It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Is that a bad joke to claim that the Auorora was really all about the subsonic B-2?
I see many postings such as yours that ignore two facts.
Second, the blueprint for strategy for the next world war is set forth in the 1989 book Military Space Forces: The Next 50 Years by John M. Collins and Commissioned by the US Congress for the dumber of their members.
Short of total economic calamity, or a miracle Ron Paul victory, do you really think they're going to bring everything home and shut down all the overseas bases if they spend a few trillion on an armada of these? Not even if they get their space beams.
Originally posted by Aim64C
I said a draw-down. Not a complete removal of presence.
But, yes, they will. The overall idea is to... more or less... do away with the Active Duty military.
It has proven to be quite an inefficient manpower system.
It's much the same with the security detachments. We mobilize for a while to go babysit some ships in port and come home - rotate out with other units if it's a long-term mission (we have a few of those ongoing in places you wouldn't really expect).
I'll admit. I'm a fan of the military. I love military hardware and the platforms it produces.
Oh dear, this might be the first online debate I've been drawn into in over a year.
Yes, perhaps, especially with robotic seabases left in the stead of the carrier groups which we havent gotten to yet and most dont realize their being on the drawing board.
Still I dont see this as 'drawback'. Of humans, maybe, and thats a big maybe. Theres always justifications of new spending and other potentially diabolical undertakings.
You might percieve that as another tool to increase their odds of survival while missing the concept that these same advances also promise to enable TPTB to turn them into robots initially and us total mind controlled slaves in the long run.
It's so inefficient that the US rules the world. If only they can make it better and bring forth faster crafts the universe awaits...
Right at that moment, I beg you to ask yourself: 'Is this concept of freedom they tell us we fight and dominate the earth for really about grandmas freedom to choose which church she goes to or is it the "freedom" of our masters to rape, pillagee, dominate, control and exert power over the world?
There's a reason I'm in the 99 percentile of intellectual metrics. I insist that only I am capable of speaking for myself and capable of analyzing the situation.
As such: I am not blinded to the fact that our military is utilized to secure economic advantages and exploits. I have, on numerous occasions, put forth the argument that our military should be a contract service (able to accept bids like a PMC - only falling under DoD guidelines and the UCMJ). May as well be honest about it and not try to obfuscate the fact under tax revenue.
However, comma, I have not seen any evidence that there are grave disservices being done to the affected populations by our presence (as a matter of policy).
Originally posted by petrus4
Another reason for wishing you were a billionaire.
Breakfast in front of the pyramids, lunch in New York, and dinner in Alice Springs.
Either way, it's unnecessary, and regardless of your intentions makes you come off as patronizing.
but the idea of turning our nation's military into a mercenary force is both immoral and sickening.
Take the Iraq sanctions for example:
Or the Al Qaeda cell that moved into Iraq after we invaded:
Or the Japan fire-bombings:
Point is, whether the effects were intentional or not, the claim that our occupations/operations abroad don't have any negative side-effects is wildly inaccurate.