Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-18-2008, 04:10 PM
 
Location: The Woods
18,337 posts, read 26,376,086 times
Reputation: 11329

Advertisements

Google "Anatoliy Golitsyn."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-18-2008, 04:33 PM
 
Location: T or C New Mexico
2,600 posts, read 2,313,491 times
Reputation: 607
Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper View Post
It has been suggested by a variety of intelligence agencies including numerous people in our own that the asymmetrical warfare employed by terrorist be addressed by special-ops, anti-terrorist units, and police type groups. One this is quite apparently is that invading an entire nation as a means to stop a "tactic" and those who employ such tactics is folly.



Obama and every other leader should, or at least I hope, are moving us away from our reliance upon a single resource as the one critical and foundational to our entire society. I realize this will likely take a generation but no better time to start than now.



Depends, if you are a share holder in General Electric or General Dynamic, you love that the American government gives away billions in foreign aid so that those countries can then turn around and use that same tax payer money to then purchase the weapons our enemies will use against us or give to those who might. Makes perfect sense unless you are the one actually paying for it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper View Post
This seems to be a very common assessment by many, that Russian military weapons and units are garbage and so far outdated compared to our own. Yet this does not stop the endless droning of "be afraid citizen" those pinko commies are coming and if you don't part another 500+ billion a year, then you and all your children will die a horrible death. So cough it up. At this point today, if Russian's threw rocks, it will still justify at least 250 billion a year in spending.



I think the cold war has been pretty much over since at least 1985, and as indicated by the above assessment of Russian military forces, what is left is not worth having.
How much would it bother you if I told you that the russians have a air superiority fighter equal or greater than the one the US has? would you be shocked?
http://www.aeronautics.ru/mfiarticleafm.htm (broken link)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper View Post
It is much like Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz pointing out to the Pentagon that since they couldn't see the Soviet missile batteries from satellite imagery, that it was proof that the Soviets were way ahead in technology, so thus justified greater spending. Yes, you are hearing right, absence of evidence they existed was used as proof. I feel safer already with these guys at the helm.



I have attempted to point this out much to my own futility. We have no problem remembering 9-11 and what a horrible act it was and the great loss of life. We have no problem keeping the desires for revenge and retribution alive as it is almost a tangible thing. Yet we do not consider the lingering resentment, hatred, and desire for retribution that others may feel when you accidentally says whoops, sorry for bombing your wedding party. Of course times this by hundreds of thousands of times and the only one thing you can assure is that there will be a perpetuation of desire to strike the other guy. Issues of ethnicity and religion are just merely window dressing to help a population rationalize it.

Last edited by highdesertmutz; 12-18-2008 at 05:21 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-18-2008, 05:05 PM
 
11,135 posts, read 14,149,188 times
Reputation: 3696
Not at all, but I wouldn't be worried either. Is this the idea behind our massive defense spending, that if an opponent has a single piece of military hardware comparable or even superior to our own that we spend massive amounts of monies to counter every possible use of said hardware? Isn't this the same type of mindset that caused the former Soviet Union to spend itself to ruin? I guess we haven't learned all that much.

In any event, the point was more to reiterate an earlier question I asked, which is, why do we take two such bi-polar assessments of Russian military/economic strength. On one hand we have one group that says Russian equipment, units, economics (centralize), etc... are all the reasons why Russia is "bunk and junk". Yet we have another group and sometimes the same people who pointed out what junk it all is then suggest that those pinko commies are on the verge of rearranging the global structure or are a serious menace to all that is free, pure and good in the world.

My point is that you can't have it both ways, someone has to be full of it, but then again, it is something we all do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-18-2008, 05:38 PM
 
Location: T or C New Mexico
2,600 posts, read 2,313,491 times
Reputation: 607
I think part of the recent surge in military spending (from 2001 to 2008) by this administration may be exorbitant, possibly or primarily out of sheer fear mongering by this administration. (soley my opinion) but, in the back of our minds, we must always be superior to one another (nation wise) so as to have the upper hand in battle. the desert storm war was a very good example of an (antiseptic war) and fought primarily with technology, we, the US suffered minimal casualties, while the iraqis were all but destroyed. I think we must maintain our (edge) militarily, but at what price? if the "cold war" or arms race is truly over, why are military hardware manufacturers constantly pushing the envelope to superiority? when does, or will this ever end, the big military spending? and if we as taxpayers choose our leaders who want to cut military spending, how much is too much, or, too little? I've provided a link to a website that shows how military spending has increased dramatically over the past 7-8 years. I think we need to be safe, but at what cost?
World Military Spending — Global Issues
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-19-2008, 08:38 AM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,738,360 times
Reputation: 14345
I think, as well, that we need to consider what that technological superiority does for us. Their is a mindset that wants our army to be outfitted with the best technology, the best weapons, the most sophisticated tools. And this isn't necessarily a bad mindset, I think our soldiers should be provided with the best tools to do their job. On the other hand, maybe we need to re-examine the job. Because while we may be able to shock and awe the world with the precision of our missiles, with the tremendous technology we have available, we're not really winning wars with that technology. We're not fighting traditional wars, the traditional enemies we would have fought that traditional warfare have shifted their strategy. Even if we win every battle, we aren't achieving a final victory. Like the mole and the hammer game, we keep whacking, and the mole keeps popping up in different places. It's time for our government to be pro-active, rather than re-active. No matter how cool the weapons are, the battlefield isn't where the real conflict is taking place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-19-2008, 09:37 AM
 
4,173 posts, read 6,668,132 times
Reputation: 1216
---- US public does not want to lose US citizens to wars. No country does, but this sentiment is particularly strong in the US because of recent wars. We tend to "clean" the war pictures up and are told to go shopping. W does not want even the photos of dead soldiers to be published. So, to minimize casualties, we have to rely on very expensive technology and spend ourselves into the ground (enemy within?). In a way this spending may be ok provided we realize it brings us not much and get over Rummy's theory that unless we use power, it is useless by itself. Rummy /W et al never talked about the costs and people in the administration who gave some (low) estimates were let go. The military complex takes way too much out of our budget.

---If Russians fielded rusty buckets for last 10 years, they won some points at least. Think about the money they saved - no one attacked them whereas we -- with shiny gold-plated buckets -- are in huge debt. And some of us want even more firepower to kick a$$ else the whole world will collapse.

-- a multipolar world is inevitable - all the poles and their proxies need to learn to deal with it. Methinks the transition to acceptance will not be easy - no one wants to let go the power they have.

Last edited by calmdude; 12-19-2008 at 11:11 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2009, 09:15 AM
 
Location: The Woods
18,337 posts, read 26,376,086 times
Reputation: 11329
Spammer...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top