlies.

    We need lines not crossed. And when they are, we turn a trophy of the antagonist into a parking lot. If they do it again, we level two trophies.
    Mecca and Medinah. The OPECkers' price-gouging has cost us as much as all the wars we fight in the Muslim bloc.
    On the outside, trickling down on the insiders.
    We won't live free until the 1% live in fear.
    Hey, richboys! Imagine the boot of democracy stomping on your faces, forever.

  7. #57
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    10-15-17 @ 05:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    424

    Re: Should the US reduce its global military presence?

    That cuts both ways. Remember that Canada, the UK and a fair number of other countries went to Afganistan as part of our treaty commitment to our closest ally - and with no regrets or reservations. Of course, we did NOT go to Iraq (for I hope obvious reasons), but I have to say the outside of the KRG, Afganistan is a lost cause (mostly because the resources to do it right were tied up in Iraq when they COULD have been effective).

    Let's see: USA is $15T or so in debt, can not come anywhere near balanced federal budget, has $100T of un-fundable (I think I just invented a word) entitlements promised over the next few years - and this is even a serious question?????

  8. #58
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    10-15-17 @ 05:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    424

    Re: Should the US reduce its global military presence?

    Uh...that's kind of a simple issue: don't waste all of the petro above domestic production levels that you do. Pretty hard to take anyone seriously who waddles off down the road for an hour long commute alone in a guzzle-pig SUV to a job that doesn't likely need to be done.

    BTW: Mecca and Medina are not in the region where most US energy imports originate.

  9. #59
    Professor

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    08-19-14 @ 02:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,824

    Re: Should the US reduce its global military presence?

    Quote Originally Posted by FluffyNinja View Post
    Thank you for your service! My father is a Vietnam vet (1967-68 - through the Tet Offensive) and I never truly appreciated his service until I learned a little history and was later activated myself as an Army Reservist to serve a year-long tour in Iraq/Saudi in 1990. I feel badly that our troops during the 'Nam era were placed in the position in which they were by bumbling politicians. I feel badly that the talking heads in Washington created a scenario in which our military could win individual battles.....but sadly, could never truly win the war.

    In my reference, I was simply attempting to illustrate to another poster the ineffectiveness of the policy of sending in small numbers of troops to act as advisors. It did not work well in Nam as it certainly did not deter a build-up of the NVA nor did it efficiently encourage the ARVN to stand up and fight the North. I'm certain that the trainers/advisors were outstanding soldiers and did the best that they could under the conditions and considering what/who they had to work with. It was the approach laid out by Eisenhower, propagated by Kennedy, and then escalated by Johnson that was flawed from the beginning.
    What I saw there in 1967 was that the South Vietnamese were cowardly, corrupt, or collaborating with the Communists. We (H/2/5 USMC) went into one area where the national troops actually had a peace treaty with the enemy! The Boat People were Chickenhawks and none of us who fought to save such a worthless people have any sympathy for them.
    On the outside, trickling down on the insiders.
    We won't live free until the 1% live in fear.
    Hey, richboys! Imagine the boot of democracy stomping on your faces, forever.

  10. #60
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,341

    Re: Should the US reduce its global military presence?

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert A Whit View Post
    Afghanistan and you may want our troops there, but I do not. Obama messed up greatly adding to the forces. Bush tried to keep the number a lot lower.
    That was because he needed 200,000 troops for Iraq and left nothing but a "placeholder" force in Afghanistan for 6 years. In other words he took his eye off the ball.

Page 6 of 19 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... 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
  •