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.

 

The Army's $200 billion makeover, largest war machine EVER

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 07:49 AM
link   

EL PASO - A $200 billion plan to remake the largest war machine in history unfolds in one small way on a quiet country road in the Chihuahuan Desert.



In the Army's vision, the war of the future is increasingly combat by mouse clicks. It's as networked as the Internet, as mobile as a cellphone, as intuitive as a video game.

The project involves creating a family of 14 weapons, drones, robots, sensors and hybrid-electric combat vehicles connected by a wireless network.


Source: www.msnbc.msn.com...

This is a 5page article and is very interesting!

It's only a matter of time until all of this is used for domestic purposes.

I wonder who they borrowed money from for this project, China, Japan or Israel?




posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 08:06 AM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


A simple question comes to mind after reading those five pages...

Why is the US hellbent on investing precious dollars that could do its citizens good, on some "imagined" enemy somewhere in the aether ?

The only enemy the US has, IMHO, is within...

Forget Iran, they only want to torch Israel, which is well deserved and long overdue IMO...

I honestly don't understand the US's obsession with military spending in this day and age with the lack of "Real" enemies...

Why not use that money to help people in your own nation ?

Why use it to inflict further suffering in nations that offer no direct threat to your own nation ?

This makes zero sense to me...

Sad really



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 08:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Rilence
 


Agree on everything you said..... EVERYTHING!

I completely agree! Well Said!



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 09:07 AM
link   
Well taking into consideration that the Army is going to be hit with major cuts in the near future, this project will just fade in the background in support for a more immediately need in the war in Iraq.

Is many projects that our government defense department allocates money for, to abandon them later for lack of fund to keep the projects alive.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 09:28 AM
link   
There is no imagined enemy. I don't think I could count how many terrorist groups and countries would take a shot the minute the U.S. lets its' guard down. Second best is not an option. I support this investment, especially in these times, when there is much uncertainty and terrorism continues to be a lingering threat. The military, esp, the Army deserves a serious upgrade. New equipment, armor, facilities, etc.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rilence

A simple question comes to mind after reading those five pages...

Why is the US hellbent on investing precious dollars that could do its citizens good, on some "imagined" enemy somewhere in the aether ?


Simple answer is to protect it's interests and the interests of its allies (including Australia)

People need to face facts...the world is not the harmonious village many people seem to think it is. It also wouldn't become so if the US were to disappear or were disarmed.

How long do you think Tiawan would last if the US didn't protect it from China? Who would stop China from then annexing the Phillipines, Indonesia, Malaysia, New Guinea.....


The only enemy the US has, IMHO, is within...

uh huh.



I honestly don't understand the US's obsession with military spending in this day and age with the lack of "Real" enemies...


I respectfully suggest you get educated on the continuous struggle for land and resources throughout human history. Being able to defend your property, and protetcing your friends from aggression by their adversaries requires military strength.


Why not use that money to help people in your own nation ?


We do both (defend our interests and provide for our citizens) quite well, thanks.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
It's only a matter of time until all of this is used for domestic purposes.

Yes, I long want the US and even Europe to have this arsenal. But just like Rilence said, they should help themselves first. Use this for domestic purposes first to improve the economy, only after that then the military should be allowed to have the full arsenal.



I wonder who they borrowed money from for this project, China, Japan or Israel?

China won't finance Iran war (this might explains the recent US intelligent backtracking), for the moment China doesn't buy new US bonds, just rolls the old ones. Japan, I don't know. Israel is not that rich. They actually used to sell high tech weapons to CHINA to finance their military R&D, which of course angered the US, so the US then gave Israel some more money for its military. Perhaps you heard about that in the news not so long time ago.
To finance this upgrade, they probably ask the money from the Arab states.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by darkbluesky
I respectfully suggest you get educated on the continuous struggle for land and resources throughout human history. Being able to defend your property, and protetcing your friends from aggression by their adversaries requires military strength.


I respectfully suggest that you get educated on settler colonialism and the continuous theft of land and how many bases America has throughout the globe.

Not being able to defend property FROM WHO?
The same country that has invested money for this war machine.

Also continuous theft of resources, like the 30trillion dollars worth of oil in Iraq.

You sir, are misguided. You got some facts right but you are applying it to the wrong countries.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 12:00 PM
link   
The automation and reliance on computerized everything could also hurt the military. A few EMP blasts near a battlefield would eliminate any advantage derived from this technology.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Once people are on top, they will do what is necessary to stay there.

I vote to hi-tech modernize our military. We gotta stay on top or find ourselves left behind the dust. With the advent of computers, the technological gap between US and other countries has decreased dramatically.

As for enemies, do you not realize the Cold War only took a short break and is now back? Along with worldwide terrorists, we have to worry about China and Russia. Follow the news about Russia and China, especially articles pertaining to Putin. The Cold War is back. Lets stay on top.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
I respectfully suggest that you get educated on settler colonialism and the continuous theft of land and how many bases America has throughout the globe.


While I recognize popular opinion may differ from govt policy, there is not a single US military base ANYWHERE in the world without the uncoerced approval and support of the host nation's govt. (except maybe Japan)

When leases have expired and/or host nations no longer desired our presence, we have left without a bullet being fired. Panama and the Phillipines come to mind. Clark AFB in Luzon was the biggest overseas US base ever.


Also continuous theft of resources, like the 30trillion dollars worth of oil in Iraq.


Are you talking about the oil for which the Iraq Oil Ministry has executed production contracts with Royal Dutch Shell and British Petroleum among others? The oil the Iraq Oil Ministry is currently selling on various commodity exchanges around the world for nearly $100 US / barrel?

Theft? hmph.



You sir, are misguided. You got some facts right but you are applying it to the wrong countries.


Your opinion.

[edit on 12/7/2007 by darkbluesky]

[edit on 12/7/2007 by darkbluesky]

[edit on 12/7/2007 by darkbluesky]



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 01:19 PM
link   
I tried to fix the quotes in my last post but the edits are not posting.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rilence
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


A simple question comes to mind after reading those five pages...

Why is the US hellbent on investing precious dollars that could do its citizens good, on some "imagined" enemy somewhere in the aether ?

Forget Iran, they only want to torch Israel, which is well deserved and long overdue IMO...

Why not use that money to help people in your own nation ?

Sad really


This is America where the citizens can help themselves I have to wonder by this statement when we became a nation of people that hold up signs and say help me we used to be a nation of people who did things for ourselves now we just say help me.. give me a break

on the Forget Iran think that sounds a little bit prejudice to me Israel has always defended themselves quite swiftly and effectively and they don't hold up signs saying help me and look for handouts..

Just out of curiosity though what help is it that you and all of my other fellow citizens are looking for and why is it that you can't do it yourself...


Respectfully
GEO

[edit on 12/7/2007 by geocom]



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by on_yur_6
The automation and reliance on computerized everything could also hurt the military. A few EMP blasts near a battlefield would eliminate any advantage derived from this technology.


I'd read that for this very reason, N.Korea was maintaining a large percentage of lo-tech weaponry as part of it's military machine to counter the EMP effect of the anticipated nuclear strike from the south.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by darkbluesky
While I recognize popular opinion may differ from govt policy, there is not a single US military base ANYWHERE in the world without the uncoerced approval and support of the host nation's govt. (except maybe Japan)


Cuba has wanted us to shut down Guantanamo for decades. Cuba never wanted us in there, but we forced our way in. The Cuban govt has cashed only ONE payment from the U.S. for Guantanamo, in what 40 yrs, they want us out so much.
There are certainly other places around the world who want us out as well. What about Iraq?



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:07 PM
link   
You're right about Cuba's position regarding GTMO, but the US does have a valid lease that doesn't expire until 2033.

I'm sure several more examples can be found so I'll modify my statement

Most US overseas bases are present with the uncoerced approval and support of the host govts.

Iraq? The Iraq govt definitely wants US forces there.

edit to add: Fidel's Cuba never wanted us there but the previous govt's did, and signed a lease with us in 1890-something, and renewed in 1934 for 99 years. We did not force our way in.

[edit on 12/7/2007 by darkbluesky]



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rilence
I honestly don't understand the US's obsession with military spending in this day and age with the lack of "Real" enemies...

Why not use that money to help people in your own nation ?


Rilence,

I have a couple questions for you.

Australia bought $3.3 Billion worth of weapons and weapons systems from the US from 1998 to 2005.

Who are your enemies?
Couldn't that money have been better spent on domestic aid programs?



Australia to double defense spending


THE GUARDIAN, SYDNEY
Friday, Feb 06, 2004, Page 5
Australia will more than double its defense budget over the next three years under plans that will turn the country into one of the world's major military powers.


article

The most recent data I could find was 2002 but...
US defense spending as a % of GDP = 3.3
Australia defense spending as a % of GDP = 2



I'm not criticizing Australia in any way. Just hoping you'll take a look at your own affairs before criticizing others.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:48 PM
link   
So Iraq ASKED for there to be 14 "Embassies" as big as a zip code and as guarded as fort knocks?

If so, then why call them embassies, why not be honest and call them military bases?



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 09:01 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Uh where is the link pertaining to information about the U.S. having 14 Embassies inside Iraq..

Zip codes can be as small as an aircraft carrier
USS Ronald Reagan 96616-2876

and in answer to your question about the whether or not Iraq asked us to be there they did in fact and while all of the details of the deal have not yet been released we a guaranteeing 50,000 troops will be there for 5 years + from this year.. and yes we are and have been building bases there for our stay but they did ask us to stay ...


Respectfully,
GEO



posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 01:06 AM
link   
The reinvention of the US ARMY is called FUTURE COMBAT SYSTEMS, it's designed to network the battlefeild and give realtime battlefeild data to the soldier, the program itself is all about the individual soldier, and creating a netcentric battlespace for total dominance.

www.army.mil...

www.army.mil...

watch the videos



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join