GOP strategy on defense: Spend more, LOTS more
Last year, we spent more on our military than at any point since World War II, even after adjusting for inflation. But according to House Republicans, it isn’t enough.
Instead of cutting defense spending after our withdrawal from Iraq and pending wind-down from Afghanistan, they want to increase it. As U.S. Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Va., a member of the House Armed Services Committee, told CNN, “we’re moving dangerously close to the point where I don’t think we’ll be able to guarantee the security of the United States of America.”
That is also the position of GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney. Instead of drawing down the number of active-duty personnel after the buildup to handle deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan, Romney proposes to increase active-duty troop levels by 100,000.
Romney also wants to spend a minimum of 4 percent of our gross domestic product on defense each year. In 2016 alone, that would mean an 18 percent increase — roughly another $100 billion a year — in projected spending on defense.
Again, this is what it looks like to be “dangerously close to the point where we won’t be able to guarantee the security of the United States of America”.
Source: International Institute of Strategic Studies
As the chart demonstrates, we spend 1.5 times as much on defense as the next nine biggest countries combined, and five of those nine are close U.S. allies who would be on our side in any fight.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
529 comments Add your comment
Fedup
May 14th, 2012
9:11 am
Remember what Eisenhower said about the military industrial complex. and deficit don’t count.
Mr. Snarky
May 14th, 2012
9:15 am
The repubs know who pays their bills.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
May 14th, 2012
9:16 am
but but it sounds so good as a soundbite to the rabid base. And of course, it never adds to the deficit.
Oscar
May 14th, 2012
9:19 am
Eisenhower was right.
We need to drastically reduce our defense budget and increase our spending on infrastructure.
Rommey will take us nowhere but down the wrong road. He needs to be avoided.
Thomas Heyward Jr
May 14th, 2012
9:19 am
“I am hopeful that we will be able to, candidly, kill this bomb maker and kill some of these other associates, because there is a dangerous process in play at the present time,” Senator Dianne Feinstein, chairwoman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, told “Fox News Sunday.”
.
Consequently the flying public is going to have to tolerate more invasive searches, she said. “The American public has not been terribly sympathetic” to this, she said, but “it’s very important that TSA (the Transportation Security Administration) keeps up its efforts.”"
.
MORE invasive?
OMG.
You Romney/Obama progs should know what that means.
Mr. Snarky
May 14th, 2012
9:21 am
Who says the government can’t create jobs?!
Oscar
May 14th, 2012
9:25 am
Mr. Snarky
May 14th, 2012
9:21 am
——————-
You are correct. Spending for defense creates jobs and profits. That’s the motivation to increase defense spending.
barking frog
May 14th, 2012
9:25 am
Does the MIC buy American?
Paul
May 14th, 2012
9:27 am
So much for needing the party of businessmen with real-world experience to restore America’s fiscal house.
If anyone had said to Romney while he was at Bain “we just acquired a company with revenues of nearly $700 billion a year but there are no inefficiencies we can cut and to make it a viable concern we need to inject another $126 billion”
Romney would fired him AFTER he had him sent for a psych eval -
Butch Cassidy
May 14th, 2012
9:28 am
Hey, with any luck, maybe MItt can get us fully engaged in Iran. Afterall, with the U.S. out of Iraq and eventually Afghanistan, the war profiteers will need fresh combat activity to keep the P&L from falling into the red. I honestly can’t think of anyone better than Romney to assure our MIP a guaranteed return on their investment.
Butch Cassidy
May 14th, 2012
9:29 am
By the way, MIP stands for Military Industrial Party.
Woodstock Mike
May 14th, 2012
9:29 am
“Last year, we spent more on our military than at any point since World War II”
In other words, Obama blatantly lied to Democrats in 2008 to gain votes he needed to win the election…
jaadf
May 14th, 2012
9:30 am
jay – what percentage of their domestic budget do those other countries spend?
reebok
May 14th, 2012
9:31 am
Romney, Fox, Limbaugh, Hannity et al know they are not catering to people in the reality-based world, they are merely keeping the fringe scared and angry. It’s kind of depressing how well it works…
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
9:31 am
I think I saw the house Republicans yell “jawohl” and click their heels together in unison when asked to indicate their position on an even larger military budget. I wonder if they need the extra money to pay for their cute little color-coordinated shirts and ties.
Peadawg
May 14th, 2012
9:32 am
cutting taxes while increasing defense spending
what’s the definition of “insanity”?
stevie ray....Clowns to the Left of me Jokers to the Right...here I am...
May 14th, 2012
9:32 am
Jay,
Agreed on defense cuts…seems a 10% increase in ALL categories makes sense. Not unlike the GAY thingy, GOP wants that military vote along with cash from defense contractors. Predictable….at least the financial institutions are equal opportunity extortionists.
straitroad
May 14th, 2012
9:33 am
This is the type of story written when the author is trying to avoid writing about an amateur, failed president who is getting more bizarre by the hour.
Oscar
May 14th, 2012
9:33 am
what’s the definition of “insanity”?
++++++++++
Cutting taxes while increasing spending.
St Simons - codewords are the new black
May 14th, 2012
9:33 am
As for myself, I think big oil ought to pay for their own security force
I mean hell, I’m already paying $3.60 for gas.
kayaker 71
May 14th, 2012
9:35 am
No mention of cutting out any portion of aid to dependent children, subsidized housing, food stamps, free cell phones, welfare checks, unemployment insurance payments……. take from one, take from all.
Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette
May 14th, 2012
9:36 am
So the GOP is welching on the debt limit deal…..
Anybody surprised?
JKL2
May 14th, 2012
9:36 am
If he had a (D) behind his name you be calling it :stimulous” and there whould be a round of golf claps.
Not sure we need an increase in troup levels, but we don’t need a decrease. Give the Soldiers some time to relax in their decreased optempo.
Jay
May 14th, 2012
9:39 am
jaadf, France spends about 2.5 percent of its GDP on defense. Germany spends 1.5 percent. China spends somewhere between 2 to 3 percent, but its numbers are harder to obtain.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
9:40 am
jaadf
I will point out that one point to consider in using the “what percentage of GDP are we spending for defense? measure is in includes the assumption that as GDP increases, defense requirements increase.
Look at it this way. A family of 4 earns $50,000 a year and spends $5,000 on food – 10 % of their GDP.
The breadwinner changes jobs and the family now makes $250,000 a year. Will anyone seriously argue that they now need to spend $25,000 a year – 10% of their “GDP” on food? Let alone increase it by another $4,626 (18%) or they will be in danger of not providing for their food needs?
Oscar
May 14th, 2012
9:40 am
kayaker 71
May 14th, 2012
9:35 am
_________
Some areas need cutting more that others. Talk about one thing at a time. Don’t disagree about cuts in other areas, but defense spending is more out of control than anything else.
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
9:41 am
The federal governments primary responsibility is the defense of our national security and that is my number one consideration when determining who will get my vote for the nations highest office. All other considerations fall in behind.
JF McNamara
May 14th, 2012
9:41 am
When Forbes turned around, did you see the wad of cash that the defense contractors had stuffed in?
Paul
May 14th, 2012
9:42 am
straitroad
“This is the type of story written when the author is trying to avoid writing about an amateur, failed president who is getting more bizarre by the hour”
How are you going to know the positions of the parties and candidates if journalists don’t write about them six months before an election?
Grasshopper
May 14th, 2012
9:42 am
jaadf
May 14th, 2012
9:30 am
jay – what percentage of their domestic budget do those other countries spend?
This is the correct question to ask. Anyone got time to research and answer?
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
9:43 am
This is the type of post written when the blogger is trying to avoid writing about the topic at hand, because it is one that he desperately does not want to know about.
Ignorance being bliss…
Joseph
May 14th, 2012
9:43 am
Why are you being so dishonest Jay? The US spent 15% of its budget on defense in 2011. China spent 12.6% on defense in 2011. That’s not a huge difference because the US has by far the biggest budget of any country in the world. Telling your story using honest tactics would serve you and your ilk better Jay.
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/year_spending_2011USbt_13bs1n#usgs302
http://english.people.com.cn/90001/90776/90785/7309773.html
JOE COOL~DoWnToWn THUG
May 14th, 2012
9:43 am
“The federal governments primary responsibility is the defense of our national security and that is my number one consideration when determining who will get my vote for the nations highest office”
BULL
Joseph
May 14th, 2012
9:44 am
By the way… When you frown on military spending shouldn’t the President shouder the blame? He’s the Commander in Chief…
Grasshopper
May 14th, 2012
9:44 am
I type too slow! Our 4% does not seem too out of line if Germany is at 1.5% and France is at 2.5%. I mean, who would want to have to count on them if the going got tougher?
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
9:45 am
Paul,
The breadwinner probably had to start working multiple jobs in order to pull in that increased income and therefore did have to increase the amount spent on food.
Jay
May 14th, 2012
9:46 am
Joseph, you really don’t have any idea what you’re talking about, do you?
Oscar
May 14th, 2012
9:46 am
Grasshopper
May 14th, 2012
9:42 am
________
You didn’t ask me, but if you look at China, they are spending heavily on infratstructure and govt. money is going toward building factories and other investments in their economy. And that’s who we are competing with.
Same with Gernmey and the other successful countries in Northern Europe. India anad Brazil are doing the same thing.
JF McNamara
May 14th, 2012
9:46 am
@Joseph,
“Why are you being so dishonest Jay? The US spent 15% of its budget on defense in 2011. China spent 12.6% on defense in 2011.”
Our budget is built on deficit spending. I think that you are making Jay’s point completely. The drum he is beating is that we need to cut defense spending to help balance the budget. If we balanced the budget and spent 15% of our budget on defense, our defense spending would drop significantly.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
9:47 am
Recon
Are you saying both parties are not interested in defending our nation?
Are you saying you’ll support the candidate who’s willing to increase our debt the most to spend more than the other guy?
A
May 14th, 2012
9:47 am
“Romney also wants to spend a minimum of 4 percent of our gross domestic product on defense each year. In 2016 alone, that would mean an 18 percent increase — roughly another $100 billion a year — in projected spending on defense.”
? 18% more 4 years from hence than now ? what is the the alternative proposed defense budget as a % of GDP for years from now? big difference?
Normal Free, Plain and Simple
May 14th, 2012
9:47 am
Chart-piphany! And with colors! Cool…
So the Republicans aren’t going to honor the promise to reduce military spending as part of the deficit reduction…can you say liar, liar, pants on fire?
If the GOP wasn’t so dangerous to America, they would be funny.
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
May 14th, 2012
9:48 am
Well, I don’t know about you, but I’m all for spending everything we got to keep the Terrists from breaking into the trailer and molesting the missus. You know they’re setting over there just lusting for her and your wife. We can make up for it by getting rid of SS, welfare, and these unemployment benefits, along with Medicaid and food stamps and all that other junk. I think about 50 million troops ought to do it. Besides, just think of the jobs there’d be if we had a military base every 10 miles or so.
Like everybody else I’m tired of hiding under the bed every time a Terrist sets off a bomb. Let’s get rid of all this Freedom and money and all that stuff we don’t need. Let’s be real Americans. Frisk everybody, even Granny and the baby, and make people tell us what they’re doing and where they’re doing.
That’s my opinion and it’s very true.
Have a good rainy Monday everybody.
Oscar
May 14th, 2012
9:48 am
JOE COOL~DoWnToWn THUG
May 14th, 2012
9:43 am
“The federal governments primary responsibility is the defense of our national security and that is my number one consideration when determining who will get my vote for the nations highest office”
BULL
___________
We have to have an adequate defense, but growth of our economy is equally vital to out survial. Power comes from financial and economic power first, so that you can afford a defense program.
Jay
May 14th, 2012
9:49 am
A, that’s an 18 percent increase over what is currently projected to be spent in 2016.
Grasshopper
May 14th, 2012
9:49 am
I hear you Oscar.
But comparing China and US economic systems really is apples and oranges. Germany can afford to spend less on military becasue of our presence; India…meh and Brazil has never spent on military.
curious
May 14th, 2012
9:50 am
As retired military, I wholeheartedly support increased defense spending.
It’s needed to support the reinstatemnt of the draft. For all of you proponents of more defense, put your mouth and your rearend on the line. That applies to your children and grandchildren, too.
When you comment, please indicate your service to the country.
Soothsayer
May 14th, 2012
9:50 am
. . . and this surprises me how? Jay, it’s called wealth redistribution and extraction. The government takes your money at gunpoint and gives to defense contractors to waste. But, do you hear howls from the Libertarian types? No. Wonder why?
Hey, how ’bout them Braves? They just swept the defending World Champion St. Louis Cardinals. Amazing!
ty webb
May 14th, 2012
9:50 am
cut cut cut…everything. I like the fact that Jay is somewhat decrying out of control government spending…though predictably, it’s highly partisan, but I’ll take it…baby steps.
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
9:50 am
The DoD needs to be cut back to a role that more closely resembles a Dept of DEFENSE. Not Offense. And we certainly do not need to continue to provide military protection for people that don’t think they should be paying for it. Bush ran up a huge tab to pay for his wars and the Republicans need to accept that and pay for it with a war tax that is based on the value of the assets that were being protected. That war tax can be applied to fund future DoD expenditures as well.
Joseph
May 14th, 2012
9:51 am
Look at the charts Jay. I think you have no idea what you’re talking about…. Which is normal for a far left zeolot such as yourself. Again if you’re not happy with defense spending blame the President!
godless heathen
May 14th, 2012
9:51 am
We could cut defense spending 10% and they’d never miss it. Waaaay too much waste.
Gator Joe
May 14th, 2012
9:51 am
I understand, and support, maintaining a strong military and the appropriate hardware. However, there is plenty of waste, fraud, and profiteering in defense spending. Much of the spending is about making defense contrators and overseas private contractors wealthy, rather than making our military stronger.
kayaker 71
May 14th, 2012
9:51 am
Oscar, 9:40,
“Defense spending is more out of control than anything else”. Oh, is it now? Entitlement spending under Bozo has increased 41% in the last four years. There are more people on food stamps than ever before. We spent over 450B in entitlement spending last year, the fastest growing segment of domestic spending in the budget. We spent over 819B just on government pension payouts and another 846B on health care. How important is your security, Oscar? Liberals always squawk about defense spending until their security is threatened, then they are the first to crow about the “government’s obligation to make them safe” . Which will it be, Oscar?
Jimmy62
May 14th, 2012
9:52 am
We spend that much more than they do because they don’t have to worry about defense because we do it for them. Is that a good situation? No. But cutting defense just when we have a growing antagonist in China could be even worse. I do think we should cut some defense programs, but it’s hardly a blip compared to SS and Medicare.
Grasshopper
May 14th, 2012
9:52 am
“However, there is plenty of waste, fraud, and profiteering in defense spending.”
There is plenty of that at every level of government.
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
9:53 am
When we get some moral courage in Washington???
The never-served Forbes and his chickenhawk pals are the very antithesis.
Fear mongers praying on the uneducated and irrational in their base, who are highly susceptible to………………. fear mongering.
Ronnie was the master. He damn near bankrupt us in his efforts to bankrupt the already imploding USSR.
And the (W)orst ever ran with that ball like he was Wrong Way Riegels…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA8ShsySc48
Oscar
May 14th, 2012
9:53 am
Grasshopper – Maybe its time to draw down our troop level in Europe and let those countries spend money for their own defense. If we think they can do that without another world war starting up in Europe between Germany and Russia. Nothing seems simple.
Joseph
May 14th, 2012
9:54 am
Look at the chart in your infinate wisdom Jay. It is total spending on defense. Federal, state, and local…. I realize if the numbers don’t fit your logic then it must not be accurate but you and your ilk simply won’t face reality….
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/piechart_2012_US_total
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
9:54 am
“Are you saying you’ll support the candidate who’s willing to increase our debt the most to spend more than the other guy?”
Paul, maybe you’ll need to read my post a second time but I believe what I said was pretty clear. But since you asked about my post, what do you think is a presidents most important duty?
Oscar
May 14th, 2012
9:55 am
yaker 71
May 14th, 2012
9:51 am
________
It is not a question of one our the other. The question on the table now is whether we are spending too much for defense. The answer to that is yes, and we need to cut back drastically and concentrate on growth of out economy.
Oscar
May 14th, 2012
9:57 am
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
9:54 am
______
Gererally, it’s to stay alive so that the Vice-President doesn’t become president. (smiley face)
Joseph
May 14th, 2012
9:57 am
Total gubmint spending… Thats federal, state, and local spending for you libs who don’t understand is $6.282 trillion dollars. Total defense spending for you libs that simply don’t understand math is $902.2 billion which results in 14% for defense… Please tell the whole story Jay. You would be more creditable if you did….
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
9:57 am
Corporations need to start paying for the protection they get as well instead of being the moochers that they are.
Oscar
May 14th, 2012
9:59 am
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
9:54 am
____
Seriously, you are right, national defense in number one duty. But the question here is how much is enough. Strong economy is part of what we need for our national security, and question is one of balance.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
10:00 am
curious
Why is the draft needed?
Retired military? Really?
How long would the draftees serve? Two years? Three? Four?
How much time is spent in schooling after basic? One month? Four? Six? Ten?
How much time until on the job upgrade training is completed?
How long will the person be fully capable in their job until their commitment is up?
Then they leave and get up to $50,000 a year in GI Bill benefits?
This ought to be real interesting.
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
10:01 am
Oscar@9:57, ISFH LOL
Soothsayer
May 14th, 2012
10:01 am
Joseph, your argument(s) is wrong. Over 50% of every tax collects goes to military spending. The chart you posted is bogus because it includes spending on Social Security and Medicare.
JKL2
May 14th, 2012
10:02 am
curious- It’s needed to support the reinstatemnt of the draft
Why? All branches are currently overstrength, and with the economy in the tank, more people than ever are lined up to join. A draft would serve no purpose other than appeasing your sense of social justice.
Army
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
10:02 am
“But since you asked about my post, what do you think is a presidents most important duty?”
That can only be accomplished by increasing the military budget?
Pleas explain
Common Sense
May 14th, 2012
10:03 am
With MARTA’s inability to get it’s debit machines working, I thought for sure you’d be talking about the need for more money to solve this problem.
Soothsayer
May 14th, 2012
10:04 am
Welcome to this preview of Republi-World. If liked life under Kind Dumbass the First, you’ll love life under King Dumbney the Flip Flopper.
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
10:04 am
Using Joseph’s “math”, I note that other expenditures, such as social security, medicare, medicaid, etc., were not nearly as large a percentage of “gubmint” spending either. It’s a miracle!
stands for decibels
May 14th, 2012
10:05 am
In other words, Obama blatantly lied to Democrats in 2008 to gain votes he needed to win the election…
I do so love being told, by people who weren’t actually listening to Obama in 2008, what Obama didn’t actually say in 2008.
Joseph
May 14th, 2012
10:05 am
I would assume that the CBO is about to come out with more scathing news about how Obamacare is going to bust the budget even more… Jay is on speed dial with the DNC and is hillarious how they are already out in front of a negative story even before its reported… Good thing most folks know better… By the way the current Obama budget for 2013 is almost a trillion dollars deficit… LOL…
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/year_spending_2013USbt_13bs1n#usgs302
Dumb and Dumber
May 14th, 2012
10:05 am
Yo Joseph — let me try and help you. China is not running a deficit, we are. If we are serious about reducing that deficit then we have to reduce defense spending. Refer to all the charts you want — the growth in military spending in the US since 2001 has outstripped every other category — and that is without including the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
BTW — how did that whole “the Iraq war will pay for itself” work out?
Joseph
May 14th, 2012
10:05 am
TaxPayer:
Its not my math. Its the governments….
Soothsayer
May 14th, 2012
10:07 am
“By the way the current Obama budget for 2013 is almost a trillion dollars deficit.”
That’s less than what he inherited from King Dumbass the First.
stands for decibels
May 14th, 2012
10:07 am
cut cut cut…everything.
And if you liked 8.2% unemployment? You’ll LOVE 9.2% unemployment, or possibly worse!
George P. Burdell
May 14th, 2012
10:07 am
Stepping back and taking a broader look, it always seems to me that defense spending ends up putting Liberals/Conservatives or Democrats/Republicans on the opposite side of their normal arguments about government spending. The conservatives don’t seem to mind deficits so long as it is for defense spending. The liberals don’t want to recognize that defense spending is another form of stimulus to the economy providing jobs to everyday Americans.
Obviously, if there was no need to spend a penny on defense, we’d be better off in the long run because the resources could be used for other endeavors. However, that is not the world we live in. Our defense spending is too high but to cut it will also have a negative impact, at least in the short to medium term, on employment etc. Also, the cost of spending one dollar too much on defense is a lot less costly than spending one dollar too little so I’ll always lean towards spending too much than too little. However, we probably don’t need the margin of safety to be as large as it currently is.
Joseph
May 14th, 2012
10:08 am
When Obamcare kicks in it will be over a trillion dollars a year in spending… And we need to cut defense spending? You leftys are complete loons….
Paul
May 14th, 2012
10:08 am
Recon
your 9:41
“The federal governments primary responsibility is the defense of our national security and that is my number one consideration when determining who will get my vote for the nations highest office. All other considerations fall in behind.”
You call that pretty clear and asking if you’ll support the candidate who’s willing to spend the most and asking if you’re willing to increase the debt to do so is not necessary?
So if Pres Obama called for a 30% increase in Defense you’d vote for him?
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
10:09 am
“That can only be accomplished by increasing the military budget?”
That’s not an answer to the question that I asked Paul.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
10:10 am
kayaker 71
“We spent over 819B just on government pension payouts”
You’re willing to cut your pension for the national good?
JKL2
May 14th, 2012
10:10 am
godless- We could cut defense spending 10% and they’d never miss it. Waaaay too much waste
Why just defense? I’d start with 20% across the board and see where we end up.
Jefferson
May 14th, 2012
10:10 am
Defense contractors RIP OFF the ‘F” out of the tax payers.
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
10:11 am
“That’s not an answer to the question that I asked Paul
So if the top brass at the Pentagon said it could be done, are you ok with it?
Soothsayer
May 14th, 2012
10:11 am
The real goal of a zombie war is neither to kill people…nor even to win. It is to transfer wealth from the real economy to the zombie industry, in this case, defense.
Of course, looking at the cost of killing people merely underlines the absurdity of the whole enterprise. You might just as well say that a good war is one where people don’t die. If that is true, the War on Terror is almost perfect. Hardly anyone dies. Which is not surprising, since there are hardly any terrorists. It is a war on nobody…with the intention of not winning…over a long period of time…at great expense. It is a zombie war, designed for the benefit of the industry behind it, not for the people who pay the bills.
godless heathen
May 14th, 2012
10:13 am
I haven’t heard President Obama’s proposal for reducing defence (sic) spending. Is he going to cut it to Canada or GB’s level?
Paul
May 14th, 2012
10:13 am
Recon 10:09
You need to redirect your question to the person who asked it.
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
10:14 am
“Is he going to cut it to Canada or GB’s level?”
Figi
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
10:14 am
“So if Pres Obama called for a 30% increase in Defense you’d vote for him?”
He would need to provide the what, where, when, why and how. There you go, now how about answering my question since you say you like clarity lets see how clear you’re willing to be.
Joseph
May 14th, 2012
10:16 am
Remember Obama’s first year in office Jay when you blamed the huge budget deficit on GWB? What happened the last 3 years of which 2 of those Obama had complete control of Congress? 5 trillion in debt… These are facts that can’t possibly be sugarcoated…
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
10:17 am
Paul,
I directed the question to you at 9:54. I’m beginning to think you don’t have an answer or you don’t want to answer.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
10:17 am
I see the cowardly old men that talk radio has scared the depends off of are all out in force, fear mongering and cowering in public.
Grow a spine you weanies, quit being afraid of everything and live life for a change. Quit hiding behind your republican idea of a gov’t that protects you from every little boo boo. America survived 225 years before that cowardly attack on the World Trade Center and will survive even longer if you cowards can put aside your fear and vote to live as men not as cowering whipped curs.
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
10:17 am
To Jefferson’s point, those guys building those planes, ships and tanks?
All Republican union thugs.
I say bust those damn things up!
And pay those thugs what they are worth – $10 an hour, with no benefits.
Instead of the $30 or $40 an hour, with huge benefits that these labor union parasites make now. (And if a few blow up, sink, crash, whatever, it’s still worth the savings!)
That would greatly reduce the cost that the chickenhawks pay for their toys…
Jay
May 14th, 2012
10:18 am
“When Obamcare kicks in it will be over a trillion dollars a year in spending….”
Joseph, once again you have no idea what you’re talking about. To use the same dates as above, total spending in 2016 on Obamacare is projected to be $143 billion.
A far cry from “more than a trillion.”
If you have to make up facts to support your position, maybe you ought to change your position. Dishonesty is not an attractive trait.
USinUK - pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout
May 14th, 2012
10:18 am
Well, it worked for Soviet Russia …
JB
May 14th, 2012
10:19 am
Off topic, but still in the news cycle………….The Pastor at Ebenezer Church this weekend has chosen skin color over Jesus and the Bible. He did not condemn Obama for his stance on Gay marriage. The argument will not be solved on this blog, but as a man of God, a follower of Jesus, a christian, He chose to take a liberal Democratic position on the subject rather than God’s word. Now, he’s not for it, but he punched Obama a pass. Really disappointed.
curious
May 14th, 2012
10:19 am
JKL2,
Intended as scarcasm. When all these “strong defense” types realize thay would have to serve, they would probably say the military is too large.
The 1% likes the 99% doing the dirty work.
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
10:20 am
Its not my math. Its the governments….
Joseph,
And which government site would that be from.
curious
May 14th, 2012
10:20 am
JKL2,
Forgot to add:
Army 1969-1997.
Normal Free, Plain and Simple
May 14th, 2012
10:20 am
Our American “Leaders” must be the most pathologically frightened group of people known to mankind. We have more than enough weapons to kill the world over and over again. Be do not need that kind of spending for toys we will never need. better to spend that money where it’s needed like social programs.
But our “Leaders” have their collective noses so far up the Military Industrial Complex’s back side, that if they took a sharp right turn, Congresses noses would be broken.
USinUK - pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout
May 14th, 2012
10:20 am
“Defense contractors RIP OFF the ‘F” out of the tax payers.”
and always have.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
May 14th, 2012
10:21 am
“Again, this is what it looks like to be “dangerously close to the point where we won’t be able to guarantee the security of the United States of America”.
Alas, this topic was chosen this morning by someone who has never been in the “trenches” and who probably thinks we should return to 1940 as compared to our enemies.
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
10:21 am
“He would need to provide the what, where, when, why and how.”
Outside of troop strength which I doubt has been vetted by the Pentagon, what else has Romney provided in to meet your what, where, when and why criteria?
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
10:21 am
“So if the top brass at the Pentagon said it could be done, are you ok with it?”
What could be done? What do you think is a presidents most important duty?
USinUK - pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout
May 14th, 2012
10:21 am
Normal – social programs won’t hold back the Mooooooslim Hoarde, I tells ya!!!
Joseph
May 14th, 2012
10:22 am
Soothsayer:
“By the way the current Obama budget for 2013 is almost a trillion dollars deficit.”
That’s less than what he inherited from King Dumbass the First.
Thats simply not true. Most of TARP has been paid back reducing Bush’s deficit his last year in office. Obama has run deficits of 1.4, 1.3, and 1.3 trillion with 2012 looking like more than 1.3. Facts that dems simply ignore or just palin don’t understand….
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
May 14th, 2012
10:23 am
It all boils down to this:
Do you want to win the next big war with 100,000 American deaths because we didn’t have all the “big toys” we needed?
Or do you want to win the next big war with 1,000 American deaths because we had even MORE than the “big toys” we needed?
It’s called “fire superiority”. And it means a lot to troops on the ground who actually do the fighting (vs. opine about it) and their families.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
10:25 am
JB; Nice (and typical) way to distort the message from Rev. Raphael Warnock (since you didn’t even know his name).
“The president is entitled to his opinion,” Warnock told congregants. “He is the president of the United States, not the pastor of the United States.”
Joseph Lowery went even further, though I doubt you’ll accurately read or quote him either:
“I believe in equal rights,” Lowery said. “You can’t believe in equal rights for some. That’s an oxymoron.”
However: “Do I like it? I’m uncomfortable with it,” said Lowery, 90. “We grew up under boy-girl, man-woman, courtship and marriage.”
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
10:25 am
“What could be done? What do you think is a presidents most important duty?”
I have acknowledged your question and said if the Pentagon said it could be done with less are you ok with that?
Fly-On-The-Wall
May 14th, 2012
10:25 am
Reading the posts from those that support this type of expenditure is very depressing. How can we ever get our budget under control if the military spending is never ever given a cap? Then when you listen to all of the Republicans who say the government cannot create jobs but if we ask to have the defense budget cut just a little then they scream about the impact to jobs.
Why can’t we spend less on the military? Why?
Paul
May 14th, 2012
10:26 am
Recon
“He would need to provide the what, where, when, why and how.”
Romney hasn’t done that either, has he? You still haven’t answered, unless you’re saying you’d vote for Obama over Romney if he would spend more on defense and be more specific in where it was going.
I think you’re floundering, here.
When Pres Reagan had his huge defense increase, Pentagon was actively looking for anyplace to spend it.
Funding exceeded requirements. Requirements, in military budgetspeak, do not equal critical needs.
They will, though, find a way to spend every dollar you shovel at them.
Joseph
May 14th, 2012
10:26 am
Taxpayer:
Here’s one of interest funded by the gubmint… Its where http://www.usgovernmentspending.com gest there numbers… I know you dems don’t want to beleive the extreme spending of this failed President but facts are facts…
http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43119
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
10:28 am
“It’s called “fire superiority”. And it means a lot to troops on the ground who actually do the fighting (vs. opine about it) and their families.”
No offense and thank you for your service, however I’m not sure if the top brass under any administration is looking at a bottom up strategy in terms of what is required in terms of resources based on world events and how much it costs to get us there
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
10:28 am
“I have acknowledged your question”
You’ve acknowledged my question but you haven’t answered it.
JKL2
May 14th, 2012
10:28 am
curious- The 1% likes the 99% doing the dirty work
Guess I never saw national defense as “dirty work”…
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
10:28 am
Or do you want to win the next big war with 1,000 American deaths because we had even MORE than the “big toys” we needed?
Or strictly in non-BS, no theoretical terms, NOT win the last big “war” with 4,408 Americans killed and 31,922 wounded, many horrifically, and have nothing to show for it?
stands for decibels
May 14th, 2012
10:30 am
Now, he’s not for it, but he punched Obama a pass. Really disappointed.
It’s getting so that a bigot can’t count on black folks to carry their slop water around any more.
Fly-On-The-Wall
May 14th, 2012
10:30 am
I’d rather we take a cut off the defense budget and spend it on NASA. Let’s get back into space exploration again in a big way. That will produce far more ‘peaceful’ spinoffs than the spending on the military gives us. Just imagine all the new ‘jobs’ that would be created with that!
Paul
May 14th, 2012
10:32 am
Recon
“I directed the question to you at 9:54.”
Someone else asks you a question and you direct it to me to answer?!!?
” I’m beginning to think you don’t have an answer or you don’t want to answer.”
It’s called ‘good manners” Recon.
When you post something and you’re asked for an explanation, provide it before diverting by asking your own question.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
10:33 am
LOL USinUK, nice write up on your brownies. I do okra like that. I’ve been told my okra is awesome but I won;t put that nasty crap in MY mouth……….
http://redskitchendiaries.wordpress.com/
JB
May 14th, 2012
10:33 am
So if you’re a Christian, you’re a bigot? wow.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
May 14th, 2012
10:33 am
Fly-On-The-Wall: You have obviously never faced death in a foxhole (Army)/fighting hole (Marines).
JamVet: And politics aside it could have been 40,000 without the “BIG TOYS” !
Not Part of Romney’s Flock: Sorry but the “BIG TOYS” effect does trickle down. Been there done that.
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
10:33 am
Well Paul and his alter-ego “Not Part of Romney’s Flock” don’t want to answer the simple question of what they believe to be a presidents most important duty. I guess they either don’t know or are afraid to answer.
UNCLE SAMANTHA
May 14th, 2012
10:34 am
its time to end welfare for our allies
they need to get to work and either pay us to defend them
or spend for defense themselves
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
10:34 am
“You’ve acknowledged my question but you haven’t answered it.
If all your spin is to say that any increases in military spending are good and you back them regardless of what the Pentagon might say or not say, then just say it.
If you are looking to back me into a corner that and to provide a blanket agreement stating that the President’s top job is the defense of the country (which it is) and it always requires more spending, nice try……….. will not happen
Now back to my question.
Thanks for your honest answer that you keep avoiding
USinUK - pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout
May 14th, 2012
10:36 am
Fred – “I’ve been told my okra is awesome but I won;t put that nasty crap in MY mouth……….”
but, I totally get your aversion … the slime factor
curious
May 14th, 2012
10:36 am
JKL2,
National Defense isn’t “dirty work” to those serving on the ground, but I don’t see the 1% rushing out to perform their “noble duty” either.
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
10:36 am
“Not Part of Romney’s Flock: Sorry but the “BIG TOYS” effect does trickle down. Been there done that”
Guess we don’t have waste within the military budget and weapons systems that cost billions that are never used or even have plans to be used.
Thanks
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
10:36 am
“When you post something and you’re asked for an explanation, provide it before diverting by asking your own question.”
Paul, are you AKA Not Part of Romney’s Flock on this blog?
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
10:37 am
Not Part of Romney’s Flock , and Paul: Cel is suffering from Neal Boortz delusions. See when Neal gets nailed to a wall he asks some question that isn’t germane to the discusssion then yells ANSWER THE QUESTION, ANSWER THE QUESTION. I’M GOING TO CUT YOU OFF IF YOU DON;T ANSWER THE QUESTION.
See how effective it is?
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
10:37 am
For some peculiar reason, Republicans think that spending more than is needed on the military by spending less than is needed on the population is a good thing. Dead people — people that die from poor healthcare, lack of food, etc. — aren’t too worried about whether some terrorist is going to break into their foreclosed home and take all they have.
In other words, it all comes down to this. If you want that huge military, you can start by paying for it. And a good starting point would be to pay for the Bush wars before asking for more.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
10:38 am
Scout
“Alas, this topic was chosen this morning by someone who has never been in the “trenches” and who probably thinks we should return to 1940 as compared to our enemies.”
Robert Gates was never in the ‘trenches’ but he knows more about national security issues and policy than a two-striper in a foxhole.
USinUK - pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout
May 14th, 2012
10:38 am
Paul – “They will, though, find a way to spend every dollar you shovel at them”
though, in all fairness, that’s not limited to the DoD … give ANY government agency an unlimited budget and they’ll find a way to exceed it
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
10:38 am
Scout, you are living in a time that does not exist anymore.
Urban warfare does not allow for huge weapons systems to be effective.
Unless of course, you want to start firebombing entire cities like Teheran and Baghdad and Pyongyang, like we did with Dresden, Berlin and Tokyo.
detritusUSA
May 14th, 2012
10:38 am
I wonder how many conservatives would want all this military spending if we discontinued the volunteer Army and returned to a draft Army? No exceptions, everybody serves two years? My guess is the military wouldn’t be quite so popular as it is now.
USinUK - pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout
May 14th, 2012
10:38 am
“Paul, are you AKA Not Part of Romney’s Flock on this blog?”
you obviously don’t know Paul.
he doesn’t have to do aliases.
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
10:39 am
Paul
Seems Recon is very adamant about getting answers, however not so much when it comes to himself
UNCLE SAMANTHA
May 14th, 2012
10:39 am
what would happen to all the socialistic countries that use us for defense spending (europe) if they had to actually spend THEIR OWN MONEY for defense
Greece?
France?
UK?
Germany?
Ireland?
Portugal?
Spain?
Italy?
GOP strategy on defense: Spend more, LOTS more – Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) | Amazing News
May 14th, 2012
10:40 am
[...] Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) [...]
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
10:40 am
“Alas, this topic was chosen this morning by someone who has never been in the “trenches” and who probably thinks we should return to 1940 as compared to our enemies.”
You are voting for people each election that have never been in the “trenches”
What is your point?
Adam
May 14th, 2012
10:40 am
I am sure someone has mentioned by now this shows the GOP isn’t serious about deficit reduction – they just want to spend on what they want to spend on.
JKL2
May 14th, 2012
10:40 am
uncle samantha- its time to end welfare for our allies
I’d start by invoking the Limbaugh Doctrine. Let’s start with cutting the welfare to those countries that hate us first.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
10:40 am
Damn. I was managing to listen to Boortz until Herman insane came on the show.
What a loser.
Oh and is anyone else sick? Is there a bug going around or ids it just me?
JB
May 14th, 2012
10:40 am
Our freedom and security is from the world knowing what WE CAN DO with our military. A position of weakness is what they are waiting for.
Rickster
May 14th, 2012
10:41 am
All it takes is one – just one – nuclear weapon detonated high above the US to plunge us into a world from which we will never recover. North Korea has the weapon – but and is working on a delivery system. Iran is close to the weapon, and is working on a delivery system.
Jay, (or anyone else) I challenge you to read “One Second After” by William R. Forstchen and tell me that we’re spending too much to defend our country. Or, to save you time, try these links:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/2010-10-26-emp_N.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse
Paul
May 14th, 2012
10:41 am
Scout
“Fly-On-The-Wall: You have obviously never faced death in a foxhole (Army)/fighting hole (Marines).”
So a high school graduate with a few months of training sitting in a foxhole is more qualified than someone like ex SecDef Gates when it comes to national security issues?
Really?
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
10:41 am
UNCLE SAMANTHA
May 14th, 2012
10:39 am
what would happen to all the socialistic countries that use us for defense spending (europe) if they had to actually spend THEIR OWN MONEY for defense
Greece?
France?
UK?
Germany?
Ireland?
Portugal?
Spain?
Italy?
++++++++++++++++++++++
Who cares? I don’t. Do you?
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
10:41 am
Fred
It is funny to watch Recon dodge the question, yet demand that other bloggers answer his.
Bless his heart
Oscar
May 14th, 2012
10:42 am
UNCLE SAMANTHA
May 14th, 2012
10:39 am
_________
They would probably wind up in a war with each other like they did in WWI and WWII.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
10:42 am
Recon
“Paul, are you AKA Not Part of Romney’s Flock on this blog?”
Nope.
I do not blog with multiple aliases.
I take responsibility for what I post.
USinUK - pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout
May 14th, 2012
10:43 am
“if they had to actually spend THEIR OWN MONEY for defense
Greece?
France?
UK?
Germany?
Ireland?
Portugal?
Spain?
Italy?”
um … dude … you might want to strike the UK off that list as IT’S COVERING YOUR FAT ASS IN BASRA!!!
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
10:44 am
“he doesn’t have to do aliases.”
Maybe not, but if not “Not Part of Romney’s Flock” must have some kind of a thing for him. Weird
Paul
May 14th, 2012
10:46 am
Scout
“JamVet: And politics aside it could have been 40,000 without the “BIG TOYS” !”
What are the ‘big toys’ the that prevented ten times the American deaths?
F-35?
Littoral ships?
F-22?
Army’s Future Combat Systems Manned Ground vehicles?
UNCLE SAMANTHA
May 14th, 2012
10:46 am
FRED
yes i care…………… if the governments of these countries want STIMULUS…….. then they need to spend the money in areas that will directly create a money multiplier……… building up their military
they will get growth and will prevent europe from sliding into recession which will be a DRAG on the US economy
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
10:46 am
Recon
Still no answers, nice deflection.
Boortz should give you a guest spot
Paul
May 14th, 2012
10:47 am
Recon
“Well Paul and his alter-ego “Not Part of Romney’s Flock” don’t want to answer the simple question of what they believe to be a presidents most important duty. I guess they either don’t know or are afraid to answer.”
Did that kind of diversion work on your first sergeant?
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
10:47 am
It looks like the lib’s are only interested in practicing their dance steps this morning. Catch y’all later.
USinUK - pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout
May 14th, 2012
10:47 am
“then they need to spend the money in areas that will directly create a money multiplier……… building up their military”
considering those economies you mention are consumer-based, then spending money on CONSUMERS will be a more effective money multiplier than spending it on the MIC
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
May 14th, 2012
10:48 am
Not Part of Romney’s Flock/Paul/JamVet/Fly on the Wall:
I can answer all of you with one phrase ………………
“Dulce Bellum Inexpertis”
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
10:48 am
Bye Bye
Rerun
UNCLE SAMANTHA
May 14th, 2012
10:49 am
USinUK
delusional
UK would REQUIRE US to defend it if attacked
from the UK TELEGRAPH
Libya: Navy running short of Tomahawk missiles
The Navy could run out of Tomahawk missiles after a fifth of the Navy stockpile has been used against Libya, sources disclosed yesterday.
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
10:50 am
Let’s start with cutting the welfare to those Americans who hate our government first.
Paul, the bloated, corrupt and wasteful military budget – and it’s proxies in the welfare state of DoD contractors – is another travesty where the fake conservatives just wonder around with their eyes and ears closed.
Long live the corporate welfare state!
And though I oppose conscription, it would be great fun to see the endless line of Young Republicans high tailing it for Canada, Venezuela and France…
Road Scholar
May 14th, 2012
10:51 am
100,000 more troops? Sign his and other repubs kids, grandkids, and dogs up first. No deferrals. To pay for it remove the congress and senate healthcare and gym rights/funding! Enough already!
UNCLE SAMANTHA
May 14th, 2012
10:51 am
USinUK – pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout
May 14th, 2012
10:47 am
“then they need to spend the money in areas that will directly create a money multiplier……… building up their military”
considering those economies you mention are consumer-based, then spending money on CONSUMERS will be a more effective money multiplier than spending it on the MIC
and how does the GENIUS propose money being spent on consumers?
Paul
May 14th, 2012
10:52 am
USinUK
“though, in all fairness, that’s not limited to the DoD … give ANY government agency an unlimited budget and they’ll find a way to exceed it”
Very true about any government agency.
Not Part of Romney’s
Yes. BTW, nice analysis of the “what’s most important presidential duty? Defense. Therefore, spending more equals fulfilling the duty better” line of ‘reasoning.”
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
10:52 am
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
10:47 am
It looks like the lib’s are only interested in practicing their dance steps this morning. Catch y’all later.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
One less Republican here on the blog cowering in fear of the world…………. Maybe he left to get a back bone installed lol.
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
10:53 am
I can answer all of you with one phrase ………………
“Dulce Bellum Inexpertis”
I believed I thanked you for your service. If you do not accept that, I will still sleep good tonight. Believe it.
With that said, as important as your job was in the military, were you doing planning on the Pentagon level in terms of strategy for the branches, budgets, etc?
Your service in itself should be applauded, however that service does not in itself give you insight to the entire operation on a macro level, no more than an IT guy at Google has an insight to the planning and operations at the executive level.
If you were at that level, I say thanks again
Fly-On-The-Wall
May 14th, 2012
10:53 am
Rickster,
We cannot defend against that type of weapon and everyone knows it. If someone decides to unleash an EMP weapon against us it will be impossible to defend against that with current and even future military spending. Because, once we are even close to having that type of defense the rest of the world will not feel safe and they’ll want to keep the status quo.
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
10:53 am
It’s good to know that when this country needs trenches dug, they can call on the experts here to handle it. Scout can probably swing a mean E-tool.
USinUK - pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout
May 14th, 2012
10:54 am
Uncle Sam –
1) considering how the US dithered around for 2 years before “leaping” the the UK’s defense during WWII, you might not want to crow about what a great ally the US is
2) even the article you (sorta) cite talks about a 20% depletion of the stocks … it’s not like they were down to the last one – and that’s in peacetime. hardly an accurate measure.
Mary Elizabeth
May 14th, 2012
10:54 am
On May 11, I posted the following remarks to GT, which was late in the thread, so I do not believe that he, and others, saw this post. I wish to repost it now, in relation to defense spending. Notice the sentence below, related to defense spending and defense priorities within our government. Hopefully, the book highlighted, and its author’s website, within my below post, will further the effort to reveal the secrecy behind the priority on defense spending and other means that “big money” uses the government for their self-interested ends.
=================================================
GT, you obviously think with compIexity and insight, and although I do not agree with all of your thoughts, I appreciate their depth, and I do agree with some of them.
I want to recommend a book to you that I think you might enjoy reading. It is “Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty, The Powerful Forces That put It In The White House, And What Their Influence Means For America.” It was written by Russ Baker, and was published by Bloomsbury Press in 2009.
Here are a few lines from the Conclusion of that book, from page 493:
“As this book demonstrates, the deck has long been, and continues to be, stacked on behalf of big-money players, especially those in commodities and natural resources – from gold to oil – and those who finance the extraction of these materials. The defense industry, and the aligned growth business of ‘intelligence,’ provide muscle. On a lower level is an army of enablers – the campaign functionaries, the PR people, the lawyers. This was the Bush enterprise. The Bushes embodied it as a dynasty, but it is larger than them, and will prove more enduring.
“Deception resides at the very center of our national psyche. It affects us in incalcuable ways, from decisions in the voting booth to our own life choices.
“The solution, clearly is to pull away the veil.
“Now the good news. Telling stories that need to be told is less dependent on the good graces of those whith a vested interest in concealment. This book would not have been possible ten years ago, before the Internet’s tremendous search and storage capabilities, and the new ways it offers to exchange information and ideas with others. Much has been made of the havoc the Internet has wrought with old business models, from publishing to recorded music. Less has been said about emerging opportunities to crack the wall of secrecy and disinformation – not just in authoritarian regimes abroad, but right here at home as well.”
——————————————————————
The author, Russ Baker, an award-winning investigative journalist, has written for the New Yorker, Vanity Fair, the New York Times, the Nation, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, and Equire. “Family of Secrets” is well documented with a myriad of footnotes.
Please check out this website and listen to the full 5 minutes of the video clip with Russ Baker discussing his book.
http://www.familyofsecrets.com/
——————————————————————————-
“Russ Baker’s work stands out for its fierce independence, fact-based reporting, and concern for what matters most to our democracy…A lot of us look to Russ to tell us what we didn’t know”—Bill Moyers
“This is the book people will be mining for years to come”—David Margolick, Newsweek and Vanity Fair
“An investigative gem filled with juicy revelations”
–Sydney Schanberg, Pulitzer Prize winner, New York Times
—————————————————————–
Paul
May 14th, 2012
10:55 am
Scout 10:48
“I can answer all of you with one phrase ………………”
Well of course you can.
Doesn’t mean it makes for a good argument, though.
godless heathen
May 14th, 2012
10:55 am
“And though I oppose conscription, it would be great fun to see the endless line of Young Republicans high tailing it for Canada, Venezuela and France…”
Do you have any data that says young Republicans serve in the military at a lesser rate than young Dems?
King of Everything
May 14th, 2012
10:55 am
…and with all that spending we still take over 10 years to get those cave-dwelling goat f**ers under control. We need to get rid of the welfare to the defense contractors and spend a 1/4 of that on the military. But in this town one man’s welfare is another man’s campaign contribution. Sad but true….
USinUK - pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout
May 14th, 2012
10:56 am
Uncle Samantha – 10:51 –
thank you for the compliment –
supporting businesses with payroll supplements so that they can maintain the workforce rather they undergo layoffs (as Germany did in 2007) is a great way to support both business AND the consumer
any other questions???
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
10:56 am
I hear scout also continues to put his entrenching tool to good use in digging his rabbit holes.
Obama is over
May 14th, 2012
10:56 am
Unfortunately, there is both a financial and moral cost associated with being the world’s last remaining superpower. There is obviously significant waste within the U.S. military infrastructure which needs to be addressed. Obama would have the country cede its preeminence in the world in the name of “fairness”. While this may appeal to a certain voting segment, the reality is that guns will still be pointed at our backs and we will still be the target of terrorists. I have the utmost confidence in the men and women who serve in the U.S. armed forces. We need to support them with the best technology, training, and equipment possible. You plan for the worst case scenario and pray for the best. When Israel invades Iran, we will see how loyal Obama is to our allies and what kind of backbone he has.
Mary Elizabeth
May 14th, 2012
10:56 am
NOTE to PAUL, please read my last two posts on the last thread. The first was specifically addressed to you, with the hope that you would, also, read the second post there, addressed to Johnny Reb.
barking frog
May 14th, 2012
10:56 am
The President’s most
important duty as CIC is
to insure that all Marines
are informed that they can
unscrew their hats upon
discharge and no longer
have to be jarheads
lovelyliz
May 14th, 2012
10:57 am
“we’re moving dangerously close to the point where I don’t think we’ll be able to guarantee the security of the United States of America.”
CODE TALK for we have to keep the tax $$$$$$$$ flwing to private defense contracts even while we propose cutting fund for teh VA and injured vets. Where else are these GOPers/blue dogs going to get their 7 figure, post political life, lobbyist jobs from?
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
10:57 am
Del does not debate.
He opines.
In 2008, the US military budget represented 58 cents out of every $1 spent by the U.S. government on discretionary programs – the items that Congress gets to vote up or down on an annual basis.
It’s primary purpose is to fuel wasteful, reckless, destabilizing foreign interventions that violate constitutional and international law.
http://tinyurl.com/726jfbq
Mike
May 14th, 2012
10:58 am
Joseph, you don’t understand, we can only “blame the President” when it is a republican.
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
10:59 am
The Dems want to cut the military budget by 30%. Active duty troops should be increased along with decreasing the National Guard an equal amount. China is our primary concern and their build up of the military over the last 10 years has been unprecedented. While the Dems want to cut the military they also want to increase all the social programs. Cutting the military by 10 % is possible but only if the numbers are shifted from the National Guard to active duty soldiers. The Dems plan of increasing all social programs will go far beyond what ever cuts are made by the military. My problem with the OblamaCrats is that they have no rational plan to reduce this national debt. Tax more and spend more won’t get there.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
11:00 am
USinUK: 1) considering how the US dithered around for 2 years before “leaping” the the UK’s defense during WWII, you might not want to crow about what a great ally the US is:
Considering how shabbily the British treated the US in WWI by trying to use our soldiers as their cannon fodder in the failed trench war and how crappy they were after the war, thank you for winning this for us, now leave and let the big boys deal with the aftermath (which in turned CAUSED WWII), the British should be grateful we came when we did.
Fly-On-The-Wall
May 14th, 2012
11:00 am
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801 (whoever),
Your response is totally irrelevant, just because someone has spent time in a foxhole does not qualify them to determine what the overall military budget could/should be. The person (man or woman) in the foxhole doesn’t want to be there in the first place – they would have preferred to NOT go into combat at all and that is what they want from their government. Drop the whole warrior attitude, we do not need those types in control in government at all. All it gets us is into another war and for what? Just so they can show off their manhood and play with the all the new toys?
My father served in WWII, both my brothers served in VietNam and I honor their service. I’m proud of them but they’ve NEVER said we need to keep spending on the military like this.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
11:01 am
Scout
I was going to say I’m regularly amazed at those who say they served in the military gives them special understanding that the Defense establishment is underfunded and under resourced. If anything, it should be just the opposite.
I’d engaged Recon (or one of the same mindset) on the idea of cutting expensive military traditions that have no critical utility in today’s practice of warfare. Like spending millions and millions of dollars each year to make sure tens of thousands of Army guys are qualified to jump out of airplanes with parachutes.
Normandy was a lonnnnnng time ago and helicopters have been around for what, five or six years?
But the opposition to cutting anything so traditional was extreme.
UNCLE SAMANTHA
May 14th, 2012
11:01 am
USinUK
sorry sir charlie
what you suggest is doing what the magical obama calls SAVING JOBS
europe needs growth
republicans argued against obama’s “stimulus” but most of that spending wasn’t stimulus
it was replacement spending for such that was not being done at the state
it was going to be spent anyway
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
11:01 am
heathen, no.
I just enjoy seeing those soft and flabby punks who bluster about a strong military, cross the street to avoid walking in front of a recruiting station!
Just like their daddies did…
Lee Weber
May 14th, 2012
11:02 am
Jay, while I think the DOD does at times make poor choices as to what weapons systems they buy, considering that national defense is one of the few things that the national government is actually supposed to do, 4% doesn’t seem unreasonable, especially since the economic multiplier number for defense spending is far greater than money spent by the government on anything (excluding infrastructure.)
For years our defense strategy was based on a perceived need to be able to fight two full scale wars and assumed that the Soviets would be backing at least one of our enemies with unlimited resources. Now we’re streched just trying to defeat two Third World enemies. Would seem we need a bit more power.
What other nations spend is not relevant and our close allies, with the exception of the British, are not only unlikely to come to aid in most cases, but are actually unable to do so now that the EU has started assigning specific duties to each nation’s armed forces (one of the Baltic states went understandably nuts last year when the EU tried to get them to limit their military activities to only mine removal.)
I don’t believe the Chinese numbers….they’re generated by the same folks that got the Soviet numbers wrong over and over.
Just Sayin
May 14th, 2012
11:02 am
Cut the military 50 % and fund free homosexual marriages for all that vote Obama.
USinUK - pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout
May 14th, 2012
11:02 am
Fred – “Considering how shabbily the British treated the US in WWI by trying to use our soldiers as their cannon fodder in the failed trench war and how crappy they were after the war”
you might want to look up the British losses in the battles BEFORE the US joined … particularly the Battle of the Somme …
UNCLE SAMANTHA
May 14th, 2012
11:02 am
Enter your comments here
juan
May 14th, 2012
11:02 am
Globalist won’t let us from there grasp want the USA to force there one world govt agenda by trying to scare us that we need a police state in the USA and a prison planet. Enough is enough time to take our country back from these corrupt bilderberg member so called elected officials.
USinUK - pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout
May 14th, 2012
11:03 am
“what you suggest is doing what the magical obama calls SAVING JOBS
europe needs growth”
which you DON’T GET when consumers are losing their jobs.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
11:03 am
Mary Elizabeth
Thank you. I will do so.
TaxPayer
“continues to put his entrenching tool to good use in digging his rabbit holes”
What’s the phrase? Oh yeah…
“I don’t care who you are. THASS FUNNY!”
barking frog
May 14th, 2012
11:04 am
JamVet
The National Nurses United
177,000 members strong
are reaching out to OWS
to unite in getting the
Robin Hood Tax passed
which is a one half of
1% tax on Wall Street
financial transactions.
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
11:04 am
Just Sayin – You may be joking about the free marriages but Joe Biden is in agreement with you as long as it brings in votes for Oblama.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
11:05 am
I’m going repost one off topic from EARLY this morning from the mothers day thread as I think many readers here will be interested:
Donald “Duck” Dunn has died. One of my favorite blues players of all time. The list of people he played with is just too damn long to list here. He had one of the best lines in the Blues Brothers movie, “Jake ain’t lying. We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.” And truly that band they assembled for the movie truly was. I found a clip of him playing with Elvis (and smoking away on that pipe lol) but I thought it more appropriate to show him with his life long childhood friend and fellow musician, Steve Cropper.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IM6MEb2xnLk
JB
May 14th, 2012
11:05 am
I’m in total shock this morning. Jerry Brown ( D) of California answer to the State 16 BILLION dollar short fall, announced that he needs to RAISE TAXES. Wow, new democratic game plan. NOT ONE DIME of cuts. After all, it’s HIS people he’s trying to help and the ones THAT DIDN’T vote for him need to pony up………on top of the highest state taxes out side of NY. I’m really shocked with his plan to solve this.
UNCLE SAMANTHA
May 14th, 2012
11:06 am
USinUK
living 70 years in the past is not healthy
we all know that europe depends on NATO for defense
and when we say NATO it is understood the U.S.
its time the U.S. lets each country pay the price for defense……
we have been stupid to let other countries use our arrogance against us and bankrupt ourselves to defend others
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
May 14th, 2012
11:06 am
Paul:
O.K. Try any of these you desire as you try took at yourself in the mirror.
“For those that will fight for it…FREEDOM …has a flavor the protected shall never know.”
“Americans fall into two classes: the protected and those few who will protect.”
“You know, the old “sheep, wolves and sheepdogs” thing.”
“Some talk the talk, some walk the walk”
““Every man thinks meanly of himself for not having been a soldier, or not having been at sea.” Samuel Johnson
Ooo Rah !
JB
May 14th, 2012
11:07 am
Be a good time to own a moving van company in California.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
11:08 am
JAMVET
That 11:01 was for you, not for Scout.
Mary Elizabeth
May 14th, 2012
11:09 am
Thanks, Paul. See the very end of the thread for the posts – last page.
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
11:09 am
I’m only for cutting the military if the Dems and Repubs agree that 100% of that cut goes to reduce th Fed deficit. I’m not for cutting the military to fund more give away programs.
Traniqua
May 14th, 2012
11:09 am
We overspend on defense because we have this ingrained notion that we must be the protector of the free world. We could shut down half our overseas military presence tomorrow and the world would be just as safe. Do we really still need 58 active military installations in Germany?
Don't Tread
May 14th, 2012
11:10 am
Cut defense spending to give more money to the “Dollars for Deadbeats” program. Spoken like a true blue Democrat.
And you can bet China’s spending on military programs is several times what they report it to be. Communists don’t have to worry about being truthful or dealing with voter backlash. They also have the financial advantage of stealing and/or reverse engineering our military technology instead of spending the money to develop it from scratch.
JB
May 14th, 2012
11:11 am
Oblama……………new money is to be spent, not reduce the debt. Not in their play book. It’s called getting out the VOTE.
xanuser
May 14th, 2012
11:12 am
sweet, we already spend 54% of every tax dollar on war…let make that 75%!
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
11:13 am
California voted for what they got in Jerry Brown….. another progressive (liberal) big spending socialist. We should not bail out California but that is what is about to happen…… and the timing is perfect – right before the Presidential election.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
11:13 am
“you might want to look up the British losses in the battles BEFORE the US joined … particularly the Battle of the Somme …”
What’s your point? Notr being a smart ass, I just don;t get it. The British and the French wanted to take American soldiers away from American command and toss them piecemeal into the lines as cannon fodder using tactics that had already proven to be worthless. The horrendous loss of life by the British, French AND Germans doesn’t alter that fact. Nor the fact that the British and French “High Commands” looked at ‘Black Jack” Pershing as if he were some interloping upstart.
This European arrogance was still prevalent at the start of WWII. Send us your soldiers to die like good colonials. Ask the Australians and New Zealanders how that worked out for THEM BTW, as a matter of fact ask the Ghurka’s how they have been treated by the UK for their centuries of faithful service……………….
The European arrogance continues today. If anything it’s worse now thta we have saved Europes ass twice……..
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
May 14th, 2012
11:13 am
Paul @ 11:01
You obviously have no concept for what it requires for a Ranger/Airborne Infantry unit to take an enemy airfield (or other area) far inland in a third world country from where the Marines could do it.
But then I didn’t expect you would.
barking frog
May 14th, 2012
11:14 am
The U.S. is invulnerable due
to Reagan’s star wars
program.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
11:17 am
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
11:09 am
I’m only for cutting the military if the Dems and Repubs agree that 100% of that cut goes to reduce th Fed deficit. I’m not for cutting the military to fund more give away programs.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Can we get a “hell yeah” on that one?
And all the people in the choir said, “Amen.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njcoJWqKEQw
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
11:18 am
“You obviously have no concept for what it requires for a Ranger/Airborne Infantry unit to take an enemy airfield (or other area) far inland in a third world country from where the Marines could do it.
But then I didn’t expect you would.”
He probably doesn’t it and nor do I, with that said you are kidding yourself if you think everyone who knows what it takes in reality and even conceptually is wanting increases to the military budget………. believe as you wish
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
11:18 am
By the way, cutting social program expenditures so that more money can be diverted to defense and more tax cuts for the wealthy does not reduce the debt or deficit. So, the Republican priorities of reducing the deficit while cutting taxes for the wealthy and increasing defense spending are a contradiction and just one of many that they are incapable of addressing honestly.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
11:18 am
Scout
11:13
“You obviously have no concept for what it requires for a Ranger/Airborne Infantry unit to take an enemy airfield (or other area) far inland in a third world country from where the Marines could do it.”
I thought military types were taught not to ASS-ume or to jump to conclusions?
Appears I was speaking of scale and you went off track with all or nothing.
One can have a core capability. What is not necessary is to take a bunch of headquarters types nearing retirement, with ranks of full colonel or general officer, and having them jump out of airplanes, not so they can lead the assault on the airfield waaay behind enemy lines, but just so they can collect jump pay.
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
11:20 am
Oblama would have been brave if he had stood up to the hissie fit thrown by the radicals on the left and the big money donations to his campaign over same sex marriage….. but he caved and my opinion is at an all time low.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
11:21 am
Scout 11;06
Sorry.
Never had a course where slogans substituted for critical analysis.
“Ooo Rah!”
Sounds like you may need more fiber in your diet….
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
11:21 am
You obviously have no concept for what it requires for a Ranger/Airborne Infantry unit to take an enemy airfield (or other area) far inland in a third world country from where the Marines could do it.
That one’s easy. President Obama just gives the order and it happens. I wonder if he says, Make it so? That would be so cool… and trekkie.
Lord Help Us
May 14th, 2012
11:21 am
Perspective, context and/or proportion do not appear to be in the GOP DNA…
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
11:22 am
1% tax on Wall Street
financial transactions.
Awesome, frog.
Quit penalizing labor.
And on the trillions of dollars in those transactions yearly, that represents hundreds of billions of dollars that Uncle Sam could use to, in theory, put to good use. (Schools, bridges, roads, etc.)
And could offset some of the money that we middle class schmucks send to him…
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
11:24 am
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
May 14th, 2012
11:13 am
Paul @ 11:01
You obviously have no concept for what it requires for a Ranger/Airborne Infantry unit to take an enemy airfield (or other area) far inland in a third world country from where the Marines could do it.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
And neither do you. Vertical envelopment was a wasteful idea from the onset. The Marines refused to accept it don’tcha know?
What is it, 40-50% casualties expected BEFORE they hit the ground?
Besides, when was the last REAL combat jump performed by an Airborne unit larger than a platoon there sport that WASN’T a Special ops mission? I can’t remember if the drops in Korea were combat drops but the ones in Viet Nam and after wards weren’t. LOL This last “combat drop” was at an airfield already secured………..
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
11:24 am
The best way to cut the deficit it to vote out those that want to expand the government and spending programs………… that means 100 % of incumbent Dems and 50% of the incumbent Repubs. TERM LIMITS.
lovelyliz
May 14th, 2012
11:25 am
The GOP and Blue Dogs aren’t interested in sparing the military, just the military contractors
Ivan Cohen
May 14th, 2012
11:26 am
GOP strategy on defense apparently are “earmarks and “pork”. See the Republican members of Congress falling all over themselves to cram military projects into their districts.
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
11:27 am
Sounds like you may need more fiber in your diet….
Whatever you do, don’t say BooYah within shouting distance of a Republican. It’s like a mating call.
Erwin's cat
May 14th, 2012
11:27 am
What a silly chart…to use it as a decision maker is even more silly
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
11:28 am
If you want to cut the deficit – take free botox out Congress’s healthcare plan – of course Nanny Pelosi would object!
GOP strategy on defense: Spend more, LOTS more – Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) « GoogleITV.com
May 14th, 2012
11:28 am
[...] GOP strategy on defense: Spend more, LOTS more – Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) Share/Bookmark Tagged as: boring-white, cutting-defense, elections, house, journal, [...]
Hootinanny Yum Yum
May 14th, 2012
11:30 am
Jay,
Could you add a chart detailing the percentage of domestic GNP spent on defense for the countries you list?
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
11:32 am
Who says not to health care for all? The health insurance industry, the drug companies and HMOs.
Who’s against a living wage? McDonalds, Burger King and Wal-Mart.
Who’s against fair taxation, and against taxing speculation? Wall Street and the big corporations.
Who’s opposed to cleaning up and minimizing pollution? The corporate polluters.
Who’s against world peace and waging peace? The Lockheed-Martins et al in the military-industrial complex.
(Hat tip Ralph Nader.)
Jay
May 14th, 2012
11:32 am
Erwin, why is that a silly chart? And why isn’t it useful information in making such decisions?
Peter
May 14th, 2012
11:33 am
Yup America spends so much on defense so Corporate America can sell around the world, and have it’s back covered. Of course all at tax payer expense.
Has republican ever figured out how to pay for the George Bush wars ? NO… cause deficits don’t matter.
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
11:33 am
What a silly chart…to use it as a decision maker is even more silly
Now there is a compelling counter-argument!
Hootinanny Yum Yum
May 14th, 2012
11:33 am
Rank Country Spending ($ Bn.) % of GDP World Share (%)
1 United States United States 711.0 4.7 41
2 China Chinay 143.0 2.0 8.2
3 Russia Russiay 71.9 3.9 4.1
4 United Kingdom United Kingdom 62.7 2.6 3.6
5 France France 62.5 2.3 3.6
6 Japan Japan 54.5 1.0 3.3
7 Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabiaz 48.2 10.4 3.0
8 India India 46.8 2.5 2.9
9 Germany Germanyy 46.7 1.3 2.5
10 Italy Italyy 37.0 1.8 2.3
11 Brazil Brazil 33.5 1.6 2.1
12 South Korea South Korea 27.6 2.8 1.7
13 Australia Australia 24.0 2.0 1.5
14 Canada Canaday 22.8 1.5 1.4
15 Turkey Turkeyy 17.5 2.4 1.1
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
11:33 am
Jay – Why don’t we just do away with the military all together? China will come in and you Dem’s will be in Heaven. Communism fort all!
Paul
May 14th, 2012
11:34 am
Fred
“Besides, when was the last REAL combat jump performed by an Airborne unit larger than a platoon there sport that WASN’T a Special ops mission”
Coulda been Grenada. Army did one just so they could say they still needed the capability.
TaxPayer
We’ve got a place here called MooYa. Them make great hamburgers.
Hootinanny
“Could you add a chart detailing the percentage of domestic GNP spent on defense for the countries you list?”
Do you want him to explain what the charts mean and what GDP is and stuff like that?
Okay, sorry…. I’ll just say ‘try google dot com’
too little time
May 14th, 2012
11:35 am
Frankly, the DOD budget is a debacle that many conservatives (including me) have a problem supporting. When GWB’s republican congress and WH spent like drunken sailors, it lost a LOT of support for the GOP. I believe that the GOP’s push for an even larger budget is both foolhardy and political suicide. We could easily cut the number of U.S military bases worldwide in half, and lop 30% off the Defense budget immediately.
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
11:38 am
“Broke Back Mountain II: Oblama Takes D.C.”
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
11:38 am
“Coulda been Grenada. Army did one just so they could say they still needed the capability.”
Wasn’t a combat jump Paul. The DZ (drop zone) had already been secured by ground troops. LOL The first elements of the Rangers that “dropped” in there landed in C130’s.
Oh and Paul? I AM a proud member of the paratroopers. But I know the reality of the situation. Helicopter insertion (air assault) is more realistic and less costly in terms of dead guys and equipment.
USinUK - pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout
May 14th, 2012
11:39 am
Fred – “What’s your point? Notr being a smart ass, I just don;t get it. The British and the French wanted to take American soldiers away from American command and toss them piecemeal into the lines as cannon fodder using tactics that had already proven to be worthless.”
the point is that they weren’t using the US as cannon fodder – that is the way they fought the war at the time – tunnels / trench / going over the top. They didn’t ask the US to do anything that they hadn’t done / weren’t doing themselves.
you can’t judge WWI by modern warfare standards as it was the turning point
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
11:39 am
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
11:38 am
“Broke Back Mountain II: Oblama Takes D.C.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
When are you going to Washington? Take some pics while you are there, will ya?
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
11:40 am
Oblama, your sarcasm drips of desperation. Can you offer something substantive?
I’ve noticed that none in the Parties of Permanent War have dared broach the subject of how the DoD welfare state makes huge profits every year by selling military hardware directly to foreign dictators around the globe.
Though that just happens to be counter to the interests of our own country…
Doggone/GA
May 14th, 2012
11:41 am
Oblama
“Oblama would have been brave if he had stood up to the hissie fit thrown by the radicals on the left ”
I’m at a loss to understand why you have to pull yourself down so much.
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
11:42 am
Are any of you Dems for cutting any thing in addition to the military? For example would you consider reducing the size of the Fed government employees?
John Birch
May 14th, 2012
11:42 am
Typical lib, Obama’s disastrous economic policies are coming home to roost (see market down again) so let’s slam the alleged GOP defense spending. Congress controls spending so until they pass a budget this is all just theoretical smoke. If O would do something positive about the economy for a change there would be lots more tax revenue to pay for that defense spending.
Finn McCool (The System Isn't Broken; It's Fixed ~ from an Occupy sign)
May 14th, 2012
11:42 am
Sorry to hijack, but we are sooooo screwed:
A new report has shocking findings about the connection between corporate funding and agricultural research
http://www.salon.com/2012/05/14/monsantos_college_strangehold/
ByteMe - Political thug
May 14th, 2012
11:42 am
When GWB’s republican congress and WH spent like drunken sailors, it lost a LOT of support for the GOP
And where did they go?
Paul
May 14th, 2012
11:43 am
Fred
That’s a great example.
Says a lot when a person who was part of an organization or had a certain skill set can say ‘it was good at the time, but now maybe it’s not worth spending on when we have new defense realities.”
Army fondly held onto their horse units for a long time, as I recall.
Air Force is still grudgingly being pulled along to field aircraft that don’t need a cockpit.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
11:43 am
They didn’t ask the US to do anything that they hadn’t done / weren’t doing themselves.
Yes they did. They were asking the Americans to disolve themselves as military units and subjugate themselves to failed tactics.
You are arguing the wrong person when it comes to military history and tactics
I grew up on them and have studied them ever since. I go back to when Cain first lured Abel into a “neutral” field and blitz attacked him. 
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
11:44 am
Dog Pound – It’s my opinion – you don’t have to like it.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
11:45 am
Oblama
“Are any of you Dems for cutting any thing in addition to the military?”
Is every day a new day for you?
How many times are you going to read the answer “Pres Obama proposed cuts in Social Security and Medicare” before you stop asking?
Finn McCool (The System Isn't Broken; It's Fixed ~ from an Occupy sign)
May 14th, 2012
11:45 am
What Cons don’t seem to grasp is that Republicans are the party of big government. Look at the drop in public service employment under Obama compared to W or even Reagan.
Doggone/GA
May 14th, 2012
11:46 am
“Dog Pound – It’s my opinion – you don’t have to like it”
Well, if you have so little confidence in yourself that you have to constantly tear yourself down…maybe you should seek professional help. Such low self-esteem is not good for you.
Doggone/GA
May 14th, 2012
11:47 am
“How many times are you going to read the answer “Pres Obama proposed cuts in Social Security and Medicare” before you stop asking?”
What makes you think he read it at all? I suspect he stops reading after “Pres Obama”
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
May 14th, 2012
11:47 am
Fred, Fred, Fred:
Good grief !
Vertical envelopment (by helicopter or Osprey) has long been an operational method for the Marines.
What planet are you on?
Impotent Rage Against the Obama Machine
May 14th, 2012
11:47 am
Dee-fense, aint that one of them gubmint programs?
Well, I’d be a hippycrit if I want mo mo mo of that, wouldn’t I?
Everything I said before that about not needin gubmint
would just be a lie wouldn’t it?
We ought to return Dee-fense to local militia control, anyway.
ByteMe - Political thug
May 14th, 2012
11:47 am
Dog Pound – It’s my opinion – you don’t have to like it.
And somehow that means we’re not supposed to challenge your opinion as being ridiculous? You seriously think that??
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
11:47 am
Paul, where it Air Force is concerned, it gets even worse. They are requiring fully trained pilots to “fly” drones. Although it’s been proven that they are no harder to fly than a video game (ie 12 year old boys would have no problem) they are requiring Commissioned officers who have to go through the whole flight training routine to “pilot’ them.
Yeah, pilots really are becoming obsolete though dammit. My dad was an AF pilot his whole adult life as are my nephew AND my nieces husband (lol he flies a B52, a plane that is more than twice his age).
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
11:48 am
Fifty years after World War II, tens of thousands of our troops are still in Europe and East Asia, defending prosperous nation allies who are fully capable of defending themselves against non-existent enemies.
Yet, useless massive weapons systems remain on the drawing boards to further mortgage our fiscal future and drain money and talent from long overdue civilian projects.
Like I said back in the 1980’s – regarding those guys at Raytheon, General Dynamics, et al – get a real job…
zeke
May 14th, 2012
11:48 am
The comments of some of you show true ignorance of real world and Constitutional reality! Defense is one of only a handful of duties granted to the federal government. And defense is the only thing that will keep the USA and it’s survival sound. So we spend about 4% of GDP on defense and more than 6 or 8 others combined, SO WHAT! If we do not have the capability to defeat every other country and combinations of two or more countries, we will not survive as a country. We are reducing our manpower and equipment as Russia, China and others are headlong into trying to “catch up” to our great technology. Sure they spend less, so could we if it wasn’t for unions, environmental anarchist and others intent on pressing their agendas regardless of the consequences! We should maintain a combined force of 1.2 to 1.5 million ACTIVE military personnel at all times. We should spend all necessary funds to insure we will always have the dominant equipment and technology! And why are you so worried that the government spends about 4% of GDP on defense, a constitutional duty?? Why do you not complain about the 25% to 50% that is spent on welfare and redistribution of wealth, NOT A CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY OF GOVERNMENT???
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
May 14th, 2012
11:48 am
Fly-On-The-Wall and Paul:
As usual …….. you choose to side with senior military “experts” who agree with your postion. There are just as many senior military “experts” who do not ………….. usually those with combat experience as well.
“War is Sweet for the Inexperienced”.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
May 14th, 2012
11:49 am
zeke:
Thank you.
JKL2
May 14th, 2012
11:49 am
JB- Jerry Brown ( D) of California answer to the State 16 BILLION dollar short fall, announced that he needs to RAISE TAXES
Didn’t see that one coming. It’s only a matter of time until obama puts him on the payroll…
ByteMe - Political thug
May 14th, 2012
11:49 am
Vertical envelopment (by helicopter or Osprey) has long been an operational method for the Marines.
I want to get them all IronMan suits then. How cool would that be?
Doggone/GA
May 14th, 2012
11:50 am
“So we spend about 4% of GDP on defense and more than 6 or 8 others combined, SO WHAT! If ”
If we don’t spend 4% now, and we are safe…why would we need to spend MORE?
ByteMe - Political thug
May 14th, 2012
11:51 am
Thank you zeke, I think I was able to fill out my Wingnut bingo card with your rant.
Lord Help Us
May 14th, 2012
11:51 am
Military spending allowed us to arm and train OBL and the Taliban in the 80’s, it allowed us to arm and train Saddam Hussein, it allowed us to create a huge arsenal of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons (which we now spend billions to store, dismantle and incinerate…), allowed us to invade and occupy Iraq and Afghanistan for ten years…etc., etc., etc…
Perhaps less military spending would make us SAFER…
Erwin's cat
May 14th, 2012
11:54 am
Jay it’s silly because it’s like comparing the expenditures of a family of 4 to that of a school…The chart offers no context…Zero
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
11:54 am
Scout: You are so full of crap. The only “vertical envelopment” done by the Marines is done by Recon, IE small units, just like I SAID.
The Marine Parachute Battalion NEVER made a jump in WWII and were disbanded. At Guadal Canal they suffered over 40% casualties in an AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT.
There is only ONE place to get your wings and that is at Fort Benning. I went through jump school with about 10-12 Marines from recon. Cool dudes. Surprisingly enough that all 10-12 were not only Marines and could read and write, but also they knew both their mother AND their dad and their parents were married.
Like I said, unusual Marines………..
Hootinanny Yum Yum
May 14th, 2012
11:55 am
Here’s a ranking of the top 15 countries based on percentage of GDP spent on defense spending in 2011. It’s unrealistic to compare raw numbers. The money spent to clothe, feed, train and maintain the soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines alone must be significantly different.
We’ve maintained an all volunteer force since Vietnam. We take much, much better care of our service members, their families and retired military members than other countries. My Air Force retirement payment sent from Defense Finance and Accounting Services (DFAS) which provides payment services to the United States Department of Defense.
To look simply at raw numbers is useless. Unless your intent is to simply mislead and incite the simple minded.
Rank Country Spending ($ Bn.) % of GDP
1 United States $711.0 4.7
2 China $143.0 2.0
3 Russia $ 71.9 3.9
4 United Kingdom $ 62.7 2.6
5 France $ 62.5 2.3
6 Japan $ 54.5 1.0
7 Saudi Arabia $ 48.2 10.4
8 India $ 46.8 2.5
9 Germany $ 46.7 1.3
10 Italy $ 37.0 1.8
11 Brazil $ 33.5 1.6
12 South Korea $ 27.6 2.8
13 Australia $ 24.0 2.0
14 Canada $ 22.8 1.5
15 Turkey $ 17.5 2.4
ByteMe - Political thug
May 14th, 2012
11:56 am
Jay it’s silly because it’s like comparing the expenditures of a family of 4 to that of a school…The chart offers no context…Zero
Only if the family of four and the school were performing the EXACT SAME FUNCTION for that money. Since they’re not… your comparison is stilly.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
11:56 am
Oh and Scout, come on. To take the position that there is no place that military spending can be cut is just ridiculous. ALL Gov’t programs are fraught with waste and can be cut.
ByteMe - Political thug
May 14th, 2012
11:57 am
Here’s a ranking of the top 15 countries based on percentage of GDP spent on defense spending in 2011
How about per-capita instead, since we’re supposed to be protecting people and not business, right? Right? No??!?
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
May 14th, 2012
11:57 am
Hootinanny Yum Yum ;
Thank you ……………. Jay is good a “raw numbers” that are meaningless.
He does it on the “gun issue” all the time.
Perry the Platypus
May 14th, 2012
11:58 am
Uh, when you are the main military defense for most of the free world, you require a big budget…
You know why Germany doesn’t have a big budget on defense? They are not allowed to. And if the get into a jam, guess who’s number they have on speed dial, US.
With the exception if China and Russia, those other countries are all dependent on us for their military support. I don’t like it, you don’t like it, but that’s the reality and there is next to nothing we can do about it.
Further, if you think you have the actual real number China spent on it’s military, you have to be 60 times 6 times stupid, they won’t tell you, they tell you what you want to hear.
You lot are so friggin’ niave it’s f***ing frightening really.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
May 14th, 2012
11:58 am
Fred:
I “said” via helicopter or Osprey knucklehead !
You need to improve your reading comprehension.
Hootinanny Yum Yum
May 14th, 2012
11:59 am
Here’s the link to GDP military expenditures.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
11:59 am
Fred
Thank you for your service
Hope you didn’t hang out on Victory Drive for any extensive period of time
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
May 14th, 2012
11:59 am
O.K.
I’m going out on patrol now so you civilians can sleep well and in peace tonight.
Be nice to each other.
“Air Raid Pearl Harbor …. This Is No Drill”
barking frog
May 14th, 2012
11:59 am
Paul, Fred
USAF is fighting for existence. long and
short range missiles and
drones can be used by the army and navy. they are trying to and may have taken back
the space mission from
NASA.
Perry the Platypus
May 14th, 2012
12:00 pm
Japan? Also, not allow to spend a lot on their military…It was part of the whole “Unconditional Surrender” thingy… You know, that little skirmish in the ’40’s?
Mighty Righty
May 14th, 2012
12:02 pm
I remember when the liberal Democrat party didn’t want to spend money to develop a missile defense system. They said we couldn’t shoot a bullet with a bullet. They made fun of President Regan and the Republicans and called the idea “star Wars.” They called it a waste of money similar to their present attitude toward defending this country. They lined up their late night comedians to disparge the idea. While making fun of the idea of shooting a bullet with a bullet, they simutaneously claimed it would escalate the cold war. Thank God for the Republicans and Ronald Reagan who did the right thing in spite of pyscho babble from the left. Well, that system works. That system that the Democrats so opposed kept us out of world war 3. That system protected Israel from missile attack from Iraq. That system protects Europe today. That system protects the United States today from missile attack by North Korea, China, Iran, and a hand full of former Russian states. When money is spent on defense it is like spending money on your personal health. It is like buying life insurance or health insurance. You hope you don’t need it, but if you do there is no substitute. It is always good investment to bet on your own safety. The schizophrenic libs waould rather use the money to build mass treansit that starts nowhere, ends nowhere and caries no one. Or they would give the money to their friends and donors at places like Solyndra, or Acorn or any other not wise investment that will have no return.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
12:03 pm
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
May 14th, 2012
11:58 am
Fred:
I “said” via helicopter or Osprey knucklehead !
You need to improve your reading comprehension.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You know what Scout? I’m using the wrong term lol. They have “expanded” vertical envelopment to include “air mobile” and “air assault.” I was speaking only in terms of parachuting.
LOL we are arguing the same thing. My bad. And Yes you are proving my point, we don’t need parachute divisions since virtually the whole military fighting force (excepting Armor units) is Air Mobile.
251 more days
May 14th, 2012
12:03 pm
Why not just cut all spending/budgets, etc, by 10%.
dcb
May 14th, 2012
12:04 pm
On the other hand, increasing the budget to handle 100,000 more jobs has its advantages – especially for the younger generation. This isn’t all a matter of hawk vs dove mentality. I for one am obliging to Bush for assuring those of us on U.S. soil that there would be no more 9-11’s. And if doing that cost the amount that we now are handing out to illegal immigrants and increase the workforce by 100,000, I’m all for it.
251 more days
May 14th, 2012
12:05 pm
If we need more military to police the world, I suggest we make those countries we are policing pay their part
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
12:06 pm
Not Part of Romney’s Flock: Hope you didn’t hang out on Victory Drive for any extensive period of time
Actually no, I didn’t lol. Never went there once. Had a sister here in Atlanta so when we got weekends off, we cruised up here and hit Buckhead (back then Buckhead was still a party spot lol).
Oh wait, I think Ranger Joes is on Victory Drive so I went there once just to check it out. But that’s all.
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
12:06 pm
A wasteful, bloated, corruption-riddled defense is a weak defense.
It takes away taxpayer money that can go to the necessities of the American people.
Hootinanny Yum Yum
May 14th, 2012
12:07 pm
I’d honestly like to see Romney select Condi Rice as his running mate.
She just helped complete a study that identified failures in the US educational system as a strategic threat to our national defense.
The ability of so many Americans to be led and influenced by progressives in Hollywood, the mainstream media and institutions of higher learning are indicators of how most Americans have lost the ability to think critically about issues today.
Hootinanny Yum Yum
May 14th, 2012
12:08 pm
Make that “national security”, not national defense.
weetamoe
May 14th, 2012
12:08 pm
The GOP is not *welching * on the debt limit deal. They have just chosen the one of two options in the deal that their dem counterparts oppose.. The US has a commitment to those 5 allies mentioned unless Obama *welches* on the deal as he has done in other deals (campaign financing deal with McCain for one.) I hope most allies are not snickering at Obama behind his back as the scandinavians and low country folks are. That punch above their weight thing is still a source of great amusement.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
12:08 pm
251: Two great suggestions (10% and naking nations pay). You and Oblama have both put out some good ideas. Shame the politicians you support won;t jump on board with you.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
12:09 pm
barking frog
Another true point about government institutions – when the need that created them is overcome by events, find a new need.
Fred
Was reading a military blog. Active duty pilots are all in a huff because the drone guys get flight pay AND the bonus pay that the Air Force put in in the early 90s to keep pilots from getting out and going to the airlines.
In line with barking frog’s observation, after it became painfully evident there was no real civilian market for the pilots to go to, the Air Force called it a ‘force management program’ and continued the $100,000 multiyear contracts.
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
12:10 pm
Fred
Just kidding
Grew up in a military household and spent time in the area. That’s why I know about Victory Drive
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
12:10 pm
The ability of so many Americans to be led and influenced by
progressives in Hollywood, the mainstream media and institutions of higher learningright wing nut case talk radio and FOX are indicators of how most Americans have lost the ability to think critically about issues today.There I fixed that for you.
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
12:12 pm
Rice was a horrifically bad (read deadly and incompetent) National Security Advisor and SecState.
Keep her the hell away from Washington! Far away!
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
12:13 pm
My lawn mower is like a GOP budget plan. It won’t work……..
Perry the Platypus
May 14th, 2012
12:13 pm
Hey has anybody noticed? Gitmo is still open….
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
12:14 pm
You would think that the 11:24 poster who alleges to be a former halo qualified member of the Army Airborne would know something about the 173rd. and other combat jumps in Vietnam and other wars since World War II
Hootinanny Yum Yum
May 14th, 2012
12:16 pm
Fred,
This is for you… http://twitpic.com/9jyrvh
Donovan
May 14th, 2012
12:17 pm
And this is coming from the lips of a Democrat who supports the gross spending habits of his party and supports a Senate that WILL NOT pass a budget in the last 3 years.
Yeah, let’s go after the military as a source of comparative discourse. Disgusting and typical of low character liberal ideology.
Kind of like…na, na, nee, na, na.
Is that the best you’ve got? Obviously.
Sounds as dumb as the Romney dog vacation attack and the Romney school hair cutting thing.
Pleasssse! I guess since you guys can’t run on Obama’s record you all have to go the low road way.
MrLiberty
May 14th, 2012
12:17 pm
The GOP does not want to spend more on Defense. They want to spend more on OFFENSE and EMPIRE. There is nothing going on in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Lybia or any of the unnamed war regions that has ANYTHING to do with defending this country. Folks would like to think that they are dying or their children are dying or being put in harms way for the purpose of defending this country but they are not. They are over there to fund the military industrial complex and to provoke more hatred for americans to justify the surveillance/police state here at home.
Sorry for interrupting your fantasies with the harsh reality of the truth.
Only a handful of folks in washington actually talk about and care about defense. Ron Paul is one of the most vocal and well-known. He cares about actually defending this country (and our freedoms) and so can reasonably talk about massive cuts to military spending and still achieve a sound foundation for defending this country, not the profits of the military/industrial/surveillance state.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
12:19 pm
I do Del. The 173rd jumped into an area far from any enemy troops. There other “combat jumps” in Viet Nam were just like the sham jumps in Grenada and Iraq.
As usual Del you are blowing smoke out of your ass because you have no real clue as to what you are talking about.
Goldie
May 14th, 2012
12:20 pm
The Dept. of Defense is the “Jobs program” for the GOP — they have nothing else to offer, unless you work for a military contractor making BIG PROFITS off the taxpayers of America!
Joe Hussein Mama
May 14th, 2012
12:20 pm
Righty — “I remember when the liberal Democrat party didn’t want to spend money to develop a missile defense system. They said we couldn’t shoot a bullet with a bullet. They made fun of President Regan and the Republicans and called the idea “star Wars.” They called it a waste of money similar to their present attitude toward defending this country. They lined up their late night comedians to disparge the idea. While making fun of the idea of shooting a bullet with a bullet, they simutaneously claimed it would escalate the cold war. Thank God for the Republicans and Ronald Reagan who did the right thing in spite of pyscho babble from the left. Well, that system works. That system that the Democrats so opposed kept us out of world war 3. That system protected Israel from missile attack from Iraq. That system protects Europe today. That system protects the United States today from missile attack by North Korea, China, Iran, and a hand full of former Russian states.”
Uh, no.
You are confusing President Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative, which was intended to defend against ICBMs, with ground-based defense missile batteries like PATRIOT, which are intended to defend against surface-to-surface weapons like SCUDs.
The difference between the SDI concept (as originally articulated) and a PATRIOT battery is like the difference between a Lamborghini and a child’s Radio Flyer wagon.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
12:20 pm
Hootinanny Yum Yum
May 14th, 2012
12:16 pm
Fred,
This is for you… http://twitpic.com/9jyrvh
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What the hell is that baseless attack about Hootinany? It is senseless and is not germane to anything I have posted.
251 more days
May 14th, 2012
12:21 pm
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
12:08 pm
251: Two great suggestions (10% and naking nations pay). You and Oblama have both put out some good ideas. Shame the politicians you support won;t jump on board with you
Fred,
It is a shame all politicians will not jump on board
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
12:23 pm
Sure Fred…a few more and you’re probably going to tell us that you were there. Pathetic little fella looking for friends on a lefty blog. Probably because he can’t find them anywhere else.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
12:23 pm
“The difference between the SDI concept (as originally articulated) and a PATRIOT battery is like the difference between a Lamborghini and a child’s Radio Flyer wagon.”
Wow. No kidding right? But it’s too technical for many of the minds here lol. Clancy did one hell of a job simplifying it though in a couple of his books.
I forget where I read it, but Clancy is still considered one of the most knowledgable people in the world on ALL the weapons systems in the world, from the M-16 rifle to the defunct Satr Wars and anything in between.
Lord Help Us
May 14th, 2012
12:24 pm
‘It is senseless and is not germane to anything I have posted.’
Thanks to Sheriff Buford T. Justice, I get a nice chuckle every time I see that word (germane)…
ken
May 14th, 2012
12:24 pm
Are we winning the war on poverty ? How many billions have been spent on on that war ? Waste is everywhere in the Govt.
Hootinanny Yum Yum
May 14th, 2012
12:24 pm
Dang Fred. Lighten up Francis. You took liberties with my post; I thought I’d just try to lighten the mood a little.
Can’t we all just be friends….
Craig Quirolo
May 14th, 2012
12:24 pm
In the near future we will be so preoccupied with defending the United States against Pandemic health threats that the needless killing of humans with guns and bombs will be a thing of the past.
getalife
May 14th, 2012
12:25 pm
drudge ran a NYPost hit piece on rev. wright that suddenly disappeared.
What happened?
It was a lie.
Anyhoo, the gop are doing down.
DannyX
May 14th, 2012
12:26 pm
“The ability of so many Americans to be led and influenced by progressives in Hollywood, the mainstream media and institutions of higher learning are indicators of how most Americans have lost the ability to think critically about issues today.”
Speaking of “progressive Hollywood” did you watch “The Family Guy” episode that ridiculed Tea Party. You know “The Family Guy” tv program on conservative Murdoch’s Fox network.
Conservatives have their own tv network and choose not to air “The Family Values Guy.” Then we still hear them whine about “progressive Hollywood.”
Btw, any reason Murdoch doesn’t air a nightly newscast to counter “liberal” NBC, ABC, and CBS? He already has the infrastructure with his Fox News channel. I guess conservatives just like to whine about the evil liberal media.
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
12:27 pm
Hoot, careful he cry’s easily.
Jay
May 14th, 2012
12:27 pm
The missile defense system is an expensive fraud.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
12:27 pm
weetamoe
“The GOP is not *welching * on the debt limit deal. They have just chosen the one of two options in the deal that their dem counterparts oppose..”
I take it you have a link you’ll share with us that shows sequestration was not sequestration, but was just one of a couple of options?
Oliver
May 14th, 2012
12:28 pm
The problem with tying our defense spending to our GDP, as a percentage thereof. Is that it no longer has the relevance it once did. An example “A family of 4 earns $50,000 a year and spends $5,000 on food – 10 % of their GDP.”
Most of our GDP is comprised of financial transactions, not making stuff. This “imaginary” product is not taxed the way actual product is, it’s taxed far far less per dollar. So there’s even less of those tax dollars to go toward security for the oil industry.
USMC
May 14th, 2012
12:28 pm
DemocRat strategy on defense: Let the U.S. be the whipping boy for Russia and China.
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
12:28 pm
Yeah, let’s go after the military as a source of comparative discourse.
Another fact-filled, highly informative and substantive counter-argument.
251 more days
May 14th, 2012
12:28 pm
I like the idea from Frog and Jam, the !% on WS transactions.
I assume there would need to be some exceptions so someones retirement fund is not effected. .
I am not for the plan as proposed by Pelosi, where all 401’s are taxed.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
12:29 pm
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
12:23 pm
Sure Fred…a few more and you’re probably going to tell us that you were there. Pathetic little fella looking for friends on a lefty blog. Probably because he can’t find them anywhere else.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Well it’s after 12 so Del is at the bottle again posting lies and bitter attacks.
Nope Del, I wasn’t in those jumps, but I knew plenty of folks that were. They would laugh about them and the combat stars on their jump wings they got for them.
They were for “political” reasons, to make the 82nd seem relevant and to try to continue the lie that a huge parachute division is needed, feasable, and serves a purpose, becasue you see, Delly, it’s not and it doesn’t.
There isn’t a damn thing the 82nd does through their air drop s(other than suffer 40-50% casualties) that the Marines can’t do with their helicopters.
If you would quit arguing just to be a bitter old man, you would admit that you are making no sense. A helicopter assault also has the advantage of rockets and mini guns to suppress the enemy on the LZ (landing zone) that parachuters don’t have to secure a DZ (drop zone.)
But you go on with your rage filled nonsensical tirades lol. They can be amusing on a slow day………
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
12:31 pm
LOL Hootinany, that WAS your post. My bad. Good comeback. I was thinking it was someone elses.
Turnabout is fair play sir, my apologies for missing it.
BTW that was a hilarious catch on the breast feeding mommy. Any idea who did it?
Joe Hussein Mama
May 14th, 2012
12:33 pm
Fred — “Wow. No kidding right? But it’s too technical for many of the minds here lol. Clancy did one hell of a job simplifying it though in a couple of his books.”
No argument there. Clancy has a real talent for breaking advanced military concepts down into ‘everyman’ language; I’ve long thought that if the DoD could hire Clancy to write and produce training materials for the uniformed services, he’d be a force multiplier all by himself — because guys would understand the concepts they were being trained on better and faster.
SDI really was ahead of its time; some of its concepts have found other uses in the space program, but none of the weapons concepts it spawned ever found their way past the testing stages. I do remember reading somewhere that the “Brilliant Pebbles” SDI concept got used as part of the CLEMENTINE mission, but that was for scientific research, not defense research.
getalife
May 14th, 2012
12:33 pm
Even the cons are not scared of aq anymore so willard tried to make Russia the new boogeyman.
Laughable and ignorant.
251 more days
May 14th, 2012
12:34 pm
getalife
May 11th, 2012
9:00 pm
We don’t have funerals.
We have parties.
Here is my song:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_5kv8QeBBc
Getalife, I just wanted to say…………………..great choice
Hootinanny Yum Yum
May 14th, 2012
12:36 pm
No idea Fred.
It’s been fun, but my meds are wearing off and guys in the white coats are rolling me back to my room.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
12:36 pm
“Sure Fred…a few more and you’re probably going to tell us that you were there. Pathetic little fella looking for friends on a lefty blog. Probably because he can’t find them anywhere else.”
Aw, c’mon, Scout. All we hear from you is “I was in a foxhole so I Was There. and have Special Knowledge….”
DawgDad
May 14th, 2012
12:37 pm
Jay’s column just doesn’t pass the smell test on a number of counts. Let’s see, the Democrats controlled the Administration and BOTH houses of Congress for two full years and did WHAT? And comparing US defense spending with Germany and France (and any other NATO ally) is like comparing responsible parents with their self-indulgent kids.
Let’s close some bases and terminate some contracts in blue states and see who wants to cut defense spending.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
12:37 pm
Sorry, Scout
That “I was inna foxhole” post was for Recon.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
12:40 pm
JHM: In one of his later books Clancy also addresses the problems of SDI that they were unable to over come. From what I can understand, they got the aiming down perfectly, but they could get a mirror “strong” enough to hold all the energy and they would get “warbling” of the beam as it passed through the atmosphere not one concentrated beam so it would melt or “slag’ the target rather than blast it.
All in all it seemed like they have the theory and concept down, we just lack the ability to engineer the parts. Kind of like DeVinci and many of his inventions lol.
Aquagirl
May 14th, 2012
12:42 pm
Nope Del, I wasn’t in those jumps, but I knew plenty of folks that were. They would laugh about them and the combat stars on their jump wings they got for them.
They were for “political” reasons
I agree. Guys were begging to jump into Grenada and Panama and were accommodated. Poor Scout lives in a world where the airborne hang around the barracks talking about his every fart and tittle. Truth is, soldiers don’t like to remember wars where we lost. Nobody does. Just ask the Vets of Afghanistan and Iraq. We’ve forgotten about those while we were still there.
curious
May 14th, 2012
12:42 pm
Who in this country hates America?
The real answer might be surprising.
People not willing to serve in any shape, form, or fashion.
People/corporations putting personal gain over National Security. In WW2, corporations weren’t allowed to gouge the government; is that the case now?
Everybody served even if it was Civil Defense.
Why didn’t Romney serve (he was about the right age)? What about his sons? Ask someone missing a limb, disfigured, or mentally overstressed if they would have liked to have had the physical support of the non-serving. Ask the families of those that returned in a body bag.
Many people talk about having “skin in the game”. Maybe if they truly loved this country, they would get in the game.
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
12:43 pm
When the Dems agree to cut programs they voted for then we will be getting somewhere. Jay knows the military is going to be cut. The Repubs have already agreed that the military needs to be cut. When are the Dems going to get to the rest of the spending problem we have – their agenda.
getalife
May 14th, 2012
12:45 pm
Thanks 251 days to go.
I did repent so hope that helped.
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
12:47 pm
I spent some time in a foxhole in England.
(And I may get a yellow card for that one!)
Obama is over
May 14th, 2012
12:47 pm
Clearly the answer is to get Jamvet and Getalife to swap out their Depends for underwear bombs. It would be cost effective and a great way to achieve their goal of speading their negative crap to as many people as possible. Never positive. Never any new ideas about anything or any potential solutions. Only half-truths, falsehoods, and the blame game….It must get really old to be in a bad mood everyday.
ragnar danneskjold
May 14th, 2012
12:49 pm
Good news – sounds like a democrat administration will not end with the usual gutting of military spending. Bad news – a democrat administration will end with more than the usual increase in bureaucrat spending.
Pass the Cheesy Grits Please
May 14th, 2012
12:50 pm
How paranoid do we have to be? It’s ridiculous. We can’t give health care to our people, but we can spend billions on a high powered state of the art hovertank laser cannon to protect us from an imaginary foe.
Joe Hussein Mama
May 14th, 2012
12:50 pm
Fred — “All in all it seemed like they have the theory and concept down, we just lack the ability to engineer the parts. Kind of like DeVinci and many of his inventions lol.”
Clearly, we just need to develop Star Trek replicators first!
getalife
May 14th, 2012
12:50 pm
I think the debt talks are over and the big cuts at the end of the year will happen.
You are going to have to man up cons because the military will be drastically cut.
China and Mexico are working on socialized health care and we should too after this health care plan fails..
This means no money for war and that is a good thing.
jm
May 14th, 2012
12:51 pm
analysis not done on a PPP (purchasing power basis)
if so, you would see china’s spending is much much higher
Joe Hussein Mama
May 14th, 2012
12:52 pm
O is O — “Never positive. Never any new ideas about anything or any potential solutions. Only half-truths, falsehoods, and the blame game….It must get really old to be in a bad mood everyday.”
Dude, speak for yourself.
Rightwing Troll
May 14th, 2012
12:52 pm
It’s not OUR fault someone put OUR oil in the ground in the Middle East…
getalife
May 14th, 2012
12:53 pm
odrana,
Boxer and briefs but thanks for asking.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
12:54 pm
ragnar
“Good news – sounds like a democrat administration will not end with the usual gutting of military spending. Bad news – a democrat administration will end with more than the usual increase in bureaucrat spending.”
The Defense Dept and military are part of the bureaucracy -
That Black Guy, now and FOREVER!!
May 14th, 2012
12:55 pm
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
12:06 pm
Not Part of Romney’s Flock: Hope you didn’t hang out on Victory Drive for any extensive period of time
Actually no, I didn’t lol. Never went there once. Had a sister here in Atlanta so when we got weekends off, we cruised up here and hit Buckhead (back then Buckhead was still a party spot lol).
Oh wait, I think Ranger Joes is on Victory Drive so I went there once just to check it out. But that’s all.
___________________________________________________________________________
I sure did!
I was assigned to 34th Med. (used to be on Sand Hill, but was moved to the main post)
We provided med support for the Airborne Training School.
They used our mess hall at the 498th.
barking frog
May 14th, 2012
12:56 pm
JamVet
Red fox?
Erwin's cat
May 14th, 2012
12:56 pm
ByteMe, if you think the French and Brazilian Military are doing the exact same function as the US military then you are more naive than “pass the cheesy grits please”
Pass the Cheesy Grits Please
May 14th, 2012
12:56 pm
This means no money for war and that is a good thing.
We didn’t have any money for the Iraq war either but that didn’t stop them.
Deficits didn’t matter back then. They only matter when a Democrat is in office.
USinUK - pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout
May 14th, 2012
12:56 pm
getalife … you’ve got a Boxer in your briefs???
sounds crowded!
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
12:57 pm
That Black Guy
That was your picture on the wall at the Traffic Light Lounge?
Rightwing Troll
May 14th, 2012
12:57 pm
“Clearly, we just need to develop Star Trek replicators first! ”
Or transmorgifiers…
getalife
May 14th, 2012
12:59 pm
Pass,
Good point and now the gop want everything paid for so putting wars on the credit card is suddenly over.
Of course if they win, it is all a big etch and sketch bs.
getalife
May 14th, 2012
1:01 pm
“Boxer in your briefs???”
If you want to call it that , it is fine with me
Lord Help Us
May 14th, 2012
1:01 pm
‘Clearly, we just need to develop Star Trek replicators first!’
No, no, no…all we need is a Heisenberg Compensator…
That would help with the calculation that says we can cut taxes, raise defense spending AND lower the deficit…
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
1:07 pm
JHM, he’s making progress, though
It was his second post today.
Usually it is his first where he obsesses over me and/or someone else.
“The gutting of military spending.”
Today’s nonsensical entry from the Republican Dictionary of Made Up Definitions.
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
1:09 pm
You gotta love the experience that the once-experienced trench diggers have to offer up. The next time I need a trench dug, that is.
That Black Guy, now and FOREVER!!
May 14th, 2012
1:09 pm
getalife
May 14th, 2012
12:53 pm
odrana,
Boxer and briefs but thanks for asking.
_________________________________________________________
Some how I picture you in “tightie whitey’s” with brown stains in the front and yellow stains in the back.
Michael
May 14th, 2012
1:10 pm
It’s interesting that Obama has a higher margin of victory with Iraq/Afgan vets than with the population as a whole. Also, the Repubs have given away their typical advantage with voters concerning defense. Now, more voters trust Dems with defense than trust Repubs. Might have something to do with the $3 trillion mistake in Iraq.
That Black Guy, now and FOREVER!!
May 14th, 2012
1:11 pm
Not Part of Romney’s Flock
May 14th, 2012
12:57 pm
That Black Guy
That was your picture on the wall at the Traffic Light Lounge?
_____________________________________________________
I’ll never tell…
getalife
May 14th, 2012
1:13 pm
tbg,
I have to wear briefs when I wear shorts or my “boxer” dangles out.
Hootinanny Yum Yum
May 14th, 2012
1:15 pm
Interesting indeed, Michael.
Could you provide sources for your contention that:
1. “…Obama has a higher margin of victory with Iraq/Afghan vets than with the population as a whole.”
2. “…more voters trust Dems with defense with defense than trust Repubs.”
As a veteran myself, I find that fascinating.
PSS
May 14th, 2012
1:16 pm
While the Dems are guilty of it too, Rs just can’t admit they don’t care about deficits. They pretend to, then go ahead and run up deficits anyway. And it’s never their fault.
getalife
May 14th, 2012
1:18 pm
yum yum,
A dem President ended both occupations so the troops will reward him for that.
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
1:20 pm
Germany & Japan already help fund the U.S military in their countries. That presence is strategic to our defense system around the world. I am also for protecting Israel against attack by the militant muslims in Iran by any means necessary. No one in their right mind wants Iran to get the nuke. I was always opposed to U.S. intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan. Both parties voted to invade Iraq and go in to Afghanistan – a major waste of lives and resources for what? For every dollar the military is cut I propose an equal amount be cut from the social spending programs and I will let Oblama decide where he is going to cut. Hell will freeze over and thaw out again before Oblama and the Dems cut a dime. It’s always – let’s cut yours but don’t touch mine by both parties.
getalife
May 14th, 2012
1:20 pm
“And it’s never their fault.”
True.
luangtom
May 14th, 2012
1:20 pm
Not only is it the Republicans wanting more for defense. Just how does your sitting President think he is going to fulfill his promises to other countries if not by a high defense budget? Promises that we will police the world and enforce world order is not a free-ride. We have personnel in over one-hundred foreign countries. If we wish to reduce our budget in defense, we need to reduce our commitment to the other countries of the world. Why are we in over one-hundred countries? What would we do if China or Russia again went forth and put troops in as many locations as we do? Why are we the chief overseer of the world? Who gave us this authority? Both parties need to address ALL spending.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
1:22 pm
Hootinanny Yum Yum
May 14th, 2012
1:15 pm
Interesting indeed, Michael.
Could you provide sources for your contention that:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I second the notion. I’m curious about the first because I’ve never seen a survey that says that and I’m WAY curious about the second because that is totally opposite of the way things have been my whole life……..
Union
May 14th, 2012
1:24 pm
we should outsource our defense spending to china.. imagine the money we would save
getalife
May 14th, 2012
1:25 pm
tom,
Leader of the free world, American exceptionalism and all that jazz.
Just
May 14th, 2012
1:25 pm
Enter your comments here
sheepdawg
May 14th, 2012
1:26 pm
idiots following idiots
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
1:26 pm
For every dollar the military is cut I propose an equal amount be cut from the social spending programs and I will let Oblama decide where he is going to cut. Hell will freeze over and thaw out again before Oblama and the Dems cut a dime.
Not so. Last time around Obama proposed lots of cuts in entitlement spending but since he wanted to cut defense and raise taxes as well the Repub’s went batsht over it and said no.
But we’ll see what happens this time. I’m all for a program where WHEN x amount of money (waste/fraud) is cut from the budget, then taxes can be raised by x percentage of a point.
The Dems DO have a reputation of promising to cut spending if taxes are raised and the not doing so (remember when the first Bush raised taxes?)
Jack
May 14th, 2012
1:28 pm
We have some pretty sophisticated, deadly weapons and our ememies know that: otherwise, they’d be more apt to test our resolve. Spend more on weapons and less on welfare.
Just Sayin'
May 14th, 2012
1:28 pm
Oblama – Nanny Pelosi’s botox treatment are strategic to our defense. Besides she gets them free through her “Cadillac” Congress Health Care Plan so she can’t be taxed on what she does not pay. Her liposuction was also a freebie by the tax payers.
Pass the Cheesy Grits Please
May 14th, 2012
1:29 pm
Both parties voted to invade Iraq and go in to Afghanistan – a major waste of lives and resources for what?
No they didn’t. They authorized the President to use force if necessary.
I dont think you understand the role of Commander in Chief or how that whole thing works.
W made the call to go in.
Big difference.
126 (61%) of 208 Democratic Representatives voted against the resolution.
6 (<3%) of 223 Republican Representatives voted against the resolution: Reps. Duncan (R-TN), Hostettler (R-IN), Houghton (R-NY), Leach (R-IA), Morella (R-MD), Paul (R-TX).
21 (42%) of 50 Democratic senators voted against the resolution:
1 (2%) of 49 Republican senators voted against the resolution:
Sen. Chafee (R-RI).
Hootinanny Yum Yum
May 14th, 2012
1:30 pm
Getalife @ “A dem President ended both occupations so the troops will reward him for that.”
Interesting concept. How did veterans of the Vietnam War, the Cold War and Operation Desert Storm vote following the end of those conflicts?
Can you show a correlation for veteran participation in a conflict, what president/party ended the conflict and how veterans voted in subsequent elections?
Is that a gut feeling or is your statement based in fact?
That Black Guy, now and FOREVER!!
May 14th, 2012
1:31 pm
getalife
May 14th, 2012
1:13 pm
tbg,
I have to wear briefs when I wear shorts or my “boxer” dangles out.
_____________________________________________________
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
1:34 pm
I want beans and taters for supper. I have so many fresh veggies that it’s almost sinful. And I’m too sick to deal with them. Someone come over and snap my greenie beanies and peel my tomatoes. i’ll give you some of what I cook. (Oh and mow my damn lawn while you are at it. Or fix my lawnmower at least.)
you take care of that and I’ll tell Brother Barry to slash entitlements AND defense.
Deal?
Normal Free...and liking it!
May 14th, 2012
1:35 pm
Oh Jack,
Be afraid! Be very afraid. Arm yourself to the teeth and let your children be sick and hungry. God bless America
getalife
May 14th, 2012
1:36 pm
yum yum,
They think a gop President would start more wars.
Not that complicated .
Normal Free...and liking it!
May 14th, 2012
1:37 pm
Turn bullets into bandages and bombs into bread. Feed and heal the world and you won’t need a reason to buy arms.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
1:38 pm
Hootinanny Yum Yum
May 14th, 2012
1:30 pm
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I actually thought that President George HERBERT Bush did an awesome job supporting/protecting his troops and listening to his Generals. As such, I voted for him after Desert Storm. Before and after that I voted Libertarian (until Harry Brown died and the Libertarian party imploded). I can’t speak for others though.
I liked “father” Bush. Can’t say I was as pleased with his son though…….
I'm a liberal and believe everything I read and nothing the other side comes up with...cause we're smart and they are not
May 14th, 2012
1:38 pm
The clock is ticking on this guy. It won’t be close. Not that our guy has all the answers, but that this guy is that bad.
East Lake Ira
May 14th, 2012
1:38 pm
So word down at the local ACE is that Ann is just the public wife and that each Romney home is home to a “homewife”…
Anyone hear this anywhere else?
We need to see DNA testing of all his sons to prove Ann’s really the mother as we certainly can’t trust docs etc…
getalife
May 14th, 2012
1:40 pm
If you are in good shape, there are high paying jobs in drilling.
They are in rural areas and there is nothing to do but go to the local strip bars.
They are desperate to find workers.
No experience necessary.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
1:40 pm
Normal Free…and liking it!
May 14th, 2012
1:37 pm
Turn bullets into bandages and bombs into bread. Feed and heal the world and you won’t need a reason to buy arms.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Man don’t I wish THAT were true. Wouldn’t it be great? Pipe dream though………
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCX3ZNDZAwY
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
1:42 pm
Just Sayin’ – Nanny Pelosi has already scheduled a “lifestyle” lift for the month of July so she will be ready for the upcoming T.V. exposure during the elections. That’s another blow to our Fed debt.
getalife
May 14th, 2012
1:45 pm
You can’t be a player without a big “boxer”
Just sayin..
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
1:47 pm
What minimum width must a trench dug in wet sand be at the surface for a depth of two meters in order to minimize the probability of a trench cave-in while removing the least amount of sand?
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
1:49 pm
A cut isn’t a cut any more – in D.C. it is a reduction of the proposed increase. In D.C. there is no word for reducing spending. Oblama will soon be “evolving” up another smoke and mirrors scheme to cover up what this election is really about : the economy, jobs and reducing this alarming multi trillion dollar Fed debt.
Joe Hussein Mama
May 14th, 2012
1:52 pm
Does anyone else hear that high-pitched Republican SQUEEEEEEEEEEE noise in here today?
Or is someone making tea?
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
1:52 pm
Oblama: You certainly are a puzzle. One post will be not only lucid and rational, but have really good ideas, and then you’ll turn around and post something completely off the wall. What’s up with that? (Oh and I’m NOT referring to your Pelosi posts lol, those are great).
wet wiccan
May 14th, 2012
1:53 pm
U.S. Dept. of Defense has 8 separate intelligence gathering agencies: AFISRA, INSCOM, DIA, MCIA, NGA, NRO, NSA, ONI. This, in addition to the OTHER intelligence gathering agencies that are not in the DOD.
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
U.S. Dept. Of Energy: OICI
U.S. Dept. Of Homeland Security: I&A, CGI
U.S. Dept. Of Justice: FBI, DEA/ONSI
U.S. Dept. Of State: INR
U.S. Dept. Of the Treasury: TFI
Could there be some overlap here? Parts of these budgets are “classified”, so who knows how much all this costs. How many of these agencies spy on us?
Oh, and get rid of the TSA.
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
1:53 pm
JHM: Like this lol?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gLN3QoN-q8
DannyX
May 14th, 2012
1:55 pm
Romney’s proposal to increase in military spending doesn’t translate in more support from veterans.
A new Reuters poll of veterans has Obama leading Romney by 7 points.
Veterans
Obama 44%
Romney 37%
Surprise, surprise.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
May 14th, 2012
1:59 pm
Fred:
I hear you but in my opinion you still need one good airborne division for a worst case situation.
There are places due to distance from the coast, altitude, etc. where a helicopter assault would just not be feasible.
All options should be open.
Recon 0311 2533
May 14th, 2012
2:00 pm
Reuters and the A/P
No surprise.
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
2:00 pm
I’m for reducing the big spenders in Congress for either party: Term Limits.
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
2:02 pm
It’s time to pull the plug on funding for the Republican’s war on women. They may not need women but the rest of us do.
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
2:04 pm
Veterans
Obama 44%
Romney 37%
The consequences of a suddenly soft on national security GOP.
And Flip is way to big a candyass to be CiC. (Too much time spent in France trying to tun the frogs into false Christians with funny underwear!)
Given his own words, he wouldn’t have even gone after OBL. How pathetic is that?
But like that last idiot GOP prez, once he got the Napoleon syndrome, he too would probably invade the wrong country just to try and prove to his his idiot voters that he wasn’t a wimp…
Stevie Ray...Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right here I am....
May 14th, 2012
2:04 pm
Does anyone have an idea if this idiotic defense spending increase proposes anything new or substantatively different from priors spends?
Union
May 14th, 2012
2:06 pm
don’t forget that we are going to need to be able to defend ourselves against the mexican drug cartels.. another 49 “headless” bodies found.. sheesh..
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
2:09 pm
gone today – here tomorrow.
curious
May 14th, 2012
2:11 pm
Invade Cuba now!
Nice beaches, climate, and we can keep travel costs down.
St Simons - we're on Island time
May 14th, 2012
2:11 pm
Really Republicans??….Really? A missle defense system on the East Coast?? I think the GOP has gone looney. Give the red necks a Lee Greenwood cassette, some bottle rockets and a few fire crackers so They can smell gunpowder, come out a lot cheaper.
Union
May 14th, 2012
2:13 pm
we create our own wasteful spending in all branches of govt. remember at the end of the fiscal year the supply folks would come by and say we had x dollars left to spend.. if we didnt spend it this year, then we may not get it next year.. so we always seemed to spend it on stuff we didnt need. go figure.
Oblama
May 14th, 2012
2:13 pm
If you don’t have $40,000 to pay for a George Clooney fund raising dinner for Oblama then you are not part of the crowd handling Oblama. Your opinion doesn’t count.
getalife
May 14th, 2012
2:13 pm
We have a term limit in November but need real term limits.
It is working here.
Union,
It was the same thing during prohibition which made Joe Kennedy a very rich man.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
2:14 pm
Stevie Ray
I’d imagine it’s like Ryan’s deficit reduction plan.
Specifics will be worked out by someone else.
Romney did say 100,000 more troops. I’m guessing that’ll be more than any time in the past 20 years.
Michael
May 14th, 2012
2:15 pm
Fred and Yum Yum,
Other posters have already the Reuters survey, so I won’t repeat that. Also, as a Viet vet, I too am interested in this change. The Ron Paul advantage among vets in primaries stemmed from his oppostition to the wars.
For me, this has gone full circle, as I was born during the term of Franklin Roosevelt – the most successful Commander in Chief of the 20th Century.
Billybob
May 14th, 2012
2:15 pm
jay bookman meet the constitution and then leon panetta……that is all
Bernie
May 14th, 2012
2:19 pm
(10) Ten years fighting a WAR in a country without a standing Army,Navy, Coast Guard, Air Force, Reserves or Marines. No missiles, tanks, jets, cargo planes, supply or stock piles of weapons, personnel carriers nor helicopters. with all of these things and still spent over $100 BILLION! in fiscal yare 2010. Think on that one….. Something in my gut, tells me money is not the answer to the problem with the Department of Defense.
Mitt Romoney wants to spend MORE…………… How sensible is that?
bob
May 14th, 2012
2:22 pm
And how does Panetta differ from repubs ?
Peter
May 14th, 2012
2:23 pm
Defense budget…a wonderful way to Bilk American’s.
Talk about a Rip off….
Cheney did it best with cost plus contracts………. send your workers on expensive vacations and allow the American public to pay for it…….That is how the GOP looks after your money !
jm
May 14th, 2012
2:26 pm
US value also currently inflated by Afghanistan efforts
Peter
May 14th, 2012
2:26 pm
Bernie ….The defense department gets a pass all the time……. incredible wasteful because the GOP and cost plus contracts are part of the plan.
And yes the GOP are out there sending equipment and troops all over the world to protect Corporate America.
Fly-On-The-Wall
May 14th, 2012
2:28 pm
In case all you Righty-Tighties need more evidence that you are the problem here is a word from one of your own: http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/14/opinion/frum-mann-ornstein/index.html?hpt=hp_bn7
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
2:28 pm
“US value also currently inflated by Afghanistan efforts”
And none of that is offset by the decrease in spending in Iraq?
GT
May 14th, 2012
2:28 pm
.There are intelligent, in other worlds, people who try to tell me the defense spending is nothing compared to the rest of the budget, that it has not increased but has decreased. If there was a way to put some light on these misinformed, suck out all the “facts” they harbor to keep them on the right, make them deal with reality,I don’t even think we would have an election, O would win by default.
Now the other thing about this. Not only are these fanatical people who sleep with their guns waiting for God knows what, facilitating this hell we call war, but we are losing in about every front we carry it out in. I was reading 40 something headless bodies being found in Mexico, in that drug war to feed this county’s, USA, habit. They are killing each other for the honor to get into a business we have declared war on, like our threat alone is not enough to fend them off. The biggest effect, we could have, on this industry would be to make it legal, not declare war, declare peace and half of Mexico will declare bankruptcy. Our wars support a lot more evil than we book in the budget. As we leave Iraq the very thugs we went over there to destroy are moving into our trillion dollar renovation, better than they were when we came to shock and aw them.
jm
May 14th, 2012
2:38 pm
““US value also currently inflated by Afghanistan efforts”
And none of that is offset by the decrease in spending in Iraq?”
Afghanistan and Iraq are not the same country
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
2:42 pm
Jm
No one said it was smart ass.
You posted
“US value also currently inflated by Afghanistan efforts”
I asked isn’t some of that spend being offset via the decrease in spending in Iraq.
If stating “value” had nothing to do with spend then I apologize.
No need to be a punk
Fred ™
May 14th, 2012
2:43 pm
Michael
May 14th, 2012
2:15 pm
Fred and Yum Yum,
Other posters have already the Reuters survey, so I won’t repeat that.
++++++++++++++++++++
I saw that after I posted. Thanks.
(ir)Rational
May 14th, 2012
2:51 pm
So, I’m sure this has been pointed out already today (but I’m not sure who has time to go through 8 pages of comments), but hasn’t Jay already done this topic just a few weeks/months ago. Same graphic and everything?
Stevie Ray...Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right here I am....
May 14th, 2012
2:55 pm
I’m wondering if Mitt wins, will he waste as much money as his predecessor did on stimulus and what he proposes to waste on healthcare….shapes up to be quite the competition…
Stevie Ray...Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right here I am....
May 14th, 2012
2:57 pm
irRational,
Jay i suspect does his best to keep us entertained beating each other up over various issues…why waste quality blogging time bashing him relative to what and where his topics may have originated…it just doesn’t matter….
Jefferson
May 14th, 2012
2:57 pm
Romney will only use gov’t to enrich the rich.
(ir)Rational
May 14th, 2012
2:57 pm
Whew, I was going back through Jay’s old posts and was starting to think I was crazy. I’m sure you’ll all be relieved to know that I’m not.
http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2012/03/22/are-we-prepared-to-right-size-our-defense-commitment/
(ir)Rational
May 14th, 2012
3:00 pm
Stevie Ray – I’m just pointing out that Jay is merely rehashing old subjects, complete with the same graphics. He wraps them up really nicely in new packaging, but the message is still the same. Neanderthal republicans want to spend too much, republicans bad, democrats want to spend
the same money on other programsless, democrats good.Joe Hussein Mama
May 14th, 2012
3:06 pm
(ir)Rational — “hasn’t Jay already done this topic just a few weeks/months ago. Same graphic and everything?”
Green blogging! Recycling of topics! 100% post-consumer blog content!
Corey
May 14th, 2012
3:07 pm
Jay, a free and paranoid people enabled by their leaders- some of whom demand that we be too afraid to attend worship without guns- breeds a pay any price to guarantee that our imagined fears do not come to fruition mindset.
(ir)Rational
May 14th, 2012
3:09 pm
JHM – Even some of the same comments. Seriously. I find it both scary and predictable at the same time.
(ir)Rational
May 14th, 2012
3:10 pm
JHM – This might be “blog recycling” but this is green blogging.
http://www.originalgreen.org/blog/
barking frog
May 14th, 2012
3:11 pm
An up or down non-partisan
vote every four years for
all federal judges is a term
limit I would like. Up vote
the judge continues. Down
vote the judge goes home
and the president appoints
a new judge to be confirmed
by Senate.
(ir)Rational
May 14th, 2012
3:14 pm
barking frog – That makes sense. But at the same time, I see judges knowing they’re not going to be kicked off at some politician’s whim as a good thing (sometimes). That is the only way they’re able to make the tough decisions that the federal government/state governments don’t always like.
Joseph
May 14th, 2012
3:15 pm
Ya’ll better get the full bore damage controll going for this Jay! Obama accused of sexaul harassment while at Harvard Review….
http://www.thegopnet.com/obama-accused-of-sexual-harassment-while-at-harvard-law-review-35087
Joseph
May 14th, 2012
3:16 pm
Now we know why he supports homosexauls….
http://www.thegopnet.com/obama-accused-of-sexual-harassment-while-at-harvard-law-review-35087
stands for decibels
May 14th, 2012
3:17 pm
(ir), Jay does point that he’s re-using the chart, by beginning graf #5 with “again.”
Not sure why it’s so awful to re-use a chart like that but, whatever.
barking frog
May 14th, 2012
3:18 pm
(ir)Rational
I mean an up or down vote
by the people in the district
on a ballot.
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
3:18 pm
“JHM – Even some of the same comments. Seriously. I find it both scary and predictable at the same time.”
If someone’s opinion on any given issue hadn’t changed in two months, who wouldn’t find the comments predictable?
Regardless of your opinion on this topic, is it the the same, some what the same or different from the last time JB posted this information?
Joseph
May 14th, 2012
3:19 pm
http://thekansascitian.blogspot.com/2011/11/barack-obama-accused-by-two-men-of.html
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
3:21 pm
The Gopnet?
Didn’t they use to sell that right next to the National Inquirer at the grocery store checkout?
(Ronald Reagan and Elvis still the most popular among extra-terrestrials!)
Joseph
May 14th, 2012
3:22 pm
JamVet:
Dems used the same tactic to run Herman Cain back on the plantation… Sux to be an Obama supporter… LOL…
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
3:24 pm
Herman Cain? Do you mean back to the asylum?
I wonder if he and his fellow womanizer from Georgia have gone to any clubs lately?
Nein, nein, nein!
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
3:24 pm
“Dems used the same tactic to run Herman Cain back on the plantation”
Cain was running in a Democrat Primary?
Seems he had a few guys named Romney, Gingrich and Santorum who gained most for him to be gone
St Simons - we're on Island time
May 14th, 2012
3:26 pm
if women ran the pentagon, would missiles be shaped differently?
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
3:29 pm
Alas, Joseph and his really bad memory.
Maybe he can research who Herman said initially leaked the story about his gropefests…
stands for decibels
May 14th, 2012
3:30 pm
Here’s a link to that Reuters poll of veterans:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/13/us-usa-poll-military-idUSBRE84C02120120513
josef
May 14th, 2012
3:31 pm
And a happy Monday…
What some purty graphs…
I also see Ole Jaybird didn’t leave the one below up for a long time as the lead comment of the day…long winded, and funny as all get out… but that’s just my warped and twisted sense of humor…
Anyway, what’s the real kvetch of the day?
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
3:34 pm
Herman Cain! I do believe he ran in the GOP primary and was brought down by the GOP. But don’t let the facts get in your way, Joseph. No sense in breaking from tradition now.
Don
May 14th, 2012
3:34 pm
Shouldn’t we figure out what job we want the military to do before we figure out what % GDP we should budget for it?
This DOES sound a lot like Eisenhower vs. Congress, with the party roles reversed this time.
G Mare 71( got the living' the red state BLUES!)
May 14th, 2012
3:37 pm
Off topic, but I haven’t seen Kamchak on here for a while. Did he change his name or if there a problem?
G Mare 71( got the living' the red state BLUES!)
May 14th, 2012
3:37 pm
uh, is.
josef
May 14th, 2012
3:38 pm
JHM
“Green blogging! ”
Thass funny! We got a lot of that…
josef
May 14th, 2012
3:39 pm
GMARE
K’chak is sometimes out for a few days at a time…he’s a long time regular…was here when I got here…
John Birch
May 14th, 2012
3:42 pm
Defense is so expensive because the pansy liberals don’t have the stomach for real fighting. Ever since the militant left protesters forced a retreat and surrender in Vietnam we have operated with a gloved fist. A lot of the Middle East expense has gone to bribery, school and hospital construction and a bunch of other mamby-pamby crap the libs demand. Likewise all the boots on the ground are only necessary to attempt to distinguish the alleged friendlies from the terrorists. 500 pound bomb them until there’s nothing left. Use the troops over here to round up the illegals then ship them to the middle east and let them have what they make of it and keep the oil pumping. That’s the Birch plan, unlike that insane Marshall Plan approach the libs require.
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
3:44 pm
John Birch
Thanks for your service.
What branch did you serve in and what years?
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
3:44 pm
jo, just that I spent some time in a foxhole in England!
Clean up on aisle 3:42…
Jefferson
May 14th, 2012
3:46 pm
My little sister could woop birch left handed, just sayin’
251 more days
May 14th, 2012
3:46 pm
Can anyone give me a non political reason why the sexual complaints should not be investigated?
It seems we are on the verge of the nastiest campaign we have ever seen, there will be more allocations against both candidates to come, and if that is the case, we need to know the truth of either slander.
Why don’t you want to know if it is true or not, and just because you say it isn’t, doesn’t make it so
barking frog
May 14th, 2012
3:46 pm
josef,G Mare
Kam was a regular on
Cynthia Tuckers blog also
She has a blog with a little
different format now. Don’t
know if he goes there or not.
It’s not AJC.
josef
May 14th, 2012
3:47 pm
John Birch
I’m going to give you benefit of the doubt and read that as one of Bill Orvis’ missives. Otherwise you’re just plumb full of sh*t…Winston Churchill called the Marshall Plan “the most unsordid act in human history…” And it would behoove you to go back and read in “Plain Speaking” where Truman came up with idea…Confederate Heritage Liberals…what a concept!
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
3:47 pm
251
Sounds like it is being investigated or fabricated, hence the article
Jm
May 14th, 2012
3:48 pm
Not part of romney’s 2:42
I can’t help you bud
If you have a base budget of say $400mm, Iraq adds to base say $100mm and Afghanistan adds $120mm for total of $620
Iraq is gone. Now $520. So savings from Iraq since its over doesn’t offset anything.
Silliness. Math not your thing apparently
Just sayin
josef
May 14th, 2012
3:48 pm
Frog
Me and the Romany’ll stay away for Sister C…
DBCOOPER
May 14th, 2012
3:49 pm
What percentage of GDP do those countries spend on social services? Since 1945 or 1965 trillion have been spent on Welfare or social programs. Only poverty is at virtually the same level. What proportion of GDP do the following countries spend on education? Last I checked the U.S was second on spending per student. I would submit we are well ahead of most industrial nations on education spending. Yet we have been falling over the last 30 years in most educational categories.
However, it can be argued that military spending and what we actually get for our military dollar come the closest matching up. Some say the military is the only government service that actually works. None of the other trillions spent on education and social programs have done much actually the situations have worsened. Whether you agree with the implementation of how the military is used? It has quantifiable success. Cold War, Humanitarian missions all over the world. I would submit the dollar spent on military goes further than a dollar spent on social hand-outs.
josef
May 14th, 2012
3:50 pm
ZamVet
A foxhole in England, it was…? Lemme guess…
josef
May 14th, 2012
3:51 pm
DB
So, we should just do away with education?
barking frog
May 14th, 2012
3:52 pm
josef
I sometimes enjoyed her
viewpoint and often agreed
but she was predictable.
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
3:53 pm
jm
They why did you leave out Iraq? You do know what a budget is, right?
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
3:54 pm
It has quantifiable success.
Agreed,
For the men who run Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrup Grumman, General Dynamcis, Raytheon, etc.
For the average American working family?
Nope.
Massive weapons systems and other colossal military boondoggles have further mortgage our fiscal futures and drained money and talent from long overdue and more important civilian projects.
josef
May 14th, 2012
3:56 pm
frog
I had my issues with her sometimes limited world view. She was a slow learner, but she did come around on a couple of occasions, kicking and screaming the whole way, mind you…but nag her long enough…
Jm
May 14th, 2012
3:56 pm
Not
IRAQ ISN’T IN THE BUDGET
EVEN IF IT WAS, IRAQ SAVINGS WOULDN’T BE AN OFFSET TO SFGHANISTAN SPENDING BECAUSE IT IS GOING DOWN, NOT UP
Does that help?
Not Part of Romney's Flock
May 14th, 2012
3:58 pm
Jm
Thanks for the clarification
There was no need to be a punk about it. However, if that made you feel good then I’m glad you were able to elevate your self importance today.
G Mare 71( got the living' the red state BLUES!)
May 14th, 2012
3:59 pm
Thanks, Josef & Frog.
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
4:00 pm
josef, if I told you, I would have to kill you!
Lets just say a randy bird from Liverpool and some Marvin Gaye were involved!
barking frog
May 14th, 2012
4:00 pm
Iraq and Afghanistan have
shown the national guard
can handle these “wars” so
we should be able to
deactivate a lot of active
army and marine units.
The active Air Force is
almost irrelevant.
Jm
May 14th, 2012
4:00 pm
Not
If you’re asking: is it possible part of that budget also includes Iraq costs (even if declining), which should be stripped out because they won’t continue in perpetuity?
Then the answer to that question is: yes
Aquagirl
May 14th, 2012
4:01 pm
Whether you agree with the implementation of how the military is used It has quantifiable success
I’d really love to hear your definition of success. Getting lots of people killed? Spending a lot of money? Increasing yellow ribbon sticker sales? Yeah, we’re doing a bang-up job there. Achieving political and strategic objectives…not so much.
barking frog
May 14th, 2012
4:03 pm
Air Force should go back
to army and marines to
navy. unload a lot of
high dollar officers.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
4:09 pm
barking 4:00
Appears the strategy is to let the Guard and Reserves take the bulk of the reductions.
So much for total force -
barking frog
May 14th, 2012
4:10 pm
Shut down the military
academies. ROTC does
fine.
Paul
May 14th, 2012
4:10 pm
oh, and frog
My reading of history is the Air Force was established as a service in large part because the Army couldn’t get past the idea aircraft existed to support ground troops, no different than howitzers or tanks.
Joseph
May 14th, 2012
4:14 pm
TaxPayer:
You can believe what you want about Cain getting slimmed. The simple fact is Obama harassed men sexually and the media simply ignored it…
Peter
May 14th, 2012
4:14 pm
Hey Don
May 14th, 2012
3:34 pm
Shouldn’t we figure out what job we want the military to do before we figure out what % GDP we should budget for it?
Come on now Don…….. the military has bases around the world to protect corporate America.
Jm
May 14th, 2012
4:14 pm
If you want to save money, cut the super fighter jets
And stupid wasteful spending resulting from politicians backyard projects
After that, not a ton of fat to cut
Dekalb comments
May 14th, 2012
4:14 pm
Poppycock!!!!
We could cut our defense spending by 50% and not impact our ability to defend the homeland. We could no longer play world policeman anymore but we could absolutely defend the homeland.
These are the same scare tactics that have been used over and over again.
Who are our potential adversaries on the battlefield?
1. Terrorists – aren’t we already spending billions and billions, more than any other country on intelligence, drones, etc.?
2. Russia and China – we need to ensure we can defend ourselves against aggression by either one of them but could do so with far less military expenditure
3. Rogue states such as North Korea and Iran – I’m not sure spending billions and billions more each year actually helps defend against those nations. These are rogue states that are a threat to other countries in addition to the U.S.
barking frog
May 14th, 2012
4:16 pm
Paul
overall the army has more
aircraft than the air force
but the USAF is the most
powerful of the armed
forces politically. they
burned billions in the
early space race and
couldn’t get off the ground.
the army and von broun
put up the first satellite.
Lord Help Us
May 14th, 2012
4:22 pm
‘The simple fact is Obama harassed men sexually and the media simply ignored it…’
Drudge and Breitbart are part of the conspiracy!!!
Mighty Righty
May 14th, 2012
4:24 pm
Dekalb comments
So your choice location to defend against an enemy would be Dekalb County, Ceorgia as opposed to say Europe, thew Middle East or Asia. It would be cheaper. It would definitely be cheaper. There are probably others, even some Dekalb residents, who would not agree.
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
4:26 pm
The simple fact is Obama harassed men sexually and the media simply ignored it…
I bet you had to attend a private school to learn your “facts”. How about backing up your trash talk, Joseph.
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
4:27 pm
I don’t see the need for a floating aircraft carrier either. I think that one should be cut.
Jm
May 14th, 2012
4:30 pm
Taxpayer aircraft carriers are great tools
I’d say cut 1/2 the overseas bases instead….
Jm
May 14th, 2012
4:31 pm
Taxpayer btw
Do you prefer “non-floating” aircraft carriers?
Paul
May 14th, 2012
4:34 pm
frog
Yeah… but having spoken with some senior AF types at the Pentagon, they say nothing matches the Navy for political astuteness. Say those guys have embedded themselves with some of the career staffers and have quite the power.
regarding the academies:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/opinion/21fleming.html?pagewanted=all
But hey, it costs only a half million per cadet, it’s a bargain!
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
4:35 pm
Taxpayer aircraft carriers are great tools
I don’t think we need to be spending money developing one that floats in the air though.
Oscar
May 14th, 2012
4:35 pm
Do you prefer “non-floating” aircraft carriers?
________
It would be cheaper to keep them in dry dock.
JamVet
May 14th, 2012
4:36 pm
Righty, for the love of Allah, you actually believed that idiotic slogan, “fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them here” garbage?
barking frog
May 14th, 2012
4:36 pm
nuclear aircraft carriers
and subs should be most
of the naval fleet.
TaxPayer
May 14th, 2012
4:42 pm
The military also developed a nuclear hand grenade. At least they had the sense not to spend money equipping soldiers with more than one each.
barking frog
May 14th, 2012
4:42 pm
Paul
Navy has been around
longer but no sex appeal.
Pols love the handsome
pilots that zoom overhead
for photo ops.
Oscar
May 14th, 2012
4:45 pm
aul
May 14th, 2012
4:34 pm
_______
Good piece in the Times about the academies. Things sound worse than I thought. Even with the scandles from the Air Force Academy which were not mentioned in the piece. Agree with him about the athletic program. I think atheltic scholorships should be stopped and down to division III or dropped altogether.
UNCLE SAMANTHA
May 14th, 2012
4:45 pm
liberals should be in favor of INCREASING defense spending as long as it goes to making weapons and not wasted on wars in foreign lands
defense spending is a PANACEA for liberals
its government spending
its stimulus
it creates jobs
those jobs are union jobs
liberals just havent been educated to understand that pure defense spending on weapons is keynsian
Paul
May 14th, 2012
4:45 pm
frog
Well, ‘handsome’ isn’t a word I would have used, but I get your drift -
http://military-photo.blogspot.com/2008/12/us-airforce-female-pilot.html
Oscar
May 14th, 2012
4:48 pm
liberals just havent been educated to understand that pure defense spending on weapons is keynsian
____________
There are better ways to spend money. Infrastructure as an investment. Pays for itself in future grown. Unlike boms that just stored forever.
josef
May 14th, 2012
4:49 pm
Fresh sheets upstairs…
pogo
May 14th, 2012
4:50 pm
Jay why don’t you go ask all of those civilians and businesses that live near and work at military bases if they want us to cut military spending? Here in America at any given military base there are at least as many civilians that work there as there are military people. Entire local economies and local businesses depend upon these bases for their livelihood. Government provided jobs are government provided jobs whether they be military or otherwise aren’t they Jay?
You are one of the misguided Krugman Keynesians so what is your problem with government providing jobs through the military? Is it better when our taxpayer money is thrown away on such poorly administered and abused programs such as foodstamps, cellphones for the poor, WIC and a host of other government giveaways? The reality is, you liberals don’t have a problem with money being thrown away, it is just that you want it thrown away on the programs that comply with your ideology and the military is not one of them. Romney is actually for increasing spending for something that not only protects us but also provides jobs for the civilian sector as well. Obama has done neither of these two things with his “stimulus” and social spending. Liberals are idiots.
jeff
May 14th, 2012
4:50 pm
Jay is a moron who will not even admit that corporation pay income taxes. He claimed that a few years ago. First of all, Who are the 5 countries on the list that would be on our side in any fight??
The UK is the only one on that list that the US could count on and God bless them. France? India? SAUDI ARABIA??? HAH, You the biggest moron in the world.
Face it, If your a liberal which today all democrats are you are either an idiot or a liar because the left want a total control of society because they are socialist. This has been going on for decades and is getting worse. And for all you cool-aide drinkers out there that feel that being left is just the right thing to do and love to do the activist thing, when government gets total control the protesters and activist will disappear in the middle of the night along with all their families..
Lord Help Us
May 14th, 2012
4:54 pm
‘when government gets total control the protesters and activist will disappear in the middle of the night along with all their families..’
Yeah, but they will come get you before they come for me…
UNCLE SAMANTHA
May 14th, 2012
4:55 pm
OSCAR
the states PAY for infrastructure
that is why Obama’s STIMULUS didnt work
it was a transfer of money from Federal to States for work that was ALREADY to be SPENT
Jay
May 14th, 2012
5:03 pm
Wrong and wrong, Samantha. The feds, not the states, pay for the majority of transportation infrastructure. And contrary to your claim, the stimulus worked.
As to the stimulative effect of military spending, its impact is considerably less than in other forms of spending. For example, if you spend $1 billion building a highway, that highway will operate for decades and decades, providing services and helping the economy.
If you spend $1 billion building jets, those jets will sit return nothing to the economy. I’m not saying they can’t be useful if and when the time comes, but in strictly economic terms, they’re a much worse investment.
John Birch
May 14th, 2012
5:03 pm
What we needed was the Patton plan, take out Stalin and the rest of you commies like Josef quoting Churchill as if he were god, and we wouldn’t have needed the stable Europe. Unsordid act and great for the eurotrash sure like welfare is wonderful for the crack baby mommas. But it sucked for us. We rebuilt Germany and Japan (McArthur plan not Marshall plan) with modern mills while we were still running blast furnaces to the point where the japs could haul coal and ore from the US to Japan and turn it into steel then into cars ship them back and cripple Ford and GM.
But at least the Euros and Japs love and respect us right? Sure, just about as much as the Iraqis and Afghanis.
John Birch
May 14th, 2012
5:10 pm
Oh and of course after we won WWII there’s the tremendous damage the aging and unhealthy Roosevelt did us by totaling mismanaging the peace at Yalta. There’s a reason US troops have been stationed in Germany ever since. The Dems seem predisposed to cowardice; Carter, Clinton, and Obama with Kennedy and Johnson as the only recent exceptions.
Mike
May 14th, 2012
5:22 pm
Don’t worry about the military industrial complex, Graham, Liberman and McCain have been there all along, and are, to make sure there is always another war on the back burner.
It has been hilarious to watch them in action, over the decades. If someone in elected office said “draw down troops”, “withdrawal”, or worse yet “peace”, the three stooges immediately would run to get their mikes in their hand. Before 5PM, their press conferences were “in the can”, ready to roll. Nobody is going to stay in office, if they want to give peace a chance.
Mitt Romney is running on increasing the nation’s military budget 18%, from its present near all time high, even if it means more Americans starve, or die on future battle fronts (where ever those might be, it doesn’t really matter, to the hawks, so long as planes and bombs are still being made by their special interest).
Peter
May 14th, 2012
5:22 pm
Hey if you are in the military you can get a free boob job, siting depression over your looks……. Or if you are a fat wife of a serviceman, you can get gastronomic surgery at the tune of $50 K.
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/military-spends-362m-weight-loss-surgery/nN5n6/
Seems the military has a free reign over what they can do and charge the American Tax payer.
Peter
May 14th, 2012
5:23 pm
Right on Mike !!!!!!!!
Don’t worry about the military industrial complex, Graham, Liberman and McCain have been there all along, and are, to make sure there is always another war on the back burner.
Get Real
May 14th, 2012
5:55 pm
Liberal strategy period…spend more…spend lots more
G Mare 71( got the living' the red state BLUES!)
May 14th, 2012
6:15 pm
Jeff, I have to ask: if you think Jay is a moron, why are you on his blog? And Taxpayer, good one with nuclear grenades
.
DBCOOPER
May 14th, 2012
7:38 pm
Jay 100% disagree ! I submit the fighter jet in deterance alone is worth more of the taxpayer investment. All the highways in the world are worth nothing if some else is using them. If you know what I mean. If the Left leaning American public doesn’t believe that there are governments in this world that would strike us at the drop of a hat, if they weren’t scared of the retaliation,. Then trying to debate on this blog is futile.
This is a very mean world we live in. Take a look at the past 25 years. Lesser countries are over-run all the time. Kuwait, Somalia, just to name a couple of the top of my head. Why do you not think North Korea hasn’t struck Japan? Because they know ‘Fighter Jets’ will come see Mr Hun in his castle. Come on?! All this means nothing if we’re not safe.
ODD OWL
May 15th, 2012
2:11 am
Mitt “Mucho Pesos” Romney’s cutthroat, vulture capitalist credentials at BAIN CAPITAL has rendered Mittens unelectable…
lovelyliz
May 15th, 2012
9:47 am
“Defense Secretary Leon Panetta warned Congress not to add items the military neither wants nor needs”
Common Sense
May 15th, 2012
11:17 am
Seems we are spending less. Lot’s less.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/05/14/152671813/50-years-of-government-spending-in-1-graph?sc=fb&cc=fp