Spending cuts in the military is the latest political issue.

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
I fully support sensible cuts to military spending, provided there are identical percentage cuts in social programs that are not found in the Constitution.

Because you know, military defense *IS* a constitutional responsibility while the following *ARE NOT*:

Healthcare
Food stamps/WIC/Child Nutrition Program
Housing Assistance/Energy Assistance/TANF
Cell Phones/Internet access
Education
etc...

Let's not cut education......a heavily militarized country really needs to be well educated as well.

our military is enormous more so than needed by a factor of ten...we need to stop being the worlds police and cut military spending by half

a reply to: nwtrucker

Well, you might be interested in this,

http: //thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c114:H.R.3616: (close the gap in the URL and copy and paste) as the link won't embed here.

Anywat this is an amedment to the famous space protection bill, (re-presented without a whole section that included' 'chemtrails) known as HR3616, (fomerly HR2977)

This amendment was made in late 2015 making emergency provision payment for military and ancillary persons who might be stood down, or 'furloughed'

I would imagine that this amendment had to relate to a major trimming down of US forces, and would need to be recent or current.
So it doesn't seem that there is going to be much in the way of increasing anything, by the look of things.

I know it says in the text, in case of a funding gap, ostensibly that may be meant to mean a shutting down of government such as there was when the lefties and righties fell out, but what if there was no shinola left anyway?

a reply to: smurfy

this is what you are trying to link

Haven't read it, just found it for ya

600 billion

and 19 men Supposedly brought you re nation to it knees

Riouz

a reply to: Riouz


Oh sure, the entire military was left completely ineffective by 19 men.

a reply to: Bluntone22

Well yes it did

IT paved the way for everything since

Riouz

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: Riouz


Oh sure, the entire military was left completely ineffective by 19 men.

on purpose.

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: smurfy

this is what you are trying to link

Haven't read it, just found it for ya

That's it..cheers.

a reply to: nwtrucker

The USA could cut its. Budget in half and survive. Not that you should cut it that much.

It just needs to learn how to spend more wisely.

Plus pressure the NATO dead weights to pay there way like the UK. All but five COUNTRYS pay the minimum amount of 2%!
If you get your more trusted allies to pick up more of the slack then you can cut back.
Get Japan and South korea to pick up more of the tab. Either make them expand there military or pay you the cost to cover there rear ends.

Plus better project oversight. Stop money going into black holes or letting defence contractors give you the run around and over running and over charging.
Money wasted on beurocratic BS and political meddling likely costs more than most European army's!

It's not a case of spending more but spend SMARTER.

It's why China and Russia are slowly catching up even though they have a fraction of the budget. They get more bang for there buck. Many cause if a politician or corperation gave the Russian or Chinese goverment the run around the politician or Ceo would likely end up shot or in prison.

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: nwtrucker


Get Japan and South korea to pick up more of the tab.

Never will happen, and I'm sure you know why the US is more than happy to cover their tab.

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: nwtrucker


Get Japan and South korea to pick up more of the tab.

Never will happen, and I'm sure you know why the US is more than happy to cover their tab.

Why?

WW2 is over its a different Japan today same as the USA is different to what it was in 1812 or 1850.

Plus Japan doesn’t have to militarize. It military Budget is currently 1% GPD. Well it can donate another 1% to the USA. Fair price for the protection from China and North Korea when the USA spends 3.5%!


Plus Get Germany and the Scaninavian country to pick up there part of the NATO Tab. And France is below the 2% too. If Germany could field and carrier group , France update theres and maybe Denmark and Norway could feild a joint one then the USA could pull back from the Atlantic and Med quite a bit and focus more on the pacific.

as mentioned, I wish the money was better spent

with climate change coming, unfortunately we may experience in our lifetime conflict for water and food and it is comforting knowing nobody can come in here and take ours

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: nwtrucker


Get Japan and South korea to pick up more of the tab.

Never will happen, and I'm sure you know why the US is more than happy to cover their tab.

Why?

Military bases.

Same reason Russia annexed Crimea and intervened in Syria. Big military bases.

a reply to: Vector99


I'm not a big fan of the results myself.


Isolationist? I hold a different view. We were "isolationist" between WWI and WWII. What did that get us?

If we had gotten in when the British Empire did, would there even have been a holocaust? If we had shown more spine confronting Germany would Japan think they could get away with Pearl Harbor? Alternate history so no clear answer.


I do know that an isolationist U.S. combined with multiple powers....fairly equal militarily, a few that thought they could 'get away with it
acted.

We've seen the casualty numbers of those ingredients.


The powers are evening up again. Multiple powers. The U.S. is, in fact, and has been in retreat militarily for decades. European based closed. Bases all over the world. Our military has shrunk over 50% just in the Clinton administration.

Our will/resolve is no longer questioned. It's laughed at.


Yet your right!! The cost is unbelievable. I really don't know the answer.


The subject came up at work today and one idea that resonated with me is a combination of Trump's withdrawal from NATO-they really don't 'need' us anymore- and back up our commitment to specific allies.


We IS needed is a specific game plan where we still operate as a deterrent internationally yet with clear, articulated oversight. On the other hand, when we draw a line in the sand, someone is always willing to take it right to that point.


Give a 'withdrawal date' and plans are made based on them by those that would benefit from that withdrawal.


Getting a headache....

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: nwtrucker

Why is the rest of the countries that you speak of, their middle class is growing and ours is decreasing?

That's the economic issue. For simplicity's sake I've separated the two. Yet kill the economy, you kill the engine that drives the military....

a reply to: TrueBrit


Humph. I see it as exactly opposite. Not that there isn't truth in what you say.

Private contractors came about due to shortages in military personnel to do the jobs required of them in the first place. Also, our military isn't in the business of personal protection.


I'm sure not going to be party to 'outsiders' telling the military how many rounds they should expend.....Obama would love you...he'd make you SecDef......


Bottom line is F-15cs are older than dirt. F-16s are older than my daughter who has two children herself, one of which is a teenager. (Yes there's been 'upgrades' but who drive a car that old....other than for fun.)

If we are going to have a military then this is intolerable....no matter what combination of factors that led up to it.


The military industrial complex? Fine abuse exists. Yet whose fault is that? Where's the oversight? Who sets the parameters of equipment that is potentially ordered? All of these are Gov'ts issues. If you give a dog a bone, he's gonna bury it.

We are back to the Gov't, the direction this should be taken, how much and how big and for what purpose??

Yes things have changed. Some have not changed.....human behavior remains unchanged since recorded history.


The was an old poster back in the Vietnam era:



"Yea though I walk through the valley of death,

I shall fear no evil,
cause I'm the meanest son of a bitch in the valley."

a reply to: AwakenYaMind


I wouldn't have that crap near me.


So enlighten me, oh wise one, I'm all ears....

a reply to: Rocker2013

You mistook my meaning. Your fault. You put your interpretation into what I said. That's on you.

Go back and look at the list I quoted from the other members post.

a reply to: nwtrucker

YOU bet it's economic, we have vampire banking happening now with the corporate powers that be,until you seperate THEIR money from the functions of the government, you will have a problem with corruption.
BUT how....