Marines short 6 Infantry Battalions and the Navy short 100 ships.

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by 61falcon, Nov 25, 2020.

  1. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    37,751
    Likes Received:
    14,562
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The US military doesn't defend the U.S. It defends other countries in other parts of the world. So I want a lot less "protection." If we bring our troops home we could cut the military by more than half.
     
    AZ. likes this.
  2. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    26,988
    Likes Received:
    11,044
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I doubt that we could cut our military by more than half, but I am in favor of bringing them home.
     
    ButterBalls likes this.
  3. Surfer Joe

    Surfer Joe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    Messages:
    24,287
    Likes Received:
    15,348
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Lol...Too many stupid gangbangers and idiot white supremacists are joining the military.
     
  4. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,706
    Likes Received:
    13,464
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Trump added over 200 Billion to the Defense Budget - estimated deficit prior to Covid for 2020 fiscal year which just ended - was expected to be well over 1.2 Trillion. Post covid Estimate is 3.3 Trillion. And this year ?? - Trumps last fiscal year ? . Wow .. we start out of the gats with a stimulus package of 2.2 Trillion - or what was the number .. have the passed the "Hero's Act" yet ?

    This gets put on top of the regular budget deficit which is going to be breath taking .. well over 2 Trillion .. and who knows how much extra stimulus spending we have till next October.

    And remember - when the lockdown ends - and the money stops falling from the tree - after a brief bout of euphoria because Covid ends -my guess is covid will end not much longer than 3 months from now) - then the economic Tsunami is going to hit.

    And this is going to be the same situation around the world .. In keeping with the Dems bill to legalize - Cheech and Chong " Its Global Man"

    Military spending is not going to be high on the priority list come Budget time next year. - but - what do we need all these obsolete ships for anyway ? Running around the world chasing the Al Qaeda/ ISIS fiction ?

    In any case - worry not - whether we like it or not - Military is no longer the strongest piece on the geopolitical chessboard (and hasn't been for decades) .. it is an anchor around our neck .. rather than a benefit at this point in the cycle of history .. where the cost of projecting power has increased to the point of bankrupting every Economic Empire that tried to maintain hegemony during such a period.

    Last 3 world economic empires - Spanish, Dutch, British .. all were humbled by the same historical cycle - same thing with the Mighty Roman Empire.
     
  5. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    26,988
    Likes Received:
    11,044
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Very few things we spend money on in this great nation are even mentioned in the Constitution. Defense is.

    Defense is a waste of money until we need it. These times are like no other. We will not have months or years to come up with a military. What we have is all we are going to have. The consequences of being wrong are catastrophic. We will not get a second chance.

    I agree with what you have said only if you convince Russia and China to disarm first. Both are actively testing us on a daily basis.
     
    ButterBalls likes this.
  6. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    37,751
    Likes Received:
    14,562
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If we bring them home then a big cut is simple and painless.
     
  7. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    26,988
    Likes Received:
    11,044
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    We have the same threats whether we are here or there.
     
    ButterBalls likes this.
  8. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    37,751
    Likes Received:
    14,562
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But dealing with the threats are far less expensive if we stop defending everyone else. Remember, federal government is broke.
     
  9. ECA

    ECA Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2018
    Messages:
    31,937
    Likes Received:
    15,595
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree...we need to stop being the worlds police.
     
  10. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    26,988
    Likes Received:
    11,044
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    As long as we do not reduce our capability in the process.
     
  11. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,706
    Likes Received:
    13,464
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is a horrible justification for Military over-spending. No one has claimed we need no defense. The question is how much we need. - something addressed in my post.

    Now that you have made this distinction - your response will be different.
     
  12. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    26,988
    Likes Received:
    11,044
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That is the justification for defense. We should not be using it as police for the world. It should be for our defense. The size of it should be sufficient to meet credible threats. Even though China and Russia have been at "peace" with us for decades, we cannot count on them remaining that way. Russia tests us by flying into airspace where they have no legitimate purpose to fly except to test our response. China builds islands where they did not previously exist and arms them and says we cannot fly over them. They are testing our response and resolve.
     
  13. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,310
    Likes Received:
    6,668
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You know how long it takes to build ships?
     
  14. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,310
    Likes Received:
    6,668
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It takes years to build warships. Especially in peacetime.
     
  15. ECA

    ECA Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2018
    Messages:
    31,937
    Likes Received:
    15,595
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I see you missed the point too. Pity
     
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2020
  16. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,706
    Likes Received:
    13,464
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No it isn't - your justification is fallacy - as it does not address the question. You are posing a fantasy black vs white paradigm where it is "Defense" at what ever cost - or Zero defense. and no one is suggesting that. The question here is how much we should be spending .. not whether or not we should defend the homeland.
     
    AZ. likes this.
  17. ButterBalls

    ButterBalls Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    51,200
    Likes Received:
    37,536
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not even remotely true, just hyperbolic banter ;)
     
  18. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    26,988
    Likes Received:
    11,044
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Our defense is based on what people that know what they are doing calculate. Our potential enemies have to know that an attack on us is the end of life as they know it. That philosophy requires capability on several fronts. We have to be able to fight a limited conventional war and we have to be prepared to fight a nuclear war. It is not based on an arbitrary "move everyone back to the US and reduce it to 50% of what it is now.
     
  19. ronv

    ronv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2018
    Messages:
    20,312
    Likes Received:
    8,774
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Wall.
     
  20. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    26,988
    Likes Received:
    11,044
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    This was identified in a new study. Not beefing up the Marines has nothing to do with the wall.

    Also, worth mentioning. There is some consideration to eliminate the Marines since much of their function is duplicated by the Army.

    Options are being looked at and considered.
     
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2020
  21. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,706
    Likes Received:
    13,464
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No it's not - they don't listen to the people that know what they are doing .. and there are huge disagreements among factions even then .. that there is some black vs white consensus is simply not true.

    The idea that all Gov't expenditure is done by folks who are acting in our best interest .. and have made the best decision - is woeful self deception.

    way way way to many assumptions in your claim - many of which are demonstrably false.

    And these Pundits whom you infer are selfless people - acting on our bests interests - regardless of whether they know what they are doing or not - and that the ones that do know are listened to .. This is just not reality.

    Nukes protect us from Russia and China ... not aircraft carriers. .. so who is this massive enemy at our gates .. threatening our homeland .. that requires us to have 17 of them - if you include the smaller ones (our smaller ones being roughly the size of the bigger one's of other nations)

    How many carriers does Russia have ? - One (1) - and we are not even sure "The Stalingrad" or what ever its name is - it is operational these days.

    So if these are not for Russia - Not for China - or any other superpower with nukes such as India - what be the purpose for the 17 -and accompanying battle group ?

    So we have these massive battle groups - ready at a moments notice - each individually capable of massive destruction - and we have 17 of them.

    To Target What - since these are worthless in real war where each is attacking the other's homeland - against any of the aforementioned superpowers - to which these conventional battle groups are obsolete conventionally - (never mind nukes).

    So who is the target .. who is this massive enemy at our gates - one that requires this 1.2 Trillion dollar annual spend.

    Tell me.
     
  22. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,320
    Likes Received:
    38,993
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Defending the US includes defending off our shores, it includes keeping the sea lanes open and working with our allies. And you want all of this while China is on a massive build up of it's forces in order to control the western Pacific and those regions while it moves into Africa and other other regions to increase their sphere of influence and dominance. Why is it in the best interest of our national security to allow China run roughshod over that region and obtain military superiority over us?
     
  23. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,320
    Likes Received:
    38,993
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So if China continues its attempts at dominance of the western Pacific and those nations through military means we should just nuke em? Do you not understand that the national security threats we face extend beyond our borders.
     
  24. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,706
    Likes Received:
    13,464
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I specifically stated treats to the homeland - and did so for a reason. Try to not drift off topic -

    and never said what you claim - nor do I think it - so do stop attributing your fantasies to me.
     
  25. MJ Davies

    MJ Davies Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2020
    Messages:
    21,120
    Likes Received:
    20,246
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why build a weapon for which ammunition cannot be made/obtained?
     

Share This Page