• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Lawmakers Warn Slashing Missile Defense Leaves U.S. Vulnerable

BulletWounD

BulletWounD

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2009
Messages
984
Reaction score
210
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Defense Secretary Robert Gates' call to cut back on missile defense programs is running into resistance from lawmakers and others who say the U.S. will be left vulnerable in the face of North Korea and Iran's advancing efforts to develop long-range rockets.

Gates called for $1.4 billion in cuts to missile defense as part of a budget plan he says will "reshape the priorities" of the Pentagon and "rebalance this department's programs in order to institutionalize and finance our capabilities to fight the wars we are in today and the scenarios we are most likely to face in the years ahead."

[...]
Click to expand...

Lawmakers Warn Slashing Missile Defense Leaves U.S. Vulnerable - First 100 Days of Presidency - Politics FOXNews.com

I watched Robert Gates' speech today and I have to say I agree with him. He wasn't talking about destroying our missile defense program, instead he was saying that we need to re-focus our efforts from mid-course interception to boost phase interception because of the evolving threat which makes mid-course interception very difficult.

He also said that we need to shift priorities in from our current strategy of worrying about the next war to that of winning the wars we're already in right now. We need to win the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq as quickly as possible. Our troop commitments in those regions are a vulnerability in and of themselves.

Cutting wasteful spending is important to maintaining a lean, mean military. It's important to note that these cuts in spending didn't come from Democrats in the Congress but from within the Pentagon and Defense Department. I think the boys in the Pentagon know a little bit more about what our priorities should be than the boys in Congress. But let's face it, they don't care about having an effective military nearly as much as they do about "creating jobs."
 
Last edited:
He also said that we need to shift priorities in from our current strategy of worrying about the next war to that of winning the wars we're already in right now. We need to win the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq as quickly as possible. Our troop commitments in those regions are a vulnerability in and of themselves.
Click to expand...

Our troops are committed to fighting extreme anti-American ideologies; those that are willing to strap bombs to themselves and run into a crowd of innocents just to put a flag over the body of a Marine.

What does a victory against an ideology look like? When do we know that we have won the war(s)? When it is declared that we have "won" the wars in these regions do we just pack our soldiers up and bring them home, so we can watch the region collapse again?

This world of "bring the troops home, right now damnit" is mythological at best. We have committed sons and daughters to fight anti-American sentiment. These conflicts are unparalleled. There is no victory, and there is no place to run from.

Go ahead, Obama, build more missiles. Build more tanks. Build more airplanes. Do whatever it takes to appease the Neo-Cons and their estranged offspring. You can shoot the middle finger off of anyone who throws it up at you, but that does not make them hate you any less. You can blow up their homes and their churches, but that does not kill their family values or their religion.

Go ahead, Mr. Obama, triple the defense budget. The more missiles we have the less likely extremists will fly planes into our buildings, the less likely people will blow themselves up, and the less likely we are the victims.

Sometimes I think there is hysteria running rampant in conservative america.
 
Arch Enemy said:
Our troops are committed to fighting extreme anti-American ideologies; those that are willing to strap bombs to themselves and run into a crowd of innocents just to put a flag over the body of a Marine.

What does a victory against an ideology look like? When do we know that we have won the war(s)? When it is declared that we have "won" the wars in these regions do we just pack our soldiers up and bring them home, so we can watch the region collapse again?

This world of "bring the troops home, right now damnit" is mythological at best. We have committed sons and daughters to fight anti-American sentiment. These conflicts are unparalleled. There is no victory, and there is no place to run from.

Go ahead, Obama, build more missiles. Build more tanks. Build more airplanes. Do whatever it takes to appease the Neo-Cons and their estranged offspring. You can shoot the middle finger off of anyone who throws it up at you, but that does not make them hate you any less. You can blow up their homes and their churches, but that does not kill their family values or their religion.

Go ahead, Mr. Obama, triple the defense budget. The more missiles we have the less likely extremists will fly planes into our buildings, the less likely people will blow themselves up, and the less likely we are the victims.

Sometimes I think there is hysteria running rampant in conservative america.
Click to expand...
:confused:

This article is not about conservatives.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates is calling for $1.4 billion in cuts to missile defense programs as part of a budget plan he says will "reshape the priorities" of the Pentagon, a move that is drawing bipartisan resistance.
Click to expand...

Nor is it about "cut and run," it's about shifting priorities for the betterment of the war fighters who are on the ground right now.
 
Last edited:
Why can't we spend money on both types of weapons systems for the wars we fight now and the wars we might fight in the future? The DOD has been outspending everybody for the past 6 decades, and it's worked out pretty well for us.
 
Typical response.

North Korea launches a Ballistic Missile....Obama administration openly hints at cutting ABM system.

If they invade South Korea I suppose they will call for cutting the military in half.




Cutting wasteful spending is important to maintaining a lean, mean military.
Click to expand...

Supposedly that is contrary to the Democrats goals.
After all our military is "stretched thins and overburdened and.."yeah.
Don't tell me that was just a canned line for 5 years!



from within the Pentagon and Defense Department
Click to expand...

Through the Administration to what you heard/read. Pentagon does not operate independently nor does it independently voice policy positions/changes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom