• 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!

A fast way to understand political parties

Despite other bombers coming into service

It's not up to the USA to decide what form of government other countries should have

In London there are statues of three presidents, can you guess who they are ?


What ships did the USA lose at Pearl Harbor ?

There is no evidence that the attack on Pearl Harbor was know about in advance or that the relatively small losses suffered were avoidable

And FDR had no socialist policies
I suspect you don't know what socialism is




But opposition to him protects democracy and freedom.[/QUOTE]

I am not familiar.
I know the F-35 has problems.
At times the problems can't be fixed as easy as were problems with the F-22.
Due to it's status as a war plane, I tend to doubt the Pentagon is in any mood to disclose flaws.
You are more up to date on that airplane than I am.
I derive most of my interest as a pilot. I have loved so many airplanes since around 1943 and once was going to be an Air Force pilot. I wanted then to fly fighter Jets. I do have an engineering background but not the full education. No degree in Engineering.
Well, the criteria is longevity, modernization tactics and things like that. Still they are flying missions.

By the way, I still don't hold myself out as some sort of expert on war planes.

I do not recall speaking of carpet bombing.

Super Carriers are vulnerable to things we may think of as top secret.

I learned many decades how the military only discloses as little as they think they can get away with.

I have never visited London. I flew over it on one or two flights.

We lost for a long time battleships and support ships.

We took a hell of a a licking at Pearl Harbor.

When Kennedy, Truman et al were presidents, they made it their business to try to create countries favorable to us. Trump does not do that.

I believe FDR was well aware of the military being built by Hitler and wanted the same thing for the USA.

For such a alleged wonderful president, he fell flat on his face.

He needed war.

Commander McCullom I believe is the correct spelling was the Intelligence officer and created the 8 point plan for FDR to get us into the war.

Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor is a book by Robert Stinnett. It alleges that Franklin Roosevelt and his administration deliberately provoked and allowed the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor to bring the United States into World War II. Stinnett argues that the attacking fleet was detected by radio and intelligence intercepts, but the information was deliberately withheld from Admiral Husband E. Kimmel, the commander of the Pacific Fleet at that time.

First released in December 1999, it received a nuanced review in The New York Times[1] and is frequently referenced by proponents of advance knowledge theories.[2]

Stinnett's starting point is a memorandum written by Lieutenant Commander Arthur H. McCollum in October 1940, which was obtained through the Freedom of Information Act. McCollum, then head of the Far East desk of the Office of Naval Intelligence,[3] discussed the strategic situation in the Pacific and ended with a list of eight actions directed at the Japanese threat. Stinnett characterizes the actions as "provocations" and states his belief in McCollum's point F ("Keep the main strength of the U.S. fleet now in the Pacific in the vicinity of the Hawaiian Islands") was intended to lure the Japanese into attacking it. Stinnett asserts that the overall intent was to provoke an act of war that would allow Roosevelt to enter into active conflict with Germany in support of the United Kingdom.

Walter Short and Kimmel were ordered to remain in a defensive posture with respect to the Japanese. Stinnett claims that intelligence intercepts were deliberately withheld from them to prevent them from mounting an adequate defense. He also claims that radio traffic was intercepted from the fleet as it approached Hawaii, allowing it to be tracked, but again, the information was withheld so that the defenders would be unprepared. All, says Stinnett, was directed from the White House itself with Roosevelt's knowledge and at his behest.

Day of Deceit - Wikipedia

I consider both Hitler and FDR to both be socialists. So of course I know what it is.

Fact is when it was still East Germany, I was there as well.

Trump is not about to be a dictator. That is merely Trump bashing. Besides a good many Democrats laud the dictator Castro defending him saying he Fidel Castro had the right of ruling an island nation.

Wikipedia failed to disclose that the Day of Deceit book has a wonderful prodigious amount of proof for his case at the back of the book. FOA helped him accumulate it.

Before you trash Stinnett. hear his case.

 
Oh so your a socialist who thinks the government should hand you everything? You don't like taxes, who does? Do you like the roads you drive on? Your fire department, cops, schools and a host of other things? Sure you do. Then why is the singular major beef from republicans taxes?

In a modern growing society there is no such thing as small government of any kind. Hell my county government is huge. Republicans live in a fictional world in their minds, the world of the long dead founding fathers. Isn't it time for a bit of an update after more than two hundred years?

Look, people hate Trump. So what? HAting him is of no use. See how that works?

Taxes are not normally voted for by the public. When I lived in CA, we did have a few things that caused us to be taxed we did get to vote for. But damned near all of the t;axes paid by the public are a crime and you will go to jail for enough flaunting them. That means you are forced.

You can't even look at your paycheck and pretend you are not forced to pay taxes.
 
Look, people hate Trump. So what? HAting him is of no use. See how that works?

Taxes are not normally voted for by the public. When I lived in CA, we did have a few things that caused us to be taxed we did get to vote for. But damned near all of the t;axes paid by the public are a crime and you will go to jail for enough flaunting them. That means you are forced.

You can't even look at your paycheck and pretend you are not forced to pay taxes.

Like I said, the number one complaint of republicans is paying taxes. Thanks for the confirmation, socialist.
 
Democrats live a life of no orgasams, where as Republicans enjoy massive and frequent orgasms.

This not sexually, but politically.

this is the type of 2020 Republican Party that we all have to argue with.
 
Like I said, the number one complaint of republicans is paying taxes. Thanks for the confirmation, socialist.

But you don't mind getting forced to pay? What happens to you if you refuse to pay?
 
I am not familiar.

It's claimed that the European Meteor air-to-air missile enables a gen 4 fighter like the European Typhoon to best an F-22

YouTube


I know the F-35 has problems.


You think ?

It's been a disaster of a project

A total money pit - and if reports are to believed, it's not a very good aircraft

It's only advantage is that there are NO Western competitors to it.
So for a Western Air Force it either buys it or goes backwards to a gen 4 aircraft like the Eurofighter Typhoon or the Rafale


I tend to doubt the Pentagon is in any mood to disclose flaws.

But unlike the F-22, the F-35 is not solely a US venture and a lot of negative press has been generated about the F-35


Well, the criteria is longevity, modernization tactics and things like that. Still they are flying missions.

Yes the B-52 is still operational but I think that's more to do with the USAF not wanting to give up bombers.
What missions can they do that other aircraft can't do better - other than carpet bomb ?


The B-1 bomber was also a complete waste of money


We lost for a long time battleships and support ships.

We took a hell of a a licking at Pearl Harbor.

Hardly, battleships played next to no part in the war, their only role was to back up carrier air strikes in shore bombardment.
Cruisers with 6" and 8" guns, did just as good a job at shore bombardment.

US losses at Pearly Harbor were minimal at best.
The Japanese really executed a very poor attack. The British air attack on the Italian fleet at Taranto was much more destructive and that was from just one aircraft carrier

The attack didn't hamstring the US Navy's campaign at Midway at all. You have to remember how many ships the USA were building:


"At its peak, the U.S. Navy was operating 6,768 ships on V-J Day in August 1945, including 28 aircraft carriers, 23 battleships, 71 escort carriers, 72 cruisers, over 232 submarines, 377 destroyers, and thousands of amphibious, supply and auxiliary ships...."


Naval history of World War II - Wikipedia



It was also building 1,000 aircraft a WEEK


When Kennedy, Truman et al were presidents, they made it their business to try to create countries favorable to us. Trump does not do that.

Trump is an idiot
He represents the worst side of America, bullying, boasting and a total ignorance of anything outside the USA
His foreign policy has been calamitous
He is a total embarrassment and is causing damage to America's interests and reputation that will take decades of hard work to repair



I believe FDR was well aware of the military being built by Hitler and wanted the same thing for the USA.

I think he knew the threat Nazi Germany posed, Japan was never a threat....yes it cost lives to defeat but ultimate, when you look at the numbers, the PTO was a no contest


For such a alleged wonderful president, he fell flat on his face.

No, he never failed at anything he tried

He needed war.

No, he'd already been re-elected twice before Pearl Harbor


Commander McCullom I believe is the correct spelling was the Intelligence officer and created the 8 point plan for FDR to get us into the war.

It was the USA that needed to enter the war with Germany
 
Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor is a book by Robert Stinnett. It alleges that Franklin Roosevelt and his administration deliberately provoked and allowed the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor to bring the United States into World War II.

Stinnett argues that the attacking fleet was detected by radio and intelligence intercepts, but the information was deliberately withheld from Admiral Husband E. Kimmel, the commander of the Pacific Fleet at that time.

First released in December 1999, it received a nuanced review in The New York Times and is frequently referenced by proponents of advance knowledge theories.


And there are a lot of books that allege that JFK was assassinated by the CIA

It's just conspiracy

US interventionist foreign policy in the Pacific forced Japan into war (or cease its attempts to build an empire in Asia)
It was going to attack the USA - America got lucky that it was such a botched attack

The USA was probably braced for a US attack but it didn't know where it would be and whilst Pearl Harbor seems an obvious target now, it was be no means certain that it would be the target

And the US Navy wasn't even on a high state of readiness at the time.
So if there was a conspiracy to almost "invite" a Japanese attack, then the conspirators also included the entire command of the USN


Stinnett's starting point is a memorandum written by Lieutenant Commander Arthur H. McCollum in October 1940, which was obtained through the Freedom of Information Act. McCollum, then head of the Far East desk of the Office of Naval Intelligence,discussed the strategic situation in the Pacific and ended with a list of eight actions directed at the Japanese threat. Stinnett characterizes the actions as "provocations" and states his belief in McCollum's point F ("Keep the main strength of the U.S. fleet now in the Pacific in the vicinity of the Hawaiian Islands") was intended to lure the Japanese into attacking it. Stinnett asserts that the overall intent was to provoke an act of war that would allow Roosevelt to enter into active conflict with Germany in support of the United Kingdom.

1. How is that a "provocation"

2. Isn't reinforcing Pearl Harbor with more naval assets a deterrent to the Japanese attacking it ?
Was the USN command at Pearl Harbor ordered to cut security or cease defensive measures like raising the alert status or conducting patrols?
It smacks of the USA concentrating its resources to counter hostile action if and when they occurred


Walter Short and Kimmel were ordered to remain in a defensive posture with respect to the Japanese. Stinnett claims that intelligence intercepts were deliberately withheld from them to prevent them from mounting an adequate defense. He also claims that radio traffic was intercepted from the fleet as it approached Hawaii, allowing it to be tracked, but again, the information was withheld so that the defenders would be unprepared. All, says Stinnett, was directed from the White House itself with Roosevelt's knowledge and at his behest.

And does he have proof of that ?

Do you have any idea how many navy personnel would have to be part of such a conspiracy ?

If Pearl Harbor had b fully informed of Japanese intentions, the best result is that the USA preserved a couple of old battleships that were next to useless anyway
The worst outcome is that Japan calls off the attack after realizing it's codes were broken (an intel edge that actually was closely guarded as it gave the USN an advantage at Midway) and attacks somewhere else shortly afterwards

Either way, war still happens


I consider both Hitler and FDR to both be socialists. So of course I know what it is.

Then you actually show you don't, as neither were socialists and had no socialist policies

What to you is a socialist agenda ?


Fact is when it was still East Germany, I was there as well.

I was in Berlin, in 1988


Trump is not about to be a dictator. That is merely Trump bashing.


The fear I have with Trump is that he's a sore loser
He might declare the November election null and void, citing illegal practices, COVID-19) and announce new election for 2021. With Senate backing, who is to stop him
(and don't say the Constitution, that's not a who)



Besides a good many Democrats laud the dictator Castro defending him saying he Fidel Castro had the right of ruling an island nation.

Can you give an example of such Democrat "lauding"

Cuba is after all, Castro's own country. Who is an American to tell them what government to have ?
 
It's claimed that the European Meteor air-to-air missile enables a gen 4 fighter like the European Typhoon to best an F-22

YouTube





You think ?

It's been a disaster of a project

A total money pit - and if reports are to believed, it's not a very good aircraft

It's only advantage is that there are NO Western competitors to it.
So for a Western Air Force it either buys it or goes backwards to a gen 4 aircraft like the Eurofighter Typhoon or the Rafale




But unlike the F-22, the F-35 is not solely a US venture and a lot of negative press has been generated about the F-35




Yes the B-52 is still operational but I think that's more to do with the USAF not wanting to give up bombers.
What missions can they do that other aircraft can't do better - other than carpet bomb ?


The B-1 bomber was also a complete waste of money




Hardly, battleships played next to no part in the war, their only role was to back up carrier air strikes in shore bombardment.
Cruisers with 6" and 8" guns, did just as good a job at shore bombardment.

US losses at Pearly Harbor were minimal at best.
The Japanese really executed a very poor attack. The British air attack on the Italian fleet at Taranto was much more destructive and that was from just one aircraft carrier

The attack didn't hamstring the US Navy's campaign at Midway at all. You have to remember how many ships the USA were building:


"At its peak, the U.S. Navy was operating 6,768 ships on V-J Day in August 1945, including 28 aircraft carriers, 23 battleships, 71 escort carriers, 72 cruisers, over 232 submarines, 377 destroyers, and thousands of amphibious, supply and auxiliary ships...."


Naval history of World War II - Wikipedia



It was also building 1,000 aircraft a WEEK




Trump is an idiot
He represents the worst side of America, bullying, boasting and a total ignorance of anything outside the USA
His foreign policy has been calamitous
He is a total embarrassment and is causing damage to America's interests and reputation that will take decades of hard work to repair





I think he knew the threat Nazi Germany posed, Japan was never a threat....yes it cost lives to defeat but ultimate, when you look at the numbers, the PTO was a no contest




No, he never failed at anything he tried



No, he'd already been re-elected twice before Pearl Harbor




It was the USA that needed to enter the war with Germany

First the Meteor. What is that mans native language. Pardon me but after having had to listen to Chinese for years, Arabs for Years I have a huge problem understanding that speaker.

We will not agree against Trump so save your hateful words and try to think positive.

Battleships shelled the Islands in the Pacific. I am not here to defend those ships to begin with but they clearly were the target for the Japanese.

I got into ripping FDR in the first place due to what he did to Hawaii. I visited that port more than once and still see the remains of one of their Battleships below the water line. I will be back in Hawaii in July.

As you may also have noticed a huge fleet off Normandy shelled the Germans for a good long period of time.

One good point for Carriers is they now reach a long distance inland but Battleships range does not allow that. Anyway, they are retired and around for visitors.

Japan at the time was tied up fighting the Soviets, China and elsewhere but they attacked Pearl Harbor which gave FDR his stinking excuse to enter the war. Stinnett spoke up about that in his lectures. FDR wanted the Japanese rather than the Nazis to attack given the port for FDR was a tiny sacrifice to make. He clearly did not want DC to be attacked.

The key point is FDR craved the attack.

The B-52 almost seems as old as I am now. (Joke) Still well maintained and a superior airplane can last a long time as it proves. I do not know anything about the bombs that would currently be used to carpet bomb. I think as war has evolved, the preference today for commanders is to precision bomb good targets as opposed to blowing entire cities up.

We once engaged in wholesale city destruction and I think that is not currently in favor.

Can it be true that for you the only thing that matters is party affiliation?

I once was a very staunch and loyal, nay devoted Democrat. I can suggest a cure if you are interested.

When i analize and blast Abe Lincoln, he was a republican.

When I do it for FDR, he was a Democrat.

I do not mind blasting anybody from any party. How do you handle this?
 
And there are a lot of books that allege that JFK was assassinated by the CIA

It's just conspiracy

US interventionist foreign policy in the Pacific forced Japan into war (or cease its attempts to build an empire in Asia)
It was going to attack the USA - America got lucky that it was such a botched attack

The USA was probably braced for a US attack but it didn't know where it would be and whilst Pearl Harbor seems an obvious target now, it was be no means certain that it would be the target

And the US Navy wasn't even on a high state of readiness at the time.
So if there was a conspiracy to almost "invite" a Japanese attack, then the conspirators also included the entire command of the USN




1. How is that a "provocation"

2. Isn't reinforcing Pearl Harbor with more naval assets a deterrent to the Japanese attacking it ?
Was the USN command at Pearl Harbor ordered to cut security or cease defensive measures like raising the alert status or conducting patrols?
It smacks of the USA concentrating its resources to counter hostile action if and when they occurred




And does he have proof of that ?

Do you have any idea how many navy personnel would have to be part of such a conspiracy ?

If Pearl Harbor had b fully informed of Japanese intentions, the best result is that the USA preserved a couple of old battleships that were next to useless anyway
The worst outcome is that Japan calls off the attack after realizing it's codes were broken (an intel edge that actually was closely guarded as it gave the USN an advantage at Midway) and attacks somewhere else shortly afterwards

Either way, war still happens




Then you actually show you don't, as neither were socialists and had no socialist policies

What to you is a socialist agenda ?




I was in Berlin, in 1988





The fear I have with Trump is that he's a sore loser
He might declare the November election null and void, citing illegal practices, COVID-19) and announce new election for 2021. With Senate backing, who is to stop him
(and don't say the Constitution, that's not a who)





Can you give an example of such Democrat "lauding"

Cuba is after all, Castro's own country. Who is an American to tell them what government to have ?

You are trying to substitute the stupid or ignorant for the man who spent years well informing himself. Stinnett as you may not know did not engage in this to find fault with FDR. As a reporter for the Tribune, he was more interested in the Japanese codes than what FDR did.

Trouble is that events served him up on a silver platter information he could not ignore so he then looked deeply into the attack at Pearl Harbor. I will not be moved away by remarks about Kennedy. He was my president as i served him in our Army. I know what happened to us in Germany due to his death.

Japan certainly did feel FDR forced them to wage war against us. And FDR fattened up a target to provoke them and it worked as planned.

Anyway, Stinnett makes a very good case though he died in 2018. But his lessons of history linger on. I own his book.

If a person wants to properly critique a book, at first please read the book. People like me could give wrong impressions so please read his book.
 
But you don't mind getting forced to pay? What happens to you if you refuse to pay?

Robert, I've been paying school taxes all of my life for the children I don't have and I don't get on here and bitch about it. I look at it as my contribution to educating our future presidents. Just like I look at recycling as my contribution to future generations. I'm not getting anything out of it other than to do my little bit to help society. Also, I'm old enough to not have to pay income tax anymore, I'm retired. The only thing that can happen to me is if I don't pay my house taxes for a couple of years which isn't going to happen. I know you think we on the left are freeloaders but we do indeed pay our taxes....without all bitching.
 
Explain why ?

For starters it would radically weaken the U.S. military. To the point that the U.S. would have to certainly cut the size of its current active duty force (which is too small to fulfill our overseas commitments as it is) by at least half. And leave the U.S. without any substantial projectable military power.

And don't babble that idiocy "we still have nukes (I hate that term by the way)". No one has used nuclear weapons in SEVENTY FIVE years!!! It is a sure bet that the U.S. would only consider using them in response to being attacked by nuclear weapons first. Thus they are useless in compensating for conventional weaknesses.

And once U.S. military spending has been cut and the regular force greatly diminished, it can't simply be restored "next year" if we need it. In all likelihood it would take at least a decade or more to restore what was cut in a year.
 
First the Meteor. What is that mans native language....

I think he's Spanish.

We will not agree against Trump so save your hateful words and try to think positive.

The only positive thought I have about that clown is the thought he might be voted out of office in 7 months


Battleships shelled the Islands in the Pacific. I am not here to defend those ships to begin with but they clearly were the target for the Japanese.

And they should have known better
They themselves used carriers
They should have known the three US carriers were at sea and not in port....now had those 3 ships been sunk, it would've altered the course of the war
As it was if no US ships had been sunk, the war would hardly change
Cruisers could provide similar shore bombardment - which was less than effective at breaking dug in Japanese defenses


I got into ripping FDR in the first place due to what he did to Hawaii. I visited that port more than once and still see the remains of one of their Battleships below the water line. I will be back in Hawaii in July.

I do not think FDR was responsible for Pearl Harbor at all
Successive US presidents pursued a policy of containing Japan. The non-interventionist policy of the USA extended only in the Atlantic, not in the Pacific


As you may also have noticed a huge fleet off Normandy shelled the Germans for a good long period of time.

Yes, and a lot of them were cruisers

The allies had almost total air supremacy...they didn't need shore bombardment at all


One good point for Carriers is they now reach a long distance inland but Battleships range does not allow that. Anyway, they are retired and around for visitors.

But do they ?

How reliable and effective are attack planes, flying through defended enemy air space ?

The USN and USAF haven't had to penetrate hostile airspace since WWII (unless you count Vietnam where local defenses weren't up to the standard of say Russia or China- don't even mention Iraq)


Japan at the time was tied up fighting the Soviets, China and elsewhere but they attacked Pearl Harbor which gave FDR his stinking excuse to enter the war. Stinnett spoke up about that in his lectures. FDR wanted the Japanese rather than the Nazis to attack given the port for FDR was a tiny sacrifice to make. He clearly did not want DC to be attacked.

Japan was not fighting the USSR and it's army was in China
The IJA traditionally looked Westward, whist the IJN looked to the East
Germany had no capacity to attack the US mainland

The key point is FDR craved the attack.

He needed to get the USA into the war with Germany

War with Germany was coming sooner or later, the USA was basically supporting the UK against Germany as it was


The B-52 almost seems as old as I am now. (Joke) Still well maintained and a superior airplane can last a long time as it proves. I do not know anything about the bombs that would currently be used to carpet bomb. I think as war has evolved, the preference today for commanders is to precision bomb good targets as opposed to blowing entire cities up.

So the B-52, fine airframe as it might be) is just a Cold War relic


We once engaged in wholesale city destruction and I think that is not currently in favor.

I would say so, yes


Can it be true that for you the only thing that matters is party affiliation?

No, but you cannot support Trump

I actually supported Reagan over Carter, he was the last Republican in office who showed any conscience


When i analize and blast Abe Lincoln, he was a republican.

He was fortunate to enjoy being president in an age before mass media


When I do it for FDR, he was a Democrat.

Without doubt America's greatest president
 
You are trying to substitute the stupid or ignorant for the man who spent years well informing himself. Stinnett as you may not know did not engage in this to find fault with FDR. As a reporter for the Tribune, he was more interested in the Japanese codes than what FDR did.

Nevertheless I find the idea that FDR and the uper USN command knew Pearl Harbor was about to be attacked and deliberately did nothing is absurd

I would rate it with conspiracy theories, by well informed men, that JFK was assassinated by the CIA

Trouble is that events served him up on a silver platter information he could not ignore so he then looked deeply into the attack at Pearl Harbor...


So you're convinced FDR knew beforehand that Pearl Harbor was about to be attacked
How many senior USN commanders also knew do you think ?


Japan certainly did feel FDR forced them to wage war against us. And FDR fattened up a target to provoke them and it worked as planned.

Not just FDR

If Pearl Harbor was "fattened up" how come so few value targets were there....why were there NO carriers ?

The damage that Japan did at Pearl Harbor was a flea bite

The USA had already cancelled orders to build more battleships. Britain built one more.

Which meant Btw that Britain built the first and last ever battleship.
 
For starters it would radically weaken the U.S. military.

Of course

It would also stop a lot of waste


...to the point that the U.S. would have to certainly cut the size of its current active duty force (which is too small to fulfill our overseas commitments as it is) by at least half.

Maybe by half


And leave the U.S. without any substantial projectable military power.

It depends where the cuts were made


And once U.S. military spending has been cut and the regular force greatly diminished, it can't simply be restored "next year" if we need it...


The USA doesn't need it


In all likelihood it would take at least a decade or more to restore what was cut in a year.


Why would you want to ?
 
Of course

It would also stop a lot of waste




Maybe by half




It depends where the cuts were made





The USA doesn't need it





Why would you want to ?

Though everyone talks about cutting "waste" out of the defense budget, it isn't that simple. "Waste" is not simply a line item in the budget that you can zero out.

Further you simply assume the U.S. would not need a military the size it has now in the foreseeable future. What do you base that assumption on? I can list several major war scenarios that a real chance exists for occurring involving the U.S.
 
Though everyone talks about cutting "waste" out of the defense budget, it isn't that simple. "Waste" is not simply a line item in the budget that you can zero out.

Further you simply assume the U.S. would not need a military the size it has now in the foreseeable future. What do you base that assumption on? I can list several major war scenarios that a real chance exists for occurring involving the U.S.

Militaries with more limited budgets tend to be less profligate with their resources and not embark on wasteful projects like the USA does.

The USA spends more money per head on defense that any country in the world.

The current US defense budget is almost $750 billion

The United States spends more on their defense budget than China, Saudi Arabia, Russia, the United Kingdom, India, France, and Japan combined.


It doesn't need a military that powerful.
 
Militaries with more limited budgets tend to be less profligate with their resources and not embark on wasteful projects like the USA does.

The USA spends more money per head on defense that any country in the world.

The current US defense budget is almost $750 billion

The United States spends more on their defense budget than China, Saudi Arabia, Russia, the United Kingdom, India, France, and Japan combined.

Not true. The U.S. doesn't know how much China and Russia actually spend on defense. In many states, the defense budget is considered a state secret.

What kind of wasteful projects would you claim the U.S. wastes money on? The F-35 program? Might I remind you that the F-35 program was specifically designed to save money and the U.S. has something like 2,000 combat aircraft nearing the end of their service lives that desperately need replacing.
 
Not true. The U.S. doesn't know how much China and Russia actually spend on defense.

A brief Google search will tell them


In many states, the defense budget is considered a state secret.

Do you have any evidence for that ?



What kind of wasteful projects would you claim the U.S. wastes money on? The F-35 program? Might I remind you that the F-35 program was specifically designed to save money and the U.S. has something like 2,000 combat aircraft nearing the end of their service lives that desperately need replacing.


LOL, well no matter what it was intended to do, the F-35 project is the biggest in military history

But I was thinking about billions spent on things like:-


The navy's rail gun

The stealth bomber program

Littoral Combat Ship program



The US DoD has the be the most inefficient and wasteful organization on earth:



"In 2015, The Washington Post discovered a report that showed how the DoD was wasting nearly $125 billion dollars due to bureaucratic waste. In the report, they identified a clear path forward that would bring the defense budget down by 15-20 percent. According to the Washington Post’s sources, the report was buried amid fears that it would lead Congress to cut their budget even further."

The Disturbing Ways We Waste Money Our Military Budget
 
A brief Google search will tell them




Do you have any evidence for that ?






LOL, well no matter what it was intended to do, the F-35 project is the biggest in military history

But I was thinking about billions spent on things like:-


The navy's rail gun

The stealth bomber program

Littoral Combat Ship program



The US DoD has the be the most inefficient and wasteful organization on earth:



"In 2015, The Washington Post discovered a report that showed how the DoD was wasting nearly $125 billion dollars due to bureaucratic waste. In the report, they identified a clear path forward that would bring the defense budget down by 15-20 percent. According to the Washington Post’s sources, the report was buried amid fears that it would lead Congress to cut their budget even further."

The Disturbing Ways We Waste Money Our Military Budget

Cutting every dime of that waste, even if it were possible wouldn't come remotely close to cutting the defense budget as much as you suggested.
 
Cutting every dime of that waste, even if it were possible wouldn't come remotely close to cutting the defense budget as much as you suggested.

No but it would surely go some way


How about scrapping plans for any more Ford class CVN's ?
 
No but it would surely go some way


How about scrapping plans for any more Ford class CVN's ?

We need more large aircraft carriers than we have now. Considering U.S. interests and commitments, we should have 15 available at the very least.
 
Back
Top Bottom