Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    14,012
    vCash
    1500

    Lightbulb What about cutting defense spending?

    I watched today’s press conference on the fiscal situation and I was frustrated by the fact that none of the reporters at the conference bothered to ask President Obama a single question about military spending. Chuck Todd and Major Garrett wasted most of the press conference asking President Obama inane questions about the situation that are easy to answer and have already been explained by President Obama and other experts in depth on numerous occasions. Now, back to the Military issue. We spend $711 Billion on our military, which is almost five times as much as the next closest country, China. Cutting military spending in half would not lead to the end of the world. This is a position that is supported by Robert Gates, the former Defense Secretary under Presidents Bush and Obama. Cutting defense spending and only spending to accomplish what is necessary will keep our military efficient and our nation safe.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Amsterdam/Maryland
    Posts
    751
    vCash
    1500
    Absolutely! What we spend on 'offense' is obscene, insane, and utterly unnecessary.

    I have posed these questions before - what do we need 6000+ aircraft for, and what do we need 6000+ battle tanks for?

    It's pretty safe to assume that neither the 'gun-crazed' Mexicans nor the 'socialist' Canucks have any real interest in invading the US by land, or even remotely the ability to do so.

    Neither the Chinese nor the Russians have the means (nor, I assume, the desire) to launch a physical attack on North America.

    The only legitimate reason for maintaining 'adequate' forces is for defense against terrorists. Terror groups do not have large standing forces capable of invading the US. Their threat is of an entirely different nature, as we all know. Defense against possible terror attacks does not require anything remotely like the forces we now have under arms.

    Slash the 'offense' budget by hundreds of billions, reduce the standing armed forces dramatically, mothball or sell ships, planes, tanks and artillery. We do not need members of the armed forces in 170+ countries. Stop responding to right wing paranoia. Get real.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    19,669
    vCash
    1500
    When you calculate all expenditures, in reality we spend around 930 billion per year on "defense".(http://original.antiwar.com/engelhar...nd-on-defense/)

    The military-indutrial-congressional-complex is dominating our country, and its gotten to a point where bought-and-paid-for politicians would rather cut from social programs, rather than sacrificing even a penny from our MASSIVE empire budget, which continues to grow every year.

    I also find it perplexing how much of the focus is on welfare moms, and how much fuel the president uses when he flies in AF-1....yet trillions wasted on war, almost 1,000 military bases around the world, and this massive expenditure for "defense" is rarely, if ever, brought up as THE largest and obvious source for cuts.

    Shows you who Congress is really working for doesn't it?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    a cardbroad box under the overpass
    Posts
    3,555
    vCash
    1500
    You are so right. This has been the third rail in american politic. You can carry that thinking over to why we need naval armadas. There won't be any naval battles against terrorist, and russian or china would just nuke them if we got into a war with them. In a day of missiles, drones, bombs that destory electronic circuits that all weapons depend on, tactic nukes, IUD, small terrorist attacks on soft targets we are still building weapons or armadas like we are going to fight another WW II war.

    This is another area that big business is killing us, and with the threat of being label "soft on defense" politican don't have the balls to fight this trend. We can still maintain a global defense and offensive attack force without this outdated thinking and over spending.

    With the ability to fly anywhere in the world, I would like us to rely more on air forces power then a naval armada (Destoryers, Cruisers, Battleships). Have Air Forces Carriers protected by subs with their missiles. Artillery can be replaced by drones or missiles. With massive missile delivery systems available in the worlds, tank fleets are useless. Even without missile delivery system, massive drone attacks could chew up a tank armada. Anyway, if we were in a fight with Russia or China, these would be first things destory. Mobility and rapid deployment should be our defensive and offensive stragery. Who can get there the fastest, maneuver the best and strike the hardest will win tomorrow wars. Massive tonage tanks, fleets of ships and stationary artillery pieces are thing of the past. Even with these things we are having trouble winning victories that ends with peace in the area. (ie, Iraq or Afhanistan).

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    6,480
    vCash
    1500
    There is an inherient problem with cutting defense spending.
    If you remember when they did base clousures(if your old enough) everyone was all for it, except when it was in there state. The Bases supported the entire economy of some cities.

    Lawton Oklahoma, and Whichita Falls Tx, come to mind, they would pretty much collapse without the money that comes in from the Bases there.

    Our other spending is similar.Military contractors have long flat out STOLEN you tax dollars.
    100 dololars for a light bulb, 40 dollars for a nut and washer.
    This money made some companies rich, but at the same time the philosophy of trickle down economics, built companies, neighborhoods and cities.

    we definitely need to cut a WHOLE lot of military spending, but we need to ween the country off of Military revenue, otherwise it will crater the economy again.
    On a sperate note, it is things like this that make me ask questions like, how can people complain about the welfare programs and the "freebies", when the leaders they suppport allow HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS, to be given away for stuf we dont need, and stuff that costs pennies on the dollar to its worth?

    so poor people welfare is a huge problem, but buying flashlight for my ruck @ 75.00 a pop, when walmart can sell me a better one for 5 bucks is A ok....
    STORK WAS RIGHT!
    Mcfadden is useless

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    a cardbroad box under the overpass
    Posts
    3,555
    vCash
    1500
    Your last remark, has been a problem for a long time. Corruption and kick-back has been a major problem for the defense budget. There has been planes ordered when they cause the pilot to black-out on tight turns, weapons that need high maintances to keep operating properly and some cases the (as with Haliburton) services was never rendered for money recieved. The worse case I have heard of was showers build for servicemen to use in Iraq, that caused several users to be badly shocked. To often the defense budget has been abused by contracters.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    The Land Beyond the Wall, VT
    Posts
    7,141
    vCash
    1500
    Why don't I believe folks have actually read the Quarterly Defese Review (QDR) prior to making claims about what we need to cut, what is needed, and what isn't?

    Here it is. Please read it, and then comment on what we need and don't need.

    BTW< I am not saying cuts can't be made. I think they can, and should. But those cuts need to be informed, planned, and coordinated cuts that adhere to a comprehensive defense strategy that makes some sense. I think we actually do need aircraft carrier groups, and subs, and destroyers, because they are incredibly effective tools for projecting power. The real question is, how many do we need based on where the need for power projection is anticipated.

    In terms of corruption, well, that's just the politics we let our politicians get away with. Sure, we talk and compain about it, but we don;t actually hold anyone accountable to actually represent us in DC. If we did, most of these clowns "representing" us would be unemployed. I wouldn't hire Joe Biden or Mitch McConnel to mop my floor. They have the integrity of my dog in a room full of italian sandwiches (I use this analogy because I just watched my Pats win without my sammich, thanks to my dog, and my inattention). It also goes for literally any industry where jobs and money are in the balance. I'd be interested to see an industry where corruption and backroom deals weren't involved.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    a cardbroad box under the overpass
    Posts
    3,555
    vCash
    1500
    I am honestly asking how have our naval task forces affected our wars since World War II? Yeah, they are impressive forces, but with the advance tech. couldn't missile attacks take them out? If I was China or Russia and plan to attack America, the above surface naval fleet would be one my first targets. One tactic nuke (costing one million at the most) could take out the whole armada (costing in the billions)

    . Plus, I would expect the defense department (or any governmental department) to defend their budget and expenditures. How about any outside reports on the defense department's budget and it's suggestion for cuts. Maybe that would have been a better starting point for previous post then my wild *** uninformed suggestions.
    Last edited by WES445; 01-15-2013 at 09:56 PM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    6,265
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by WES445 View Post
    I am honestly asking how have our naval task forces affect our wars since World War II? Yeah, they are impressive forces, but with the advance tech. couldn't missile attacks take them out? Plus, I would expect the defense department (or any governmental department) to defend their budget and expenditures. How about any outside reports on the defense department's budget and it's suggestion for cuts.
    I can tell you that my son, who was on the Stennis, and aircraft carrier, told me about the use of his ship as a portable airport that gave support to consistent bombing at the beginning of our reaction to Afghanistan following 9/11. Distance from the target makes a difference.
    Here is the question of the day, does anyone think that wealthy people should pay a lower percentage of their income to taxes than middle class people? Don't argue tax brackets, just a simple question. Do you think someone earning 46 million dollars should pay a lower percentage of their income than say someone earning sixty thousand?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    a cardbroad box under the overpass
    Posts
    3,555
    vCash
    1500
    Well, I guess I am like most americans, who don't know were to cut on the defense budget. I do wish those in congress, who do, would do something to bring the budget down along with the corruption. The way things are going, I might as well ask for a rainbow pony for christmas.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    6,480
    vCash
    1500
    no shame there wes, it is a complete cluster f.. of a mess. I mean if you thought untangling the wires behind your Homeentertainment system was a B!th, this will blow your hair back.

    See, now we are actually discussing something that exists in reality.Financial abuse.
    Long ago, the Republican agenda was driven by people who were upset by these things.They are now populated by people who know how to game the emotions of their voters.

    And here is a very important point that I hope all of you can get your hands around.
    The free market capitalists are the tyranical Kings that the Repubilcan party wants you to believe are in the Government.
    They are the ones that cant be voted out, they are the ones who act without any power to oppose them.
    when we argue about where money is spent, corporate welfare is a far greater problem the social welfare.

    we over pay EVERYONE.
    how is that not a freebie?
    How is that not a hand out? why? because you have to show up somewhere and punch a clock?
    then You are EARNING IT?
    how stupid is that? so if If I work somewhere that is robbing the Government blind, charging 200 times the cost to produce something and Im getting paid 10 times the free market rate to do a job, thats ok becasue its a job?

    haliburton and Blackwater was paying contractors 3-5 times what soilders where getting for the same God Damn jobs, we didnt need them or waht them there, now we are 16 trillion dollars in debt, while those buisnesses passed out all that money to Karl Rove and his buddies, and you guys are mad @ Obama?
    STORK WAS RIGHT!
    Mcfadden is useless

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    The Land Beyond the Wall, VT
    Posts
    7,141
    vCash
    1500
    exactly. It has gotten completely out of control.

    If we could tie each defense procurement back to a specific DOD objective that is tied to its mission statement, I'd have less of an issue with military expenditures.

    Not only that, but does anyone who served remember the boot transition, where the soles would fall right off, or the new DCU transition when seems would come undone?

    Or back in the 1990s when we went to the beret and the entire DOD had a 9mm ammunition shortage?

    Steph is right, its a cluster****. I agree there should be cuts, I just get nervous when some folks seek cuts that might bite us in the ***. That's all.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    6,480
    vCash
    1500
    The Berets thing was funny,no one seemed to want them,and SF didnt want anyone else to have them.
    when I went through warrior transition ,they gave me a full Uniform issue,I had just gotten a full Uniform issue from the Airforce two years earlier.
    I swear Patsfan, I could damn near open a store from all the crap I have.
    more then 10 sets of Boots,I have no Idea how many Unis, Although I know I still have some of the old all green fatigues.
    waste in government is a built in economic stimulus.Now, Im not as resentful as some may be because it all gets put back into the economy,but if we have to cut waste,and we do, then its high time we start to ween these companies off that military revenue flow.
    STORK WAS RIGHT!
    Mcfadden is useless

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    19,669
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Patsfan56 View Post
    exactly. It has gotten completely out of control.

    If we could tie each defense procurement back to a specific DOD objective that is tied to its mission statement, I'd have less of an issue with military expenditures.

    Not only that, but does anyone who served remember the boot transition, where the soles would fall right off, or the new DCU transition when seems would come undone?

    Or back in the 1990s when we went to the beret and the entire DOD had a 9mm ammunition shortage?

    Steph is right, its a cluster****. I agree there should be cuts, I just get nervous when some folks seek cuts that might bite us in the ***. That's all.
    Reading War is a Racket, by Smedley Butler should be mantadatory for all children, b/c nothing has changed in a century.

    There is more than enough waste to cut to where it will not affect the troops on the ground. This is what politicians use to keep exponentially throwing hundreds of billlions blindly at our empire(defense) budget. How about our thousands of military bases abroad? How about billions to dictators? How about bagging a new fighter jet program for a few years? There is waste everywhere.

    YES our soldiers continue to get screwed on the ground b/c of mismanagement at almost every level, however I'd argue that this is a failure of appropriate allocation of resources. Instead of no-bid, cost-plus contracts to these corporations perhaps we can focus primarily on the people who actually do the fighting for us...to make sure they are properly equipeed and cared for. It's the greed of corporations and our bought-out politicians who continue to throw our troops under the bus.

    I won't even mention depleted uranium munitions during the Gulf War that we now know was the cause for the mysterious 'Gulf War sickness'.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Amsterdam/Maryland
    Posts
    751
    vCash
    1500
    There are two things that I agree with Ron Paul about.

    Legalize pot.

    Stop playing world policeman. If we do that, we can slash 'defense' spending and still happily exist in peace, and with national security, with only a fraction of our current naval overkill capacity.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •