It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Trump to Call for (Major) Military Spending Increase - Repeal Sequistration

page: 2
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 11:15 AM
link   
As I listen to Trumps speech, I can hear the war drums in the background. Who's ready to support more profit in blood for the contractors.

America is in the war business and it appears that business will be improving soon.
edit on 7-9-2016 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 11:21 AM
link   
Some specifics are starting to leak out ahead of his speech..



Trump would increase the size of the army to about 540,000; “build a Marine Corps based on 36 battalions”;
“build a Navy approaching 350 surface ships and submarines”;
and “build an Air Force of at least 1,200 fighter aircraft,” his campaign also said.


www.bloomberg.com...

Current size of Army 480k...He wants to add another 60,000 troops or 12.5%

Ships? We are about 273 now....he wants to add 87 or about 30% increase

Fighter aircraft? The US Airforce has a minimum of 1900 fighter aircraft (by law)..plus 1400 US Navy...so no idea what Trump is talking about there? Maybe an additional 1200?



posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 11:35 AM
link   
I think he want's to become King of the World.



posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 11:48 AM
link   
Trump is calling for Major Increase in Military Spending $$$$
No entitlement cuts $$$$
Tax cuts $$$$
giant infrastructure plan $$$$
Huuge wall $$$$$
immigration force $$$$$

And no legitmate explanation on how any of this will get paid for...

I am still waiting for someone to explain how he is a conservative?



posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 12:17 PM
link   
The amount of irony in this, considering all the criticism of Hillary's latest commercial where she accused Trump of being a dangerous war monger; wherein his supporters accused her of being the warmonger.

Maybe intelligence will finally prevail, maybe finally everyone can see these two #heads are the same.



posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Here's the part that got my attention:


Trump also vowed to help offset the cost by seeking additional payments from countries where the U.S. has military bases, including Germany, Saudi Arabia and Japan.

So basically, our troops are just used as mercenaries and he's going to increase our going rates (or you could see it as extorting the host countries for more protection money).

Also, ironically, Trump was for the sequester just 3 years ago! He even said they should do a lot more cutting than what the sequester did!



posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 02:26 PM
link   
I don't think more money is needed for the military, rather a top to bottom review of spending and how to make each $ go further. Despite the current levels, if the US ever got into a ground conflict with Russia in the ME, they'd get their asses handed to them.



posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 02:38 PM
link   
I notice a distinct lack of threads promoting any initiatives that Hillary Clinton has proposed. It's amazing that she is still in the running.

it will be interesting to see if being a boring sickly liar and deceiver was a good strategy for her.



posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Here are the words from the speech...


As soon as I take office, I will ask Congress to fully eliminate the defense sequester and will submit a new budget to rebuild our military. This will increase certainty in the defense community as to funding, and will allow military leaders to plan for our future defense needs. As part of removing the defense sequester, I will ask Congress to fully offset the costs of increased military spending. In the process, we will make government leaner and more responsive to the public. I will ask that savings be accomplished through common sense reforms that eliminate government waste and budget gimmicks – and that protect hard-earned benefits for Americans. Government-wide, improper government payments are estimated to exceed $135 billion per year, and the amount of unpaid taxes is estimated to be as high as $385 billion. We can also reduce the size of the federal bureaucracy through responsible workforce attrition – that is, when employees retire, they can be replaced by a smaller number of new employees. We can also stop funding programs that are not authorized in law. Congress spent $320 billion last year on 256 expired laws. Removing just 5 percent of that will reduce spending by almost $200 billion over 10 years. The military will not be exempt either – the military bureaucracy will have to be trimmed as well.


Some fact checking to do on the numbers, but he seems to have the core of a plan.

Some context is also needed on the current spending and military health. Here is what he said:


President Obama and Hillary Clinton have also overseen deep cuts in our military, which only invite more aggression from our adversaries. History shows that when America is not prepared is when the danger is greatest. We want to deter, avoid and prevent conflict through our unquestioned military strength. Under Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, defense spending is on track to fall to its lowest level as a share of the economy since the end of World War II. We currently have the smallest Army since 1940. The Navy is among the smallest it has been since 1915. And the Air Force is the smallest it has been since 1947. When Ronald Reagan left office, our Navy had 592 ships. When Barack Obama took office, it had 285 ships. Today, the Navy has just 276 ships. The average Air Force aircraft is 27 years-old. We have 2nd generation B-52 bombers – their fathers flew the same plane. Our Army has been shrinking rapidly, from 553,000 soldiers in 2009 to just 479,000 today. In 2009, our Marine Corps had 202,000 active Marines. Today, it’s just 182,000. Our ship count is below the minimum of 308 that the Navy says is needed to execute its current missions. President Obama plans to reduce the Army to 450,000 troops—which would hamstring our ability to defend the United States. It takes 22 years on average to field a major new weapons system. In 2010, the US spent $554 billion on non-war base defense spending. In the current year, we are spending $548 billion – a cut of 10% in real inflation-adjusted dollars. This reduction was done through what is known as the sequester, or automatic defense budget cuts. Under the budget agreement, defense took half of the cuts – even though it makes up only one-sixth of the budget.


edit on 7/9/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 02:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
I notice a distinct lack of threads promoting any initiatives that Hillary Clinton has proposed. It's amazing that she is still in the running.

it will be interesting to see if being a boring sickly liar and deceiver was a good strategy for her.


Trump absolutely shredded her in his speech and his assessment is undeniable:


Let’s look back at the Middle East at the very beginning of 2009, before Hillary Clinton was sworn-in. Libya was stable. Syria was under control. Egypt was ruled by a secular President and an ally of the United States. Iraq was experiencing a reduction in violence. The group that would become what we now call ISIS was close to being extinguished. Iran was being choked off by economic sanctions. Fast-forward to today. What have the decisions of Obama-Clinton produced? Libya is in ruins, our ambassador and three other brave Americans are dead, and ISIS has gained a new base of operations. Syria is in the midst of a disastrous civil war. ISIS controls large portions of territory. A refugee crisis now threatens Europe and the United States. And hundreds of thousands are dead. In Egypt, terrorists have gained a foothold in the Sinai desert, near the Suez Canal, one of the most essential waterways in the world. Iraq is in chaos, and ISIS is on the loose. ISIS has spread across the Middle East, and into the West. Iran, the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism, is now flush with $150 billion dollars in cash released by the United States – plus another $1.7 billion dollars in cash ransom payments. In other words, our country was blackmailed and extorted into paying this unheard-of amount of money. Worst of all, the Nuclear deal puts Iran, the number one state sponsor of Radical Islamic terrorism, on a path to nuclear weapons. This is Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy legacy.



posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 02:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth


Despite the current levels, if the US ever got into a ground conflict with Russia in the ME, they'd get their asses handed to them.


Holy crap...No...

There is no measure of troop level, readiness or capability where US ground Troops get their butts handed to them by Russia. Notice that Russia only feigned sending in troops in Syria with a few small units, but then retreated quickly to just bombing the crap out of everything?

The last two Russian Military operations that involved ground troops were Ossetia-Georgia and Crimea-Ukraine and in both instances it was third-rate operations against weekend-warrior civilians...and they still lost troops..Russian Spec Ops is OK (Spetnaz), but US Spec Ops are several order of magnitude better...and as far as the average GI JOE, America's forces are far, far better trained and equipped and don't carry Vodka in their Camelbak.



posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

To be fair, he's no fan of science or energy & the environment.

He could choke out their funding and put it all in defence without costing the honest tax-paying voter one extra dime.

Problem solved!



posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 02:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: UKTruth


Despite the current levels, if the US ever got into a ground conflict with Russia in the ME, they'd get their asses handed to them.


Holy crap...No...

There is no measure of troop level, readiness or capability where US ground Troops get their butts handed to them by Russia. Notice that Russia only feigned sending in troops in Syria with a few small units, but then retreated quickly to just bombing the crap out of everything?

The last two Russian Military operations that involved ground troops were Ossetia-Georgia and Crimea-Ukraine and in both instances it was third-rate operations against weekend-warrior civilians...and they still lost troops..Russian Spec Ops is OK (Spetnaz), but US Spec Ops are several order of magnitude better...and as far as the average GI JOE, America's forces are far, far better trained and equipped and don't carry Vodka in their Camelbak.


lol, Vodka in the camelbak.. I like that.



posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 02:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
I notice a distinct lack of threads promoting any initiatives that Hillary Clinton has proposed. It's amazing that she is still in the running.

it will be interesting to see if being a boring sickly liar and deceiver was a good strategy for her.

That's interesting. I thought Repubs said a Hillary presidency would just be 4 more years of Obama's policies? By that logic, wouldn't you already know what policies she's advocating?

But for the record, she has been putting out new proposals and initiatives. Of course there won't be many threads on them here because ATS is very right leaning. People here are more obsessed with her emails & exaggerated health "crisis". But in case you want to start those threads, here's a link to her new policy proposals on mental health (it was released last week & it's pretty detailed):

Comprehensive Agenda on Mental Health

And here's a link to her new policy proposal to deal with pandemics and to increase the public health system (this was released the week before the previous plan):

Hillary Clinton Proposes Rapid Response Fund to Fight Pandemics, Bolster America’s Public Health Infrastructure



posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 03:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Special forces may as well be irrelevant in any regional confrontation with Russia in the Middle East, unless you want to sabotage the submarine bases in Murmansk for no reason.

If be interested to see how America's pathetic quick-reaction Brigade Combat Team (really stupid name btw) fare against Uncle Vlad's 2nd Guards Tank Divison and 7th Guards Motor Rifle Division. Quite badly id imagine as one has guys in humvees and the other T-90s and BMP-2.

Good luck getting the US 1st Armored Divison, with an amazing four (4!!!!) battalions of tanks to Istanbul as the humvee dudes are swept aside like ants. Should take about 2 weeks by sealift, by which time the conflict would be over.

Thankfully under a Trump administration war with Russia seems quite far-fetched, so it's all academic really.

Though for the truly interested, I'd recommend reading some of the hypothetical European Escalation research papers that be come out as of late. Doesn't end too well for NATO, but Russia tends to come out quite badly as well if it's any consolation.

The Russian Army of Grozny is gone. The Chaos of Post-Soviet Russia has ended. "Murika # Yeah" is a remarkably childish and uninformed view to have on future conflicts with America's rivals. The Pentagon itself said in 2015 it could no longer guarantee a decisive victory over the DPRK for example. This is due to a number of factors, most notably that the DPRKs military isn't the joke the American Press make it out to be and America's own declining military strength.

Though hopefully under Trump Russia won't be an American rival anymore



posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 03:55 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Hardly shredded, he says all those things but I wonder if he could back them up with direct actions taken by either of them.
Just a bunch if talking points with little substance behind them.



posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 03:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: UKTruth

Hardly shredded, he says all those things but I wonder if he could back them up with direct actions taken by either of them.
Just a bunch if talking points with little substance behind them.


The substance is there. It's what has happened since 2009.
I don't think we need to know the specific actions Hillary took, she was SOS. She was a significant part of the team who made such a mess of things. She's happy to claim she took out Osama Bin laden, so she needs to take accountability for this mess and the million plus dead.



posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Ohanka

Not sure where to start with that post?

Explaining that the battlefield is different than it was in WW1? Not that the ruskies would know by rolling through civilian populations in Georgia and Ukriane and still losing troops.


Good luck getting the US 1st Armored Divison, with an amazing four (4!!!!) battalions of tanks to Istanbul as the humvee dudes are swept aside like ants. Should take about 2 weeks by sealift, by which time the conflict would be over.


No airlift required...The US already has Stockpiles in Europe...stashed everywhere..

Why is the Pentagon stuffing caves in Norway full of tanks?

In August, the military added M-1A1 Abrams tanks and a number of Assault Breacher Vehicles to the bunkers. The latter are heavily armored tracks designed to blow up minefields and push through other obstacles.

The Pentagon also added M-88 tank retrievers, amphibious assault vehicles, up-armored Humvees, and various upgraded trucks to the cache. The Corps was expected to finish moving the new materiel under the mountains by the end of the month.

The American military storehouses in Norway have all the other basic equipment a Marine Expeditionary Brigade needs to get up and running. A MEB can range in size from 14,000 to 18,000 people and includes tanks, helicopters and fighter jets.
...
In fact, in May American forces pulled heavy armor out of depots in Germany for a massive war game. The Army also keeps Abrams tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles ready to go for training or potential crises.

theweek.com...





edit on 7-9-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 04:27 PM
link   
a reply to: xstealth

Great. Let them sell the drugs they are guarding in dirt-holes like Afghanistan. Or the Lithium from the same area. or the oil from everywhere else we are "defending democracy" at / in.

Not good enough? How about this: we dramatically overhaul the US Military budget, and install oversight so that scumbag war-profiteers aren't profiting from phony wars in the first place, then -- lets spend a huge chunk of what we save on the VA, and take care of the soldiers we already broke playing Monopoly with the rest of the worlds resources.

Ain't no war to prevent.

Ain't an army on earth that can reach us by land or sea without first verifying the receipts for the weapons we sold them yesterday.

This is a classic mafioso protection scheme. You have a nice free-dumb there, pal. Be a shame if something bad (war) happened to it.



posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Russia has been rebuilding and modernising their armed forces ever since the sloppy victory in Georgia. Everything from nuclear missiles to uniforms is being overhauled as well as command structures. This whilst the US military has been in decline.

Russia and China will take over from the US as the world's superpowers - The US is pretty much a laughing stock as it is (though more through leadership in Washington than anything else). That will change after another 8 years of degrading the military whilst Russia continues it's modernisation and increased military budget. By then it will not just be a lack of leadership that will demote America, but strength also.

Look around, not even Iran are scared of the US anymore. No one is.



new topics




 
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join