Trump is winning

http://reason.com/blog/2014/02/26/the-us-military-budget-is-bigger-than-th
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...us-spends-more-military-next-8-nations-combi/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

Seems awfully... What's that? Ah, yes. Bloated. I mean for fucks sake your country is already technologically superior to every fucking country, even your allies, so if the budget was cut so that you only were as strong as the top 3 countries put together that would still leave you with a mighty bick dick to swing around 'aaaand' it would allow you to spend money on other stuff. USA is not just quality, it is also quantity. You got both, and the former in an excessive number. A redundant number. Fat.

Trim that and you'll still be all karate with a third leg you can swing around as well as a fucking drone strike to blow up the other martial arts master while he's hypnotized by said third leg.
 
Mr Fish said:
Your military is bloated. Trimming the fat wont hurt.
Click to expand...
You mean the British army? Nah, its not bloated. We need to expand it. Cuts are fine as long as we trim the fat not the muscle, like sacking civil servants and getting rid of the bureaucracy.
But you see, just 'trimming the fat', isn't going to cut it.
Click to expand...
And how do you know how much trimming the fat will save? Probably billions, enough to pay a large part of the fee for those social programs. And why is defence always the lefties whipping boy? Why not quangos, or useless beurocrats, or porkbarrel spending or departmental wastage?
Mr Fish said:
http://reason.com/blog/2014/02/26/the-us-military-budget-is-bigger-than-th
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...us-spends-more-military-next-8-nations-combi/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
Seems awfully... What's that? Ah, yes. Bloated. I mean for fucks sake your country is already technologically superior to every fucking country, even your allies, so if the budget was cut so that you only were as strong as the top 3 countries put together that would still leave you with a mighty bick dick to swing around 'aaaand' it would allow you to spend money on other stuff. USA is not just quality, it is also quantity. You got both, and the former in an excessive number. A redundant number. Fat.
Click to expand...
Just because a military is big and a lot is spent on it does not mean its bloated. Its not the muscle that we need to trim, its the fat, like the civil servants and bureaucrats.
 
Sorry, just assumed
Doomsdayprepper said:
1. You mean the British army? Nah, its not bloated. We need to expand it. Cuts are fine as long as we trim the fat not the muscle, like sacking civil servants and getting rid of the bureaucracy.

2. Just because a military is big and a lot is spent on it does not mean its bloated. Its not the muscle that we need to trim, its the fat, like the civil servants and bureaucrats.
Click to expand...
1. Sorry, I assumed you were a USAnian. I deeply apologize.

2. Sure it does, if it exceeds what is necessary to keep USA safe and engage in stuff then I'd say it is bloated. Like, you know how when some bodybuilders get to the size that they have a hard time moving around? Muscle needs to be trimmed too if it gets too cumbersome. All it's there for is to basically show off and not really for practical use.
 
R.Graves said:
Muscles become hideous and off putting at a certain point.
Click to expand...
Hideous and off putting is exactly what you want the military to be.
Mr Fish said:
Like, you know how when some bodybuilders get to the size that they have a hard time moving around? Muscle needs to be trimmed too if it gets too cumbersome. All it's there for is to basically show off and not really for practical use.
Click to expand...
You need to research how the US Army works.
Thing is the US Army is not cumbersome at all, nor does it have a hard time moving around. That is the most incorrect statement I have ever heard.
Its an efficient and streamlined organisation capable of incredible feats of logistics.
For example, Operation Desert Storm. After 5 weeks of bombing, it took 100 hours the Ground Campaign was over. 700,000 US troops were moved into Iraq within a very short amount of time.
Another example, the Iraq War. Huge amounts of troops and hardware was moved to Iraq within weeks.
Please don't just make statements like that without prior research.
All it's there for is to basically show off and not really for practical use.
Click to expand...
It's called a deterrent. And of course its for fucking practical use.
I'll link a load of practical uses since 1990:
1990 – Liberia: On August 6, 1990, President Bush reported that a reinforced rifle company had been sent to provide additional security to the U.S. Embassy in Monrovia, and that helicopter teams had evacuated U.S. citizens from Liberia.[RL30172]

1990 – Saudi Arabia: On August 9, 1990, President Bush reported that he launched Operation Desert Shield by ordering the forward deployment of substantial elements of the U.S. armed forces into the Persian Gulf region to help defend Saudi Arabia after the August 2 invasion of Kuwait by Iraq. On November 16, 1990, he reported the continued buildup of the forces to ensure an adequate offensive military option.[RL30172]American hostages being held in Iran.[RL30172] Staging point for the troops was primarily Bagram air field.

1991 – Iraq and Kuwait: Gulf War, On January 16, 1991, in response to the refusal by Iraq to leave Kuwait, U.S. and Coalition aircraft attacked Iraqi forces and military targets in Iraq and Kuwait in conjunction with a coalition of allies and under United Nations Security Council resolutions. On February 24, 1991, U.S.-led United Nation (UN) forces launched a ground offensive that finally drove Iraqi forces out of Kuwait within 100 hours. Combat operations ended on February 28, 1991, when President Bush declared a ceasefire.[RL30172]

1991–96 – Iraq: Operation Provide Comfort, Delivery of humanitarian relief and military protection for Kurds fleeing their homes in northern Iraq during the 1991 uprising, by a small Allied ground force based in Turkey which began in April 1991.

1991 – Iraq: On May 17, 1991, President Bush stated that the Iraqi repression of the Kurdish people had necessitated a limited introduction of U.S. forces into northern Iraq for emergency relief purposes.[RL30172]

1991 – Zaire: On September 25–27, 1991, after widespread looting and rioting broke out in Kinshasa, Air Force C-141s transported 100 Belgian troops and equipment into Kinshasa. American planes also carried 300 French troops into the Central African Republic and hauled evacuated American citizens.[RL30172]

1992 – Sierra Leone: Operation Silver Anvil, Following the April 29 coup that overthrew President Joseph Saidu Momoh, a United States European Command (USEUCOM) Joint Special Operations Task Force evacuated 438 people (including 42 Third Country nationals) on May 3. Two Air Mobility Command (AMC) C-141s flew 136 people from Freetown, Sierra Leone, to the Rhein-Main Air Base in Germany and nine C-130 sorties carried another 302 people to Dakar, Senegal.[RL30172]

1992–96 – Bosnia and Herzegovina: Operation Provide Promise was a humanitarian relief operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina during the Yugoslav Wars, from July 2, 1992, to January 9, 1996, which made it the longest running humanitarian airlift in history.[9]

1992 – Kuwait: On August 3, 1992, the United States began a series of military exercises in Kuwait, following Iraqi refusal to recognize a new border drawn up by the United Nations and refusal to cooperate with UN inspection teams.[RL30172]

1992–2003 – Iraq: Iraqi no-fly zones, The U.S., United Kingdom, and its Gulf War allies declared and enforced "no-fly zones" over the majority of sovereign Iraqi airspace, prohibiting Iraqi flights in zones in southern Iraq and northern Iraq, conducting aerial reconnaissance, and several specific attacks on Iraqi air-defense systems as part of the UN mandate. Often, Iraqi forces continued throughout a decade by firing on U.S. and British aircraft patrolling no-fly zones.(See also Operation Northern Watch, Operation Southern Watch) [RL30172]

1992–95 – Somalia: Operation Restore Hope, Somali Civil War: On December 10, 1992, President Bush reported that he had deployed U.S. armed forces to Somalia in response to a humanitarian crisis and a UN Security Council Resolution in support for UNITAF. The operation came to an end on May 4, 1993. U.S. forces continued to participate in the successor United Nations Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM II).(See also Battle of Mogadishu)[RL30172]

1993–95 – Bosnia: Operation Deny Flight, On April 12, 1993, in response to a United Nations Security Council passage of Resolution 816, U.S. and NATO enforced the no-fly zone over the Bosnian airspace, prohibited all unauthorized flights and allowed to "take all necessary measures to ensure compliance with [the no-fly zone restrictions]."

1993 – Macedonia: On July 9, 1993, President Clinton reported the deployment of 350 U.S. soldiers to the Republic of Macedonia to participate in the UN Protection Force to help maintain stability in the area of former Yugoslavia.[RL30172]

1994 – Bosnia: Banja Luka incident, NATO become involved in the first combat situation when NATO U.S. Air Force F-16 jets shot down four of the six Bosnian Serb J-21 Jastreb single-seat light attack jets for violating UN-mandated no-fly zone.

1994–95 – Haiti: Operation Uphold Democracy, U.S. ships had begun embargo against Haiti. Up to 20,000 U.S. military troops were later deployed to Haiti to restore democratically-elected Haiti PresidentJean-Bertrand Aristide from a military regime which came into power in 1991 after a major coup.[RL30172]

1994 – Macedonia: On April 19, 1994, President Clinton reported that the U.S. contingent in Macedonia had been increased by a reinforced company of 200 personnel.[RL30172]

1995 – Bosnia: Operation Deliberate Force, On August 30, 1995, U.S. and NATO aircraft began a major bombing campaign of Bosnian Serb Army in response to a Bosnian Serb mortar attack on a Sarajevo market that killed 37 people on August 28, 1995. This operation lasted until September 20, 1995. The air campaign along with a combined allied ground force of Muslim and Croatian Army against Serb positions led to a Dayton Agreement in December 1995 with the signing of warring factions of the war. As part of Operation Joint Endeavor, U.S. and NATO dispatched the Implementation Force (IFOR) peacekeepers to Bosnia to uphold the Dayton agreement.[RL30172]

1996 – Liberia: Operation Assured Response, On April 11, 1996, President Clinton reported that on April 9, 1996 due to the :"deterioration of the security situation and the resulting threat to American citizens" in Liberia he had ordered U.S. military forces to evacuate from that country "private U.S. citizens and certain third-country nationals who had taken refuge in the U.S. Embassy compound...."[RL30172]

1996 – Central African Republic, Operation Quick Response: On May 23, 1996, President Clinton reported the deployment of U.S. military personnel to Bangui, Central African Republic, to conduct the evacuation from that country of "private U.S. citizens and certain U.S. government employees", and to provide "enhanced security for the American Embassy in Bangui."[RL30172] United States Marine Corpselements of Joint Task Force Assured Response, responding in nearby Liberia, provided security to the embassy and evacuated 448 people, including between 190 and 208 Americans. The last Marines left Bangui on June 22.

1996 – Kuwait: Operation Desert Strike, American Air Strikes in the north to protect the Kurdish population against the Iraqi Army attacks.

1996 – Bosnia: Operation Joint Guard, On December 21, 1996, U.S. and NATO established the SFOR peacekeepers to replace the IFOR in enforcing the peace under the Dayton agreement.

1997 – Albania: Operation Silver Wake, On March 13, 1997, U.S. military forces were used to evacuate certain U.S. government employees and private U.S. citizens from Tirana, Albania.[RL30172]

1997 – Congo and Gabon: On March 27, 1997, President Clinton reported on March 25, 1997, a standby evacuation force of U.S. military personnel had been deployed to Congo and Gabon to provide enhanced security and to be available for any necessary evacuation operation.[RL30172]

1997 – Sierra Leone: On May 29 and May 30, 1997, U.S. military personnel were deployed to Freetown, Sierra Leone, to prepare for and undertake the evacuation of certain U.S. government employees and private U.S. citizens.[RL30172]

1997 – Cambodia: On July 11, 1997, In an effort to ensure the security of American citizens in Cambodia during a period of domestic conflict there, a Task Force of about 550 U.S. military personnel were deployed at Utapao Air Base in Thailand for possible evacuations. [RL30172]

1998 – Iraq: Operation Desert Fox, U.S. and British forces conduct a major four-day bombing campaign from December 16–19, 1998 on Iraqi targets.[RL30172]

1998 – Guinea-Bissau: Operation Shepherd Venture, On June 10, 1998, in response to an army mutiny in Guinea-Bissau endangering the U.S. Embassy, President Clinton deployed a standby evacuation force of U.S. military personnel to Dakar, Senegal, to evacuate from the city of Bissau.[RL30172]

1998–99 – Kenya and Tanzania: U.S. military personnel were deployed to Nairobi, Kenya, to coordinate the medical and disaster assistance related to the bombing of the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.[RL30172]

1998 – Afghanistan and Sudan: Operation Infinite Reach. On August 20, President Clinton ordered a cruise missile attack against two suspected terrorist training camps in Afghanistan and a suspected chemical factory in Sudan.[RL30172]

1998 – Liberia: On September 27, 1998, America deployed a stand-by response and evacuation force of 30 U.S. military personnel to increase the security force at the U.S. Embassy in Monrovia. [1][RL30172]

1999–2001 – East Timor: Limited number of U.S. military forces deployed with the United Nations-mandated International Force for East Timor restore peace to East Timor.[RL30172]

1999 – Serbia: Operation Allied Force: U.S. and NATO aircraft began a major bombing of Serbia and Serb positions in Kosovo on March 24, 1999, during the Kosovo War due to the refusal by Serbian President Slobodan Milošević to end repression against ethnic Albanians in Kosovo. This operation ended in June 10, 1999, when Milošević agreed to pull out his troops out of Kosovo. In response to the situation in Kosovo, NATO dispatched the KFOR peacekeepers to secure the peace under UNSC Resolution 1244.[RL30172]

2000–2009[edit]


    • 2000 – Sierra Leone: On May 12, 2000, a U.S. Navy patrol craft deployed to Sierra Leone to support evacuation operations from that country if needed.[RL30172]
    • 2000 – Nigeria: Special Forces troops are sent to Nigeria to lead a training mission in the county.[10]
    • 2000 – Yemen: On October 12, 2000, after the USS Cole attack in the port of Aden, Yemen, military personnel were deployed to Aden.[RL30172]
    • 2000 – East Timor: On February 25, 2000, a small number of U.S. military personnel were deployed to support the United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor (UNTAET). [RL30172]
    • 2001 – On April 1, 2001, a mid-air collision between a United States Navy EP-3E ARIES II signals surveillance aircraft and a People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) J-8II interceptor fighter jet resulted in an international dispute between the United States and the People's Republic of China called the Hainan Island incident.
    • 2002 – Philippines: OEF-Philippines, As of January, U.S. "combat-equipped and combat support forces" have been deployed to the Philippines to train with, assist and advise the Philippines' Armed Forces in enhancing their "counterterrorist capabilities."[RL30172]
    • 2002 – Côte d'Ivoire: On September 25, 2002, in response to a rebellion in Côte d'Ivoire, U.S. military personnel went into Côte d'Ivoire to assist in the evacuation of American citizens fromBouaké.[11][RL30172]
    • 2003–2011 – War in Iraq: Operation Iraqi Freedom, March 20, 2003, The United States leads a coalition that includes the United Kingdom, Australia and Poland to invade Iraq with the stated goal being "to disarm Iraq in pursuit of peace, stability, and security both in the Gulf region and in the United States."[RL30172]
    • 2003 – Liberia: Second Liberian Civil War, On June 9, 2003, President Bush reported that on June 8 he had sent about 35 U.S. Marines into Monrovia, Liberia, to help secure the U.S. Embassy in Nouakchott, Mauritania, and to aid in any necessary evacuation from either Liberia or Mauritania.[RL30172]
    • 2003 – Georgia and Djibouti: "US combat equipped and support forces" had been deployed to Georgia and Djibouti to help in enhancing their "counterterrorist capabilities."[12]



    • 2004 – Haiti: 2004 Haitian coup d'état occurs, The US first sent 55 combat equipped military personnel to augment the U.S. Embassy security forces there and to protect American citizens and property in light. Later 200 additional US combat-equipped, military personnel were sent to prepare the way for a UN Multinational Interim Force, MINUSTAH.[RL30172]
    • 2004 – War on Terror: U.S. anti-terror related activities were underway in Georgia, Djibouti, Kenya, Ethiopia, Yemen, and Eritrea.[13]



    • 2005–06 – Pakistan: President Bush deploys troops from US Army Air Cav Brigades to provide Humanitarian relief to far remote villages in the Kashmir mountain ranges of Pakistan stricken by a massive earthquake.
    • 2006 – Lebanon: part of the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit[14] begins evacuation of U.S. citizens willing to leave the country in the face of a likely ground invasion by Israel and continued fighting between Hezbollah and the Israeli military.[14][15]



    • 2007 - The Mogadishu Encounter, on November 4, 2007, Somali Pirate's boarded and attacked a North Korean merchant vessel. Passing U.S. Navy Ships and a helicopter that were patrolling at the time responded to the attack. Once the ship was freed from the pirates, the American forces were given permission to board and assist the wounded crew and handle surviving pirates.
    • 2007 – Somalia: Battle of Ras Kamboni, On January 8, 2007, while the conflict between the Islamic Courts Union and the Transitional Federal Government continues, an AC-130 gunship conducts an aerial strike on a suspected al-Qaeda operative, along with other Islamist fighters, on Badmadow Island near Ras Kamboni in southern Somalia.[16]
    • 2008 – South Ossetia, Georgia: Helped Georgia humanitarian aid,[17] helped to transport Georgian forces from Iraq during the conflict. In the past, the US has provided training and weapons to Georgia.
2010–present[edit]



    • 2010–11 – Operation New Dawn, On February 17, 2010, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced that as of September 1, 2010, the name "Operation Iraqi Freedom" would be replaced by "Operation New Dawn". This coincides with the reduction of American troops to 50,000.
    • 2011 – Drone strikes on al-Shabab militants begin in Somalia.[18] This marks the 6th nation in which such strikes have been carried out,[19] including Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Yemen[20] and Libya.
    • 2011–present – Uganda: U.S. Combat troops sent in as advisers to Uganda.[21]
    • 2012 – Jordan: 150 U.S. troops deployed to Jordan to help it contain the Syrian Civil War within Syria's borders.
    • 2012 – Turkey: 400 troops and two batteries of Patriot missiles sent to Turkey to prevent any missile strikes from Syria.
    • 2013 – Mali: U.S. forces assisted the French in Operation Serval with air refueling and transport aircraft.
    • 2013 – Navy SEALs conducted a raid in Somalia and possibly killed a senior Al-Shabaab official, simultaneously another raid took place in Tripoli, Libya, where Special Operations Forces captured Abu Anas al Libi (also known as Anas al-Libi)[22]
    • 2014 - 2014 American rescue mission in Syria: The U.S attempted to rescue James Foley and other hostages being held by ISIL. Air strikes were conducted on the ISIL military base known as "Osama bin Laden camp". Meanwhile, the bombings, Delta teams parachuted near an ISIL high-valued prison. The main roads were blocked to keep any target from escaping. When no hostage was found, the American troops began house to house searches. By this time, ISIL militants began arriving to the area. Heavy fighting occurred until the Americans decided to abandon the mission due to the hostages being nowhere in the area. Although the mission failed, at least 5 ISIL militants were killed, however 1 American troop was wounded. According to the reports, Jordan had a role in the operation and that one Jordanian soldier had been wounded as well. This was unconfirmed.
    • 2014 - 2014 Yemen hostage rescue operations against al-Qaeda: On November 25, U.S Navy SEAL's and Yemeni Special Forces launched an operations in Yemen in attempt to rescue eight hostages that were being held by al-Qaeda. Although the operation was successful, no American hostages were secured. In the first attempt, six Yemenis, one Saudi Arabian, and one Ethiopian were rescued. On December 4, 2014, al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) threatened to execute the Somers if the U.S failed to the unspecified commands. AQAP also stated that they would be executed if the U.S attempted another rescue operation. On December 6, a second operation was launched. 40 U.S SEALs and 30 Yemeni troops were deployed to the compound. A 10-minute fire fight occurred before the American troops could enter where the remaining hostages (Somers and Korkie) were being held. They were alive, but fatally wounded. Surgery was done in mid air when flying away from the site. Korkie died while in flight, and Somers died once landed on the USS Makin Island. No American troop was killed/injured, however a Yemenis soldier was wounded.
    • 2015 - April 30, 2015 U.S. sends ships to the Strait of Hormuz to shield vessels after Iranian Seizure of commercial vessel: The U.S. Navy deploys warships to protect American commercial vessels passing through the Strait of Hormuz from Iranian interference. Concerns were also raised that Iranian gunships were trailing a U.S. container ship. Iran additionally fired shots over the bow, and seized, a ship registered in the Marshall Islands, part of a long-standing dispute between the two nations.[27]
These are all also good examples of the US Military's logistical achievements too.
 
Last edited:
You misinterpreted or misunderstood my analogy. I'm not saying that the army itself becomes cumbersome with all of that muscle. I'm saying that it may become a problem for 'the rest' of the country and its people if the military is given too much of a prioritization.
 
Cause education is shit in impoverished areas, college tuition is too costly and people get in way too high of debt just to get an education, public college as far as I've heard isn't exactly stellar and the cost of healthcare is far too high. Making college and healthcare free (by diverting money gained from taxes from the military towards education) (or at the very least improving public colleges and impoverished areas school systems) would help out a lot of people.

Like, yeah, they got a big mighty veiny throbbing moneycock to swing around if they so choose but it's not exactly swinging all too often and while it's impressive to look at there are a lot of other areas of the US that needs far more attention.
 
Mr Fish said:
Cause education is shit in impoverished areas, college tuition is too costly and people get in way too high of debt just to get an education, public college as far as I've heard isn't exactly stellar and the cost of healthcare is far too high. Making college and healthcare free (by diverting money gained from taxes from the military towards education) (or at the very least improving public colleges and impoverished areas school systems) would help out a lot of people.
Click to expand...
I'd cut civil servants and bureaucrats, and maybe cull some of the top brass. Slashing all that should give the govt enough money to lower costs for education and healthcare.
I want to know what kind of stuff in the army you'd cut. Cutting the muscle would be incredibly stupid.
 
Some of the military bases overseas in allied countries probably. If the point is to keep personnel ready in case they need to defend an ally they can just as well just move that shit over to an allied base instead of operating their own base.

I'd probably cut some of the redundant spending on new shit too. I've heard of the US getting new vehicles that just end up sitting in hangars, waiting to seemingly never be used. Like, fine, you (US, not 'literally' "you", doomy) got a bunch of planes and boats and shit ready to rock n roll. Good for you. Now how about 'not' buying any more until those are either used up or a war gets started proper?

I don't know the full number of army personnel (grunts, officers, civvies and shit) and what exactly they all do and what their importance in the overall scheme of things are but I'd probably get working on getting moving them out of the military (not just gonna kick them out into the cold) cause something is draining the military like fucking crazy) so that those that aren't necessarily needed aren't just draining money for the sake of draining money (Like overseas military bases on allied soil).

Also, aren't there an awful lot of people that get a chance to join the military? Maybe the amount of new ones being culled should be scaled down. I've heard of people that only get into the military because they'll pay for their education and healthcare and provide them with green cheese after they served their term, while not a terrible reason to join the army it makes me wonder how many are taken in and are provided for and never really used. Like, how much money has been used on them exactly?

But this is coming from a swede who knows bugger all of the complexity of a foreign military. So I dunno if what I'd do would be good or not. But I see the budget they got and the other issues their country face and it makes me wonder why you can't just kill two (three, four... Five? A hundred? 17 at least! (I don't fucking know, lots of things that money could be used for)) birds with one stone. I mean, budget higher than the 8 next countries combined? That just seems excessive to me.
 
Last edited:
Because things are not nearly as simple as how you explain it Fish.

First of all, a military base on foreign soil means EXACTLY this. You attack this country, you are essentially attacking this AMERICAN military base. You attack an AMERICAN military base, you are declaring war on America, period.

A great deal of americans are employed in the defense industry. As americans have gotten used to getting cheap goods, along with global competition, companies have to outsource to remain competitive. This leaves defense related work, that obviously cannot be trusted to other countries, to americans, providing jobs.

Lastly, we are talking about providing every single American with coverage for the most expensive stuff. Americans do not need help with seeing a doctor for a cold or stomach flu. Americans have problems with paying for LIFELONG treatments life AIDS, rehabilitative services, Alzheimers, etc. This is not to mention medical providers suggesting every treatment under the sun to avoid getting sued or simply out of greed. I mean fucking RESTLESS LEG SYNDROME??

IMO, there will need to be MASSIVE cuts in government spending across the board, including military, along with a MASSIVE, across the board tax hike to pay for this 'socialism'.

That's is why I mention NATO. America does the heavy lifting so the Europeans can fund a minimum military. If Trump seriously puts into practice what he is saying, nations like France and the UK are going to have to divert a large chunk of social spending to mainting a beefier and more capable military. Whether the population, who has gotten used to all this 'free sht', can handle this, is something else altogether. Judging from the turmoil in France BEFORE the Nice attack, it doesn't look good.

That's why I said Europe is so different. You guys make socialism work because you have a smaller and more educated population. Smaller population means less fucktards per capita. Smaller population means smaller class sizes. Smaller population means it is easier to achieve consensus. It is the same argument with communism. it works on a small scale but utterly fails on a GRAND scale.

It is funny how socialists in the this country demand $15 dollar minimum wage when there is NO SHORTAGE of unskilled labor in this country. What is worse is the irony that the same left who are hurt by this lack of competition, also advocate free and open borders, which would add only MORE, people who are ready to enter this labor pool. This makes unskilled labor EVEN LESS competitive than it already is now.
 
Last edited:
There is no 'Socialism' in Europe, there is Social Democracy. Bernie already covered costs with the Robin Hood tax, the funneling of funds from middlemen companies to the people directly, along with the fact that the costs aren't bloated due to frills - European nations have those frills too - but by vested interests who inflate the costs of drugs, who inflate the costs of education for their own pockets, who use money more and more for needless wars from the War on Drugs to the War on Terror. Hell, Sanders still will keep the military. He's actually still very much in line with keeping bases, keeping the US in the fight, and all that NATO jazz, but he would cut off the complex of corporations that suck billions out of the USM budget like Dynacorp to put that money elsewhere and keep the USA capable.
 
Anyway, Clinton went with the Kaine VP. I mean, we all knew faux populist-progressive Warren wouldn't get it, she wants to keep fighting the Banks and yelling when she lands a feather-punch, but Clinton also had Booker, MoM, Biden , whom everyone loves for some damn reason, (yes, the VP of a prior president can be the VP of another president, such as George Clinton and John C. Calhoun, unless they now have term limits) or some other such like a female, maybe Giffords (they even LOOK ALIKE). But she went with Kaine.

Dunno how this could help Trump, but it's just something which occurred.
 
Mr Fish said:
Some of the military bases overseas in allied countries probably. If the point is to keep personnel ready in case they need to defend an ally they can just as well just move that shit over to an allied base instead of operating their own base.
I don't know the full number of army personnel (grunts, officers, civvies and shit) and what exactly they all do and what their importance in the overall scheme of things are but I'd probably get working on getting moving them out of the military (not just gonna kick them out into the cold) cause something is draining the military like fucking crazy) so that those that aren't necessarily needed aren't just draining money for the sake of draining money (Like overseas military bases on allied soil).
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting we fire personnel? They what keeps the military a well oiled machine. That is a good example of trimming the muscle, not the fat, which is a very bad idea.
Some of the military bases overseas in allied countries probably. If the point is to keep personnel ready in case they need to defend an ally they can just as well just move that shit over to an allied base instead of operating their own base.
Click to expand...
A lot of the Air Bases are not only used by the USA. Many of them are shared, like Incirlik, which has been in the news lately, is used by the USA, Turkey, the RAF and sometimes the Saudis.
Every base supports either a specific security goal or regional stability. In a lot of areas the bases are useful and bring economic stability. They also keep the world stable because with a base everywhere there is a solid presence ready to keep order if necessary.
I've heard of people that only get into the military because they'll pay for their education and healthcare and provide them with green cheese after they served their term, while not a terrible reason to join the army it makes me wonder how many are taken in and are provided for and never really used. Like, how much money has been used on them exactly?
Click to expand...
Not going to believe that unless you provide sources.
But this is coming from a swede who knows bugger all of the complexity of a foreign military.
Click to expand...
Then why do you want to debate about it? It's unwise to argue about something you know nothing about.
Now how about 'not' buying any more until those are either used up or a war gets started proper?
Click to expand...
A ridiculous and dangerous viewpoint. One must be ready to fight at any time. It could take months, if not years for the equipment to arrive. The Military must be ready for conflict at any time, with all the equipment it needs. What if there is a sudden invasion of the mainland? Or America wants to invade a country now, and needs to do it now, but it needs to wait months for the stuff to arrive?
US, not 'literally' "you", doomy
Click to expand...
Please never call me 'doomy'. Doomsday will suffice.
That just seems excessive to me.
Click to expand...
This comes down to opinion. I don't think its excessive, because as the dominant superpower, the US has the responsibility to keep order globally.
 
Last edited:
Bernie Sanders also wants to gut NATO.

Bernie wants to tell nations who want protection from Russia to fuck off. He does these things so he can appease an expansionist minded Putin.

If we deny nations entrance to NATO, where the hell would they go if not the arms of the CSTO? Sure he supports sanctions but that has already happened/is happening.

Bernie also has said nothing about aggressive Chinese expansion in disputed waters. He has said nothing about what to do if China initiates another Taiwan crisis or continues to act aggressively towards Japan.

His only mention has been sanctions on nations who provide China with weapons. This is a tiny measure as China for some time, has been modernizing its own weapon from within. The development of the J31 stealth fighter and the WZ 10 attack helicopter are prime examples of this. Not to mention Russia, who is a direct competitor of ours, is likely going to continue to provide arms technology to China anyways, among other nations who are also against us.

He supported the Iran deal, which gave the hardcore theocratic government billions with which to fund HAMAS and Hezbollah. Money that can be used to acquire new weapons and modernize their military.

He supports the elimination of the Cuban embargo without Cuba giving an inch of ground in return, primarily in the form of nationalized U.S. company assets, among other things.

He supports closing Gitmo, which would transfer all f its terror detainees into U.S. prisons, giving them to indoctrinate the criminals already in there. Not to mention what happens if there is an escape as now a wanted terrorist is on U.S. soil.

I mentioned his Robin Hood AKA 1 percent on wallstreet speculation tax. I also mentioned I don't believe it will be nearly enough to fund all the free shit.

To me he is socialist enough.

Government control over complicated sectors like healthcare for example has far reaching implications on things like medicine, regulating rules for those who want to open their own practice, how to compensate doctors, legal issues, etc. Private ownership has a stake in all these caveats, private ownership that the state seeks to control.

He wants government to further influence private businesses like pushing for the $15 minim wage, government influence in regards to paid maternity leave, hiring and firing conditions, etc.

Do not let the populist rhetoric fool you. The same goes for any other sector Sanders wants to nationalize.
 
Last edited:
Danuis said:
Anyway, Clinton went with the Kaine VP. I mean, we all knew faux populist-progressive Warren wouldn't get it, she wants to keep fighting the Banks and yelling when she lands a feather-punch, but Clinton also had Booker, MoM, Biden , whom everyone loves for some damn reason, (yes, the VP of a prior president can be the VP of another president, such as George Clinton and John C. Calhoun, unless they now have term limits) or some other such like a female, maybe Giffords (they even LOOK ALIKE). But she went with Kaine.

Dunno how this could help Trump, but it's just something which occurred.
Click to expand...
The only term limit that applies is the 10-year lifetime one on the Presidency as established in the 22nd Amendment. A VP can run as a VP for another president, as long as he wouldn't go over the 10-year limit if he had to assume the office of President.
 
NOW the Dem party will not be united. Not after #DNCleak/#DNCleaks/#wikileaks.

Hilarious how the Clintons are trying to pin this on Russia. Like this is the '50s.

No matter how you feel about Clinton, the results are clear: the Bernistas now have yet another hit against them to count; they won't be behind her. Even a few of her own are buckling.

Hillary needs their votes. She has done basically jack nothing to get those votes, nor has the DNC (the Superdelegate amendment was voted down, but can still be fought on the floor in two days or so)
 
What with her lifelong crusade against foreign influence in US elections, Hillary should make great political capital of that.
 
Trump's supporter Newt Gingrich is also saying "Estonia is a suburb of St Petersburgh" and Trump that NATO-countries shouldn't be defended by US.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top