• 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!

The real source of our problems....

SEE POST BELOW FOR QUESTION

  • You're nuts

    Votes: 13 52.0%

  • Come to think of it, we're always at war and trillions in debt

    Votes: 9 36.0%

  • I just don't know

    Votes: 3 12.0%

  • I just don't care

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    25
ecofarm said:
Yeah! Saddam never did anything wrong!
Click to expand...

He was a total dick - tator, that is. He raped and pillaged in a country that isn't ours and halfway around the world but what did he do to us in particular? (Excuse me for not knowing)
 
sKiTzo said:
Poll Question: Am I crazy to say that those who run the "military industrial complex" have hijacked our government and are sucking us dry?
Click to expand...

Of course you are. Defense contractors make their money in a variety of ways ranging from the development of new technologies to the maintenance of existing fleets. Heck, there are plenty of friendly foreign countries to sell military gear to, as well.

In other words, they don't need us to go to war in order to make money, and considering our foreign policy of the last 40 years they certainly don't need a conspiracy in order to get us onto the battlefield -- all they have to do is be patient.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Of course you are. Defense contractors make their money in a variety of ways ranging from the development of new technologies to the maintenance of existing fleets. Heck, there are plenty of friendly foreign countries to sell military gear to, as well.

In other words, they don't need us to go to war in order to make money, and considering our foreign policy of the last 40 years they certainly don't need a conspiracy in order to get us onto the battlefield -- all they have to do is be patient.
Click to expand...

I think the question is who has been controlling our foreign poilicy for the last 40 years? How much has the defense lobby influenced our decisons on what conflicts are in our own best interests?
 
sKiTzo said:
Poll Question: Am I crazy to say that those who run the "military industrial complex" have hijacked our government and are sucking us dry?
Click to expand...

My estimation of your degree of sanity has little to do with your posing a single question.
 
iguanaman said:
I think the question is who has been controlling our foreign poilicy for the last 40 years? How much has the defense lobby influenced our decisons on what conflicts are in our own best interests?
Click to expand...

I'd say that there's been a healthy mix of fear (of communism), and commercial interests at work, and that the defense lobby isn't going to waste money on the foreign policy angle when the policy made war inevitable as it was.
 
sKiTzo said:
War is a business to them. If there is no war, they have to start one or they lose profits. Exorbitant profits.. OUR TAX DOLLARS>>>>>>"DEFENSE" SPENDING>>>>>TRILLIONS>>> MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX. Do you honestly think we would be in any more "danger" had we not been at war the last two decades and spent zillions? Could you maybe see how they might have contrived these wars for profit and/or private agenda?

Poll Question: Am I crazy to say that those who run the "military industrial complex" have hijacked our government and are sucking us dry?
Click to expand...
Yes. Yes you are.

What percentage of our gross domestic product do we spend on the constitutional requirement to provide for the common defense?
How much to se spend on the welfare state?
 
I dont find this crazy at all...
 
lpast said:
Its politicians that create war not the military...the military only goes where politicians tell them or allow them to go, seems your complaints whether legitimate or not are misplaced. You should rail on the politicians who start war and who are in fact in charge of what the military does and where it goes.
Click to expand...

I think this is a bit niave. The hierarchy of the military has been influencing poltical decision since forever. Bay of Pigs is a great example. When I worked for the DOD at Ft Riley and at DLA HQ in Michigan I can't tell you how many field grade and command grade officers who had sworn alliegance to this country considered the Military to be the country. Not part of it but THE Country like they were in charge. Disgusting.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
Considering the combined cost of the wars in afghanistan and iraq has been almost 4 trillion dollars, you're statement is entirely false. Unless you honestly believe we've given 4 trillion in bailouts?

Not to mention these are the direct additional costs of running the wars, not the amount we pay for maintaining such a large military.
Cost of war at least $3.7 trillion and counting | Reuters
Click to expand...

could not have said this better. The military budget alone is going to be half of the total some day and how much of that is accountable? And please don't give me the "all of it" crap. The GAO reports from 1960 til today. the DOD cannot account for over 15% of what its given. Independant sources have for years said the DOD could sustain a 30% or more cut in funding with little or no effect on performance.

Now add in the cost of unfunded and unnecessary "wars" and its a nightmare.
 
wolfman24 said:
could not have said this better. The military budget alone is going to be half of the total some day and how much of that is accountable? And please don't give me the "all of it" crap. The GAO reports from 1960 til today. the DOD cannot account for over 15% of what its given. Independant sources have for years said the DOD could sustain a 30% or more cut in funding with little or no effect on performance.

Now add in the cost of unfunded and unnecessary "wars" and its a nightmare.
Click to expand...
Yep, you nailed it. The 7 years I was in the army I saw an unbelievable amount of fraud, waste, and abuse. Anyone that says that funds are accounted for in the military is a joke.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
The REAL source of the problem is having expenditures greater than income. Our politicians mouths write checks that our citizens' asses can't cash. The wars are one of the many many sources we have contributing to our debt, but certainly not all.
Click to expand...

You are absolutely correct. It is most certainly not all however It is a major chunk. They ARE profiteering though and proof of this would be the no-bid contracts that they award for exorbitant unxhallenged sums. You can't deny that because it's what they are doing - plain and simple. The reports (by our own soldiers) of war crimes DO exist. Our own soldiers are saying the whole "terrorist threat" thing is being overinflated and that we are actually the terrorists now. This shows that the real reasons are the private interests. This is ongoing and it's not going to stop because the American people are buying it hook, line, and sinker.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Of course you are. Defense contractors make their money in a variety of ways ranging from the development of new technologies to the maintenance of existing fleets. Heck, there are plenty of friendly foreign countries to sell military gear to, as well.

In other words, they don't need us to go to war in order to make money, and considering our foreign policy of the last 40 years they certainly don't need a conspiracy in order to get us onto the battlefield -- all they have to do is be patient.
Click to expand...

Military weapons contractors 101 - The acme tank company proposes a new super tank to the DOD the first proposal is reasonable and appears to fill a need. General X is in charge of tank contracts and has worked with Acme many times. They are friendly. General X askes for more information and Acme submits a new proposal with additional costs and extras. General X approves the project and sends it along to his superiors for comment and decison. Superiors ask for more information. Acme submits new proposal with more costs and extras. Superiors approve plan.

Acme starts production but runs into alot of problems which cost more money. Timeline is ignored as are penalties in order to get this "badly needed" tank into production. First prototype rolls off the assembly line but fails to meet quality control standards, more time more money and more overruns. Second prototype comes along 3 years behind schedule. Passes quality control but fails "survivability" tests. More well you know. 5 years later the third comes along and makes it all the way through. However a newer better tank is already in production and only 17 of the "badly needed tanks" are made and never used. The contracto is paid the full price for the production of 50 tanks. General X retires and goes to work for ACME along with several of his superiors.

Don't think this is realistic. Read the Inspector Generals report on the proposal to production of the Bradley Fighting Vehicle. Not quite the same but damn close. It happens all the time and we pay for this ****.
 
wolfman24 said:
I think this is a bit niave. The hierarchy of the military has been influencing poltical decision since forever. Bay of Pigs is a great example. When I worked for the DOD at Ft Riley and at DLA HQ in Michigan I can't tell you how many field grade and command grade officers who had sworn alliegance to this country considered the Military to be the country. Not part of it but THE Country like they were in charge. Disgusting.
Click to expand...
This is mildly amusing.

I served for twenty years and served at levels from platoon to Corps. I never, ever heard anyone say they believed they were in charge of toe country. I know what a field grade officer is because I was one for a bit less than half of my twenty years. During that time I had a company command. Would that make me a "command grade" officer? Or do you mean general officers who have risen to at least the one-star level?

I sense you have an axe to grind.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
Yep, you nailed it. The 7 years I was in the army I saw an unbelievable amount of fraud, waste, and abuse. Anyone that says that funds are accounted for in the military is a joke.
Click to expand...
Since you had an obligation to report fraud, waste, and abuse I am sure the stories will break any day now.

Or was it contained within your unit?
 
wolfman24 said:
could not have said this better. The military budget alone is going to be half of the total some day
Click to expand...
Great idea. The defense budget is about 4-5% of GDP today. In my lifetime it has been as high as 8% of GDP. The US government spends about 25% of GDP. I think the chance that the military budget will ever be half of GDP is close to zero. So I really like that you have placed this threat clearly in the future.

and how much of that is accountable? And please don't give me the "all of it" crap. The GAO reports from 1960 til today. the DOD cannot account for over 15% of what its given.
Click to expand...
The rules are both very complicated and ever changing. For better accountibility simplify the rules.

Independant sources have for years said the DOD could sustain a 30% or more cut in funding with little or no effect on performance.
Click to expand...
This is laughable. I suspect that if you provided a list of the independent ssources we would discover the usual suspects. What do the people who are responsible for mission performance say? What do the people who provide Congressional oversight say?
 
Misterveritis said:
This is mildly amusing.

I served for twenty years and served at levels from platoon to Corps. I never, ever heard anyone say they believed they were in charge of toe country. I know what a field grade officer is because I was one for a bit less than half of my twenty years. During that time I had a company command. Would that make me a "command grade" officer? Or do you mean general officers who have risen to at least the one-star level?

I sense you have an axe to grind.
Click to expand...

I am not expert but these were the designations I always heard. Field Grade is Lt - Maj and Command Grade was LtC and above.

As I have said in other posts before just because you never heard it yourself doesn't mean I didn't hear it. I do not assume to presume that I have had your experiences or knowledge and it is myoptic for you to do it to me or anyone else.

Ft. Riley - Captain in charge of Vet Clinic at the time, Deputy Commander of Irwin Army Hosptial (LtC), visiting BrGen who was in charge of Military Hospitals in the district

DLA HQ - Bird Col at DLA HQ, Navy attachee to DLA HQ (LtComm), REAR ADm (Naval logistical command Charelston SC), among others. Real people Real words really happened.

As far as an axe to grind - Well maybe in that when a person who has sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States which mandates a civilian government makes statements like this I get pissed off yes and I am probably not alone.

Another point. You may say this are isolated cases but where did they acquire these ideas thin air. they came from somewhere or someone else. Why do you believe what you believe, an isolated ephifany?
 
wolfman24 said:
I am not expert but these were the designations I always heard. Field Grade is Lt - Maj and Command Grade was LtC and above.
Click to expand...

Things do change. Company grade when I served in the Army included both lieutenant grades plus captain. Field grade included major, lieutenant colonel and colonel. Flag or general officer grades were those who were promoted to brigadier, major, lieutenant and just plain old general. It sounds as if the command grades include the battalion and brigade level commands (LTC and COL). There are commanders and staff at all levels from company on up.

As I have said in other posts before just because you never heard it yourself doesn't mean I didn't hear it. I do not assume to presume that I have had your experiences or knowledge and it is myoptic for you to do it to me or anyone else.
Click to expand...
True enough. I served all over the world, attended the usual career schools, and knew thousands of officers of all ranks up to two stars. I not one time heard any of the officers I knew even hint they thought they were in control of the country. You mileage clearly varies.

Ft. Riley - Captain in charge of Vet Clinic at the time, Deputy Commander of Irwin Army Hosptial (LtC), visiting BrGen who was in charge of Military Hospitals in the district

DLA HQ - Bird Col at DLA HQ, Navy attachee to DLA HQ (LtComm), REAR ADm (Naval logistical command Charelston SC), among others. Real people Real words really happened.
Click to expand...
Let's just say I remain skeptical.

As far as an axe to grind - Well maybe in that when a person who has sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States which mandates a civilian government makes statements like this I get pissed off yes and I am probably not alone.

Another point. You may say this are isolated cases but where did they acquire these ideas thin air. they came from somewhere or someone else. Why do you believe what you believe, an isolated ephifany?
Click to expand...
I remain skeptical.
 
wolfman24 said:
Military weapons contractors 101 - The acme tank company proposes a new super tank to the DOD the first proposal is reasonable and appears to fill a need. General X is in charge of tank contracts and has worked with Acme many times. They are friendly. General X askes for more information and Acme submits a new proposal with additional costs and extras. General X approves the project and sends it along to his superiors for comment and decison. Superiors ask for more information. Acme submits new proposal with more costs and extras. Superiors approve plan.

Acme starts production but runs into alot of problems which cost more money. Timeline is ignored as are penalties in order to get this "badly needed" tank into production. First prototype rolls off the assembly line but fails to meet quality control standards, more time more money and more overruns. Second prototype comes along 3 years behind schedule. Passes quality control but fails "survivability" tests. More well you know. 5 years later the third comes along and makes it all the way through. However a newer better tank is already in production and only 17 of the "badly needed tanks" are made and never used. The contracto is paid the full price for the production of 50 tanks. General X retires and goes to work for ACME along with several of his superiors.

Don't think this is realistic. Read the Inspector Generals report on the proposal to production of the Bradley Fighting Vehicle. Not quite the same but damn close. It happens all the time and we pay for this ****.
Click to expand...

Is this your demonstration that defense contractors do not need to lobby for war in order to make money?
 
Misterveritis said:
Things do change. Company grade when I served in the Army included both lieutenant grades plus captain. Field grade included major, lieutenant colonel and colonel. Flag or general officer grades were those who were promoted to brigadier, major, lieutenant and just plain old general. It sounds as if the command grades include the battalion and brigade level commands (LTC and COL). There are commanders and staff at all levels from company on up.

True enough. I served all over the world, attended the usual career schools, and knew thousands of officers of all ranks up to two stars. I not one time heard any of the officers I knew even hint they thought they were in control of the country. You mileage clearly varies.


Let's just say I remain skeptical.


I remain skeptical.
Click to expand...

Okay at least you can see my point. For you or anyone for that matter to say it did not happen just because it did not happen to you is not only rude but myoptic. Your comment of I'm skeptical is much practical.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Is this your demonstration that defense contractors do not need to lobby for war in order to make money?
Click to expand...

No not at all i was merely supplementing your point with how many contractors bend the military weapons contracts to thier benefit. The way a defense contractor makes its money would be dependant on how diversified it was. If its sole purpose in life (and there several like this) is to make money off DOD and thereby us, then they must continue to do business as usual within that construct. But like you said the really big boys can probably get along with out the DOD, but also see it as the goose that keeps laying the golden egg.

Making war is not thier business making money is. whether it be DOD or somewhere else they will find a way to do it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom