PDA

View Full Version : Rebuilding our "depleted" military



Docthehun
08-03-2016, 01:59 PM
Appears to me we need to spend more............ https://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images?p=world+navy+comparison%2C+graphs&fr=yfp-t-s&imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.businessinsider.com%2Fi mage%2F53bf14c96bb3f7e131e33651-1200%2Fimage.jpg#d=-1&iurl=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.businessinsider.com%2Fima ge%2F53bf14c96bb3f7e131e33651-1200%2Fimage.jpg&action=click

Let's look at this one.

http://www.topmoneymake.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/military-power.jpg

Oboe
08-03-2016, 02:00 PM
Yes, obastard has gutted it and we are totally unprepared for the evil in the world. If you want peace, prepare for war.

Cigar
08-03-2016, 02:06 PM
No need for more Boots ... they're waring Flip-Flops, sitting in Lawn chairs in Utah operating Joysticks :laugh:

Oboe
08-03-2016, 02:09 PM
Obama has turned the military into a gay bath house.

Bethere
08-03-2016, 04:04 PM
Yes, o$#@! has gutted it and we are totally unprepared for the evil in the world. If you want peace, prepare for war.

1. Military spending has gone up every year.
2. Any cuts in the growth of the budget are due to the sequester which was forced on obama when the gop took the government hostage.
3. We spend more on the military than most of the rest of the world combined.
4. Change is happening at a rate that is too fast for you to process.
5. You are suffering from future shock.
6. The party that nominated trump is doomed.

Have a great day.

AZ Jim
08-03-2016, 04:29 PM
We are, as a society, military poor. How 'bout our bridges, sewers, our water sheds, all the things like roads and highways the lack of attention can stop us as surely as any military threat. IKE was right about the military complex.

https://www.ourdocuments.gov/images/print_friendly_header.gif (https://www.ourdocuments.gov/)






www.ourdocuments.gov (https://www.ourdocuments.gov/)
August 3, 2016





https://www.ourdocuments.gov/images/clear_pixel.gif


https://www.ourdocuments.gov/images/print_friendly_570x1_black.gif


https://www.ourdocuments.gov/images/clear_pixel.gif




Transcript of President Dwight D. Eisenhower's Farewell Address (1961)
My fellow Americans:
Three days from now, after half a century in the service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as, in traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested in my successor.
This evening I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell, and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen.
Like every other citizen, I wish the new President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all.

Our people expect their President and the Congress to find essential agreement on issues of great moment, the wise resolution of which will better shape the future of the Nation.
My own relations with the Congress, which began on a remote and tenuous basis when, long ago, a member of the Senate appointed me to West Point, have since ranged to the intimate during the war and immediate post-war period, and, finally, to the mutually interdependent during these past eight years.
In this final relationship, the Congress and the Administration have, on most vital issues, cooperated well, to serve the national good rather than mere partisanship, and so have assured that the business of the Nation should go forward. So, my official relationship with the Congress ends in a feeling, on my part, of gratitude that we have been able to do so much together.

II
We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America's leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.
III
Throughout America's adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.
Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology-global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method. Unhappily the danger it poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle-with liberty at stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.
Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small,there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research-these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we which to travel.
But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs-balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage-balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between action of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.
The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only.
IV
A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.
Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peace time, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.
Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United State corporations.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence-economic, political, even spiritual-is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been over shadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system-ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.

V
Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we-you and I, and our government-must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.

VI
Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be, instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.
Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.
Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose difference, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war-as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years-I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.
Happily, I can say that war has been avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But, so much remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little I can to help the world advance along that road.

VII
So-in this my last good night to you as your President-I thank you for the many opportunities you have given me for public service in war and peace. I trust that in that service you find somethings worthy; as for the rest of it, I know you will find ways to improve performance in the future.
You and I-my fellow citizens-need to be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of peace with justice. May we be ever unswerving in devotion to principle, confident but humble with power, diligent in pursuit of the Nation's great goals.
To all the peoples of the world, I once more give expression to America's prayerful and continuing inspiration:
We pray that peoples of all faiths, all races, all nations, may have their great human needs satisfied; that those now denied opportunity shall come to enjoy it to the full; that all who yearn for freedom may experience its spiritual blessings; that those who have freedom will understand, also, its heavy responsibilities; that all who are insensitive to the needs of others will learn charity; that the scourges of poverty, disease and ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth, and that, in the goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.
Transcription courtesy of the Dwight D. Eisenhower Presidential Library and Museum (http://www.eisenhower.archives.gov).





https://www.ourdocuments.gov/images/clear_pixel.gif




https://www.ourdocuments.gov/images/print_friendly_570x1_black.gif


https://www.ourdocuments.gov/images/clear_pixel.gif




Page URL:
http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?doc=90&page=transcript (https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?doc=90&page=transcript)





https://www.ourdocuments.gov/images/clear_pixel.gif


https://www.ourdocuments.gov/images/print_friendly_570x1_black.gif


https://www.ourdocuments.gov/images/clear_pixel.gif


https://www.ourdocuments.gov/images/clear_pixel.gif


U.S. National Archives & Records Administration
700 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20408 • 1-86-NARA-NARA • 1-866-272-6272

zelmo1234
08-03-2016, 04:34 PM
1. Military spending has gone up every year.
2. Any cuts in the growth of the budget are due to the sequester which was forced on obama when the gop took the government hostage.
3. We spend more on the military than most of the rest of the world combined.
4. Change is happening at a rate that is too fast for you to process.
5. You are suffering from future shock.
6. The party that nominated trump is doomed.

Have a great day.


I agree with everything accept that the sequester was not forced on Obama, it was his idea.

zelmo1234
08-03-2016, 04:36 PM
The Military is one of the few things that is constitutional for the Government to spend money on.

As for the infrastructure. Let that states and cities pay for their own projects.

If Hillary is elected the Military will continue to decline and become more and more underfunded. Democrats don't like the military, never have. So rebuilding it will only happen if Trump is elected. Same with the VA, no improvements will happen under Hillary.

Common Sense
08-03-2016, 04:57 PM
Obama has turned the military into a gay bath house.

You should tell someone in uniform that.

Docthehun
08-03-2016, 09:14 PM
The Military is one of the few things that is constitutional for the Government to spend money on.

As for the infrastructure. Let that states and cities pay for their own projects.

If Hillary is elected the Military will continue to decline and become more and more underfunded. Democrats don't like the military, never have. So rebuilding it will only happen if Trump is elected. Same with the VA, no improvements will happen under Hillary.

Trump does have an infrastructure funding plan. He intends to sell a trillion dollars worth of infrastructure bonds. He believes you'll buy those bonds with the tax cut he's promised you. Take your 2015 "Tax Due" and cut it in half. Will you take that money and invest it in low paying bonds? Bet not, but the Chinese might. I'll let you figure out if you think the program will add to or reduce the federal debt.

Dr. Who
08-03-2016, 09:33 PM
The Military is one of the few things that is constitutional for the Government to spend money on.

As for the infrastructure. Let that states and cities pay for their own projects.

If Hillary is elected the Military will continue to decline and become more and more underfunded. Democrats don't like the military, never have. So rebuilding it will only happen if Trump is elected. Same with the VA, no improvements will happen under Hillary.
How can she both be the harbinger of war and the eviscerator of the military? I think that she is a neocon and no neocon will gut the military.

Newpublius
08-03-2016, 09:45 PM
The Military is one of the few things that is constitutional for the Government to spend money on.

As for the infrastructure. Let that states and cities pay for their own projects.

If Hillary is elected the Military will continue to decline and become more and more underfunded. Democrats don't like the military, never have. So rebuilding it will only happen if Trump is elected. Same with the VA, no improvements will happen under Hillary.

We will never know peace in this country, will we?

#outofnato
#peace
#two oceans
#canada
#mexico
#nuclearweapons

The Chinese/Russian Army is not marching down Broadway

ISIS doesn't care except for the fact that we ARE actually OVER THERE.

Trust me, they're going to sell us the oil.

1% of GDP, $170bn, we STILL spend more than ANYBODY.

Ethereal
08-03-2016, 09:47 PM
IKE was right about the military complex.

Yet you are supporting the military-industrial complex's puppet for president.

Ethereal
08-03-2016, 09:50 PM
The Military is one of the few things that is constitutional for the Government to spend money on.

As for the infrastructure. Let that states and cities pay for their own projects.

If Hillary is elected the Military will continue to decline and become more and more underfunded. Democrats don't like the military, never have. So rebuilding it will only happen if Trump is elected. Same with the VA, no improvements will happen under Hillary.

Except the military isn't "underfunded". If anything, it's grossly overfunded.

http://www.pgpf.org/sites/default/files/0053_defense-comparison-full.gif

And Hillary Clinton loves war and militarism, so there is no reason to believe she wouldn't continue overfunding the military.

Newpublius
08-03-2016, 10:17 PM
IKE was right about the military complex.

































He was correct of course but the logic applies to those with affirmative interests in government expenditures generally. It doesn't just magically apply to Lockheed Martin.

Mac-7
08-04-2016, 03:42 AM
Except the military isn't "underfunded". If anything, it's grossly overfunded.

http://www.pgpf.org/sites/default/files/0053_defense-comparison-full.gif

And Hillary Clinton loves war and militarism, so there is no reason to believe she wouldn't continue overfunding the military.

Libs call it overfunding but when we call on our military to face the enemy in battle I dont want parity.

Our troops should be so well equipped and trained that no enemy in the world has a chance to survive against them.

And that costs money

Peter1469
08-04-2016, 04:51 AM
The military is underfunded in the sense of what it is we ask it to do. It is also too small for what we ask it to do.

Common
08-04-2016, 05:25 AM
If you are going to have a military and they are going to be asked to risk their lives for whatever frivolous reason politicians and the rich created for them. THEY MUST have the best of everything that helps them to stay alive.

The left is lowering the standards of our military just like they did police and fireman in the early 70s. Down the road the left will be whining about the millitary.

domer76
08-04-2016, 02:38 PM
Obama has turned the military into a gay bath house.

Which one do you frequent?

Chloe
08-04-2016, 02:52 PM
Our military is not depleted it's just spread so thin around the world that its not sustainable. We need to close hundreds of bases around the world that are no necessary and continue bringing troops home from the middle east....oh and stop spending billions of dollars on things that don't work or will ever be used.

Common
08-04-2016, 03:15 PM
How can she both be the harbinger of war and the eviscerator of the military? I think that she is a neocon and no neocon will gut the military.

I actually almost hit the like button because I agreed with your statement. Then I remembered Bill Clinton gutting the military and closing dozens of bases in the USA, then leaving our bases in germany and other places open that serve no purpose

Ethereal
08-04-2016, 04:10 PM
Libs call it overfunding but when we call on our military to face the enemy in battle I dont want parity.

Our troops should be so well equipped and trained that no enemy in the world has a chance to survive against them.

And that costs money

So what is the magic amount of money we need to spend in order to achieve that objective? Because right now we're spending around three times as much money as China on our military. I propose that spending twice as much money is more than sufficient. Am I wrong? If so, why?

Mac-7
08-04-2016, 04:21 PM
So what is the magic amount of money we need to spend in order to achieve that objective? Because right now we're spending around three times as much money as China on our military. I propose that spending twice as much money is more than sufficient. Am I wrong? If so, why?

I havent checked but I suspect china has a draft and spends very little on its soldiers.

Peter1469
08-04-2016, 05:09 PM
Our military is not depleted it's just spread so thin around the world that its not sustainable. We need to close hundreds of bases around the world that are no necessary and continue bringing troops home from the middle east....oh and stop spending billions of dollars on things that don't work or will ever be used.

That clearly does not include the Ford Class aircraft carriers. Those are cool.

Ethereal
08-04-2016, 06:42 PM
I havent checked but I suspect china has a draft and spends very little on its soldiers.

You didn't answer my question.

What is the optimal amount of money we need to spend in order to maintain a clear military superiority over the rest of the world? Because I happen to agree with that objective. I simply believe we can achieve that objective even if we cut our military spending by 40%. We'd still be spending much more on our military than any other country in the world. The problem is that a large chunk of military spending is not for defensive purposes, but for purposes of offense and imperialism. If we simply concentrated on defensive military spending, we could still be the most powerful military in the world and we'd save hundreds of billions of dollars every year.

Mac-7
08-04-2016, 06:48 PM
You didn't answer my question.

What is the optimal amount of money we need to spend in order to maintain a clear military superiority over the rest of the world? Because I happen to agree with that objective. I simply believe we can achieve that objective even if we cut our military spending by 40%. We'd still be spending much more on our military than any other country in the world. The problem is that a large chunk of military spending is not for defensive purposes, but for purposes of offense and imperialism. If we simply concentrated on defensive military spending, we could still be the most powerful military in the world and we'd save hundreds of billions of dollars every year.

I dont know how much s enough.

You or I wont be called into combat against the chinese or russians someday will we?

for the soldiers in the field I want the best weapons money can buy to the point that they SLAUGHTER the enemy and all come home safe after the war.

thats my goal but it wont happen if we cut current spending by 40%.

Bethere
08-04-2016, 08:33 PM
I actually almost hit the like button because I agreed with your statement. Then I remembered Bill Clinton gutting the military and closing dozens of bases in the USA, then leaving our bases in germany and other places open that serve no purpose

Bush wanted to cut defense even more than bill, don't you remember? He called it the peace dividend. It was even a feature of the 1992 gop platform.

The BRAC process started before clinton even took office.

Have a great day!

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/jan/24/rudy-giuliani/the-peace-dividend-began-with-a-bush/

Peter1469
08-05-2016, 05:01 AM
Bush wanted to cut defense even more than bill, don't you remember? He called it the peace dividend. It was even a feature of the 1992 gop platform.

The BRAC process started before clinton even took office.

Have a great day!

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/jan/24/rudy-giuliani/the-peace-dividend-began-with-a-bush/

Yes the military was drastically cut after the Persian Gulf War. The started under Bush the Elder and picked up under Clinton.

donttread
08-05-2016, 07:47 AM
Yes, obastard has gutted it and we are totally unprepared for the evil in the world. If you want peace, prepare for war.

Wait a minute. You think that the most effective , armed and expensive military the world has ever known , capable of offensive attacks in multiple nations half a world away at the same time isn't being funded enough?? Good grief! What would you like them to be able to do, invade and occupy the entire ME at the same time?? Higher military spending? I mean holy fuck, that's just nuts?