U.S troop deployment. Do you check your facts? Or quote propaganda from MSM

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 11:53 AM
link   
A "fact" posted and believed often on this site.Is the U.S military is spread to thin to be of any consequence.That the role of world police has depleted it's forces.

Now as it is written often in news articels and repeated regularly,people have taken to believe it is a fact.Well folks it is not the truth.It is pure unsubstantiated propaganda and B.S.Here are some real facts about U.S troop deployment.

As of Sept, 30. 2012 U.S Military strength 1,388,028 with 173,929 troops deployed in 150 countries.This includes military attaches and Embassy and consulate security.That still leaves 1,164,099 troops to draw on at present strength.


en.wikipedia.org...


The reserve forces under Title 10 U. S. C. the entire reserve forces can be call up for duration of war plus six months,This is another 1,458,500 troops .

I leave you with a quote from Thomas Sowell that I think fits.

"If people in the media cannot decide whether they are in the business of reporting news or manufacturing propaganda,it is all the more important that the public understand that difference,and choose their news sources accordingly."




posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:07 PM
link   
Dang who said that? Just because there isn't a lot of them does not mean we are not deadly. This is how I see it, we have the active duty guy, then the reserves, then the old guys we can call back because of the patriot act, then you have people that will volunteer in times of war, and last but not least you have the American citizen, just in case it gets that bad. Hopefully we will never see the draft again, but that too. One of our soldiers are as good as ten of someone else, but that is my opinion man.


Did anyone read Lone Survivor? If you haven't it is a must read, but what I am trying to say here is that those four seals killed around 150 men. So if we just send a Ranger battalion over to Africa we should be ok right?
edit on 23-1-2013 by T4NG0 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by rockymcgilicutty
 


You comment on questionable reporting by the MSM, yet you reference Wikipedia?

Grant it, if the validity of the sources are genuine, then not to much of a problem, but I find it ironic that you damn MSM reporting on military figures, when Wikipedia is regarded as less then reliable.

I to hope for a day when Wiki is considered scholarly, but it is not just yet.

I release i have not addressed the military deployment aspect of your thread, but I do not know enough about it to comment, except that you can never under estimate the strength of the US armed forces.
edit on 23-1-2013 by MDDoxs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by T4NG0
 


A star for you.I really don't expect this thread to go anywhere.Because people who respond with propaganda,or their hopes and wishs as facts.Are very often confused by real facts,and have no basis for a reply.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by MDDoxs
reply to post by rockymcgilicutty
 


You comment on questionable reporting by the MSM, yet you reference Wikipedia?

Grant it, if the validity of the sources are genuine, then not to much of a problem, but I find it ironic that you damn MSM reporting on military figures, when Wikipedia is regarded as less then reliable.

I to hope for a day when Wiki is considered scholarly, but it is not just yet.

I release i have not addressed the military deployment aspect of your thread, but I do not know enough about it to comment, except that you can never under estimate the strength of the US armed forces.
edit on 23-1-2013 by MDDoxs because: (no reason given)


I'll take Wikipedia over the MSM, any day, in regards to validity.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:26 PM
link   
Maybe I am getting my facts wrong...I thought our young soldiers were serving many extended tours of
duty in the middle east.

One would think if we had a million extra soldiers we could swap those on extended tours with
replacements.

I also heard that suicides among active service military deployed now outnumbers casualties
of war...?
edit on 23-1-2013 by rival because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by MDDoxs
 


I was waiting for that reply.Here are the worst stats I could find.Still they don't substantiate that our forces are depleted.In this case Wiki is reliable.


www.vetfriends.com...



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by rockymcgilicutty
 


Why is important to you to show that, in fact, our military isn't depleted?



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by rival
 


Not a million extra soldiers. A million people in the military branches.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by rockymcgilicutty
 


I figured you were prepared for a response like mine. I am not questioning the conclusions you have made, as I have no insight into the issue, however the accuracy of wiki and MSM are both questionable, especially with respect to military deployment.

I think any public information pertaining to military deployment will be inaccurate as it would be a security risk to report exact deployment numbers outlining the strength or weakness of US forces.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by rival
Maybe I am getting my facts wrong...I thought our young soldiers were serving many extended tours of
duty in the middle east.

One would think if we had a million extra soldiers we could swap those on extended tours with
replacements.

I also heard that suicides among active service military deployed now outnumbers casualties
of war...?
edit on 23-1-2013 by rival because: (no reason given)



Yes,Check the number of combat troops that have re-enlisted,to serve a second or third tour.Therfore extending their tours theirself's.If you re-up go home then come back the MSM will call you a replacement.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by MDDoxs
 


I see your point.But the issue I was addressing was the idea that U.S. forces are depleted.While wiki may not be
the ultimate authority.I still ask people to check their facts.At least I have given some,while I have not found any source whose numbers suggest that U.S forces are depleted.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by rockymcgilicutty
 


Before the world enters a new age what better way to get all the evil people out of the wood work than to make them think they can get away with it?

Everything is going according to plan.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by jjkenobi
reply to post by rival
 


Not a million extra soldiers. A million people in the military branches.


So we don't have as many soldiers as I thought.

Well, how many active-ready-to-fight-soldiers do we have 'un'deployed. That would be the number
most relevant to the OP I believe.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by slowisfast
reply to post by rockymcgilicutty
 


Why is important to you to show that, in fact, our military isn't depleted?


For accuracy.I see the claim that U.S forces are stretched to the breaking point stated often.But I never see any stats on this claim.It is a tagline that people use to validate a point.That has no basis in truth,and I wanted to try and set the claim straight.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by T4NG0
 


You think that one American Soldier is worth 10 spetznas or s.a.s, If so then I must disagree with your opinion.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by rival

Originally posted by jjkenobi
reply to post by rival
 


Not a million extra soldiers. A million people in the military branches.


So we don't have as many soldiers as I thought.

Well, how many active-ready-to-fight-soldiers do we have 'un'deployed. That would be the number
most relevant to the OP I believe.


You have no idea what you are talking about.


Have you ever heard of the Tail (Support) to tooth (Combat) ratio.Well it applies to ALL armies.
edit on 23-1-2013 by rockymcgilicutty because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by rockymcgilicutty

Originally posted by rival

Originally posted by jjkenobi
reply to post by rival
 


Not a million extra soldiers. A million people in the military branches.


So we don't have as many soldiers as I thought.

Well, how many active-ready-to-fight-soldiers do we have 'un'deployed. That would be the number
most relevant to the OP I believe.


You have no idea what you are talking about.


Have you ever heard of the Tail (Support) to tooth (Combat) ratio.Well it applies to ALL armies.
edit on 23-1-2013 by rockymcgilicutty because: (no reason given)


I did not come into this thread acting like I knew what I was talking about. It's just an opinion.
I would think ready to go soldiers would be the litmus test of ground strength of an army.

It is my assertive opinion that our thirteen Trident subs constitute WAY MORE than
enough evidence that your position is valid. We could deploy them all simultaneously,
park them in the right spots and within 50 minutes erase half of the world's population...

So NO....we are not spread thin at all



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by rockymcgilicutty
 


Before the world enters a new age what better way to get all the evil people out of the wood work than to make them think they can get away with it?

Everything is going according to plan.


If you reply to the opening post I will reply.If you have to go off topic.I will take that as validation of my O/P,and your inability to disprove it.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by lewman
reply to post by T4NG0
 


You think that one American Soldier is worth 10 spetznas or s.a.s, If so then I must disagree with your opinion.


Well this being another opinionated statement and all, I think our special forces are better than anyone else's. Realistically one guy can't take on a team of Spetsnaz or SAS. I know an operator that got in a fist fight with a Spetsnaz, he said he was tuff as hell. I have a feeling that we have smarter guys, with better equipment. What say you?





top topics
 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join