bpwallace49 Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 Why, because it is the most important thing to America. Without the Biggest, Baddest defense in the world, you just mightbe cleaning your masters camel crap tomorrow. Do the Chinese have a lot of camels? BTW, can anyone think of a credible invasion threat that would ever impose its will on us? EVERYTHING in our gubmnet could stand to lose some dead weight. That includes military spending. Or just reallocating resources to but it where it is needed most. Didnt Obama stop funding the 22 million per plane F-22 program? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 (edited) Waste is waste. And very easy to hide in endless secret weapons systems tests, etc. And then of course there is the whole political worry of any cuts in defense and homeland security coming before a terrorist attack and the fail-out from the failure to protect. Of course it doesn't matter that even if we increased our defense spending 100 fold there's no guarantee that we can prevent 100% of all attacks. If someone is committed to give their life in an attack, sooner or later somebody will complete their horrible task. Edited January 27, 2010 by CaP'N GRuNGe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 Do the Chinese have a lot of camels? BTW, can anyone think of a credible invasion threat that would ever impose its will on us? EVERYTHING in our gubmnet could stand to lose some dead weight. That includes military spending. Or just reallocating resources to but it where it is needed most. Didnt Obama stop funding the 22 million per plane F-22 program? Is that how we're naming these planes nowadays? Would an F-39 be 39 million per plane? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 Why, because it is the most important thing to America. Without the Biggest, Baddest defense in the world, you just mightbe cleaning your masters camel crap tomorrow. You're right, I can see how a fleet of thousands of Arab dhows could make their way across the Atlantic from Beirut and Tripoli, loaded up with elite turbaned warriors brandishing shotguns and blunderbusses, flintlocks and scimitars, land at Miami and fan out north and west, sweeping all before them. It's very real. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 Is that how we're naming these planes nowadays? Would an F-39 be 39 million per plane? I doubt it . . . but I really think the name of the plane was the F-22 Raptor . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mucca Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 Do the Chinese have a lot of camels? BTW, can anyone think of a credible invasion threat that would ever impose its will on us? EVERYTHING in our gubmnet could stand to lose some dead weight. That includes military spending. Or just reallocating resources to but it where it is needed most. Didnt Obama stop funding the 22 million per plane F-22 program? I believe Iran might have a camel or two, and with enough nukes and our defense down, I'm sure they would love to impose a little will on us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mucca Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 You're right, I can see how a fleet of thousands of Arab dhows could make their way across the Atlantic from Beirut and Tripoli, loaded up with elite turbaned warriors brandishing shotguns and blunderbusses, flintlocks and scimitars, land at Miami and fan out north and west, sweeping all before them. It's very real. Pearl Harbor must of been fake in your world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 I believe Iran might have a camel or two, and with enough nukes and our defense down, I'm sure they would love to impose a little will on us. Mucca . . . how would they deliver the nukes? FedEx? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 Pearl Harbor must of been fake in your world. They had a conventional military with aircraft carriers. Who else has that kind of capability? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 I believe Iran might have a camel or two, and with enough nukes and our defense down, I'm sure they would love to impose a little will on us. They might get one or two off and the whole arabian peninsula would be turned into a sheet of glass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mucca Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 Mucca . . . how would they deliver the nukes? FedEx? I'm not saying it will happen tomorrow, But if we cut too much where we can't deter the capabilities of others, it will eventually happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 I'm not saying it will happen tomorrow, But if we cut too much where we can't deter the capabilities of others, it will eventually happen. I agree with you, but to me that means investing in the correct deterrents to reflect the changing nature of credible threats. Things like the Raptor program should have been scaled back YEARS ago. Instead the inertia of the bureaucracy keeps pumping out items without missions while we struggle to provide up-armored Humvees to the troops that need it. Just having irrational fear of cutting back excess doesnt mean that the entire military is eliminated . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 They might get one or two off and the whole arabian peninsula would be turned into a sheet of glass. Get back to your geography class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 (edited) Get back to your geography class. I didn't say we would be accurate. (I did a quick google image search and without verifying i thought it included Iran.) Edited January 27, 2010 by CaP'N GRuNGe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 I just want to know one thing...When did a BILLION of anything stop being a lot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mucca Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 I agree with you, but to me that means investing in the correct deterrents to reflect the changing nature of credible threats. Things like the Raptor program should have been scaled back YEARS ago. Instead the inertia of the bureaucracy keeps pumping out items without missions while we struggle to provide up-armored Humvees to the troops that need it. Just having irrational fear of cutting back excess doesnt mean that the entire military is eliminated . . I wouldn't call it irrational fear, I would call it doing what the gubment is supposed to do with our tax $$, and their #1 priority is to protect it's homeland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 (edited) Pearl Harbor must of been fake in your world. I don't think so. Defense is a bloated money-gobbling wreck. It could be cut by at least a quarter with no net loss of capability. Did you know the Pentagon hasn't been successfully audited for 60 years? Is that the transparency you want for your taxpayer dollars? Edited January 27, 2010 by Ursa Majoris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 I wouldn't call it irrational fear, I would call it doing what the gubment is supposed to do with our tax $$, and their #1 priorityis to protect it's homeland. Protect from what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mucca Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 I don't think so. Defense is a bloated money-gobbling wreck. It could be cut by at least a quarter with no net loss of capability. Did you know the Pentagon hasn't been successfully audited for 60 years? Is that the transparency you want for your taxpayer dollars? The entire system is a bloated money-gobbling wreck. Let's cut the obvious waist, earmarks-pork, before slashing defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mucca Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 Protect from what? I forgot, we blew up the towers and bombed PH ourselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 I forgot, we blew up the towers and bombed PH ourselves. So you want to add military spending to defend against a 9/11, is that it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 I just want to know one thing...When did a BILLION of anything stop being a lot? “A billion here and a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking real money." likely in the 1960s Quote was contributed to Senator Everett McKinley Dirksen, but no proof that he ever said that. http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/histor...irksen_Dies.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 You're right, I can see how a fleet of thousands of Arab dhows could make their way across the Atlantic from Beirut and Tripoli, loaded up with elite turbaned warriors brandishing shotguns and blunderbusses, flintlocks and scimitars, land at Miami and fan out north and west, sweeping all before them. It's very real. Why does everyone pick on Florida? Couldn't the Arab nightmare land in Maine? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mucca Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 So you want to add military spending to defend against a 9/11, is that it? I wasn't aware that cutting pork and earmarks instead of defense somehow adds to military spending. Is that how liberal politics work, if you cut something, you have to spend on what you don't cut? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted January 27, 2010 Author Share Posted January 27, 2010 Regarding spending on national defense, it doesn't help that you have intellectually dishonest people on the right. Don't ask me how (i've never been a registered Republican voter) but I just received a mailing from Michael Steele and the GOP which contained a survey about voter attitudes and of course the typical request for money. Could have something to do with changing my registration from Democrat to unaffiliated, but whatever. Anyways, here is the first question under a section called National Defense: 1) Do you believe the Obama Administration is right in dramatically scaling back our nation's military? YES------NO------No Opinion EXCUSE ME? WHAT AN OUTRIGHT LIE! The Obama Admin increased overall defense spending in it's first budget from the prior year. What typical stereotypical "Democrats are weak on defense" bullpoopy. It pisses me off to no end. Yes and Republicans want your children to starve and old people to die. It's the same with both parties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.