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.
I guess that seal who was killed trying to protect the ambassador in libya had a fake job too. Well no he had a real job because he was a former seal. Oops.
Do you people know how to read?
I've said numerous times that Special Forces men (specifically mentioned the SEALs) are the kind of military men we need, not 18 year old boys playing "army man" in Oklahoma and especially not guys living in Ramstein coaching their sons to tose at the Little League World Series.
This thread just proves that the TEA Party is in the magical land of Oz and doesn't actually care about managing the budget.
If you lived in a house that cost $2,000 a month and made $1,500 a month, would you move or would you just go deeper and deeper into debt?
We spend $171,000 per person employed by the DoD, there are 3.23 million people employed costing us $553,000,000,000 a year. Our budget deficit is 1,100,000,000,000, so half our deficit comes from the military budget. We could cut the deficit to 75% of what it is simply by cutting our military budget by 50%, which would still give us a military budget bigger than the next 3 largest military budgets in the world COMBINED. We'd still have 4x China's budget and 10x Saudi Arabia's. How would that make us less safe? Especially if we used our streamlined forces to focus on keeping us safe instead of babysitting 18 year olds who should be in school or learning a trade that helps us as Americans.
DISCLAIMER: I'm a veteran of the US Navy (was an O-3 when I left) so I'm definitely pro-military...but I'm only pro-military when it's not just a welfare program for uneducated 18 year olds without any real career path. I believe in a highly technologically advanced military made up of R&D and special forces, which has a significanly higher value than 500,000 enlisted kids who do PT 6 times a week and sit around the barracks watching porn and playing football (that's what we did at Camp Pendleton...and I was an officer).
We have tons of troops stationed in non-combat zones. Men and women earning salaries and costing the government a ton in keeping them abroad while they contribute next to nothing to our economy (and contribute to the economies of those places instead) is clearly a major reason why our economy is struggling.
We have more than 9,000 troops in each of the following places:
Japan - 36,000
South Korea - 28,500
England - 9,300
Italy - 10,800
Germany - 53,500
So let's assume a (lowball) annual cost of $50,000 for those ~138,000 men and women. That's a cost of $6,900,000,000 (6.9 Billion) every year for soldiers stationed in places where they are absolutely not needed at all. That's about $23 from every single American each year to support those people, which to me is the exact definition of Socialism.
So if you're for a lower budget, you HAVE to be for the shrinking of our overseas military. Otherwise you're just a hypocrite.
Aside from what I've bolded, I completely agree with you. If the Tea Partiers were serious about cutting government spending, they wouldn't be giving the military a break. The only person I can think of who is consistent about cutting all government spending (including military) is Ron Paul.
This thread just proves that the TEA Party is in the magical land of Oz and doesn't actually care about managing the budget.
If you lived in a house that cost $2,000 a month and made $1,500 a month, would you move or would you just go deeper and deeper into debt?
We spend $171,000 per person employed by the DoD, there are 3.23 million people employed costing us $553,000,000,000 a year. Our budget deficit is 1,100,000,000,000, so half our deficit comes from the military budget. We could cut the deficit to 75% of what it is simply by cutting our military budget by 50%, which would still give us a military budget bigger than the next 3 largest military budgets in the world COMBINED. We'd still have 4x China's budget and 10x Saudi Arabia's. How would that make us less safe? Especially if we used our streamlined forces to focus on keeping us safe instead of babysitting 18 year olds who should be in school or learning a trade that helps us as Americans.
I'm not a Tea Partyer, more a moderate, but I think you probably already know the answers to the questions you ask.
If I lived in house I could not afford, of course, I would move somewhere cheaper. But the GOVERNMENT has an unlimited amount of money to spend, OURS. So the need to cut back is not so dire. They have painted themselves into a corner with all of the programs designed to generate jobs, and money. What does it say about a government that happily tells us our houses are magically worth three times their value? Do you think they're happy we have a nest egg, equity? No, they see the dollar signs in their eyes, more funny money for them to spend. Then they act surprised when the bubble bursts and the finger pointing begins.
Even if a politician with a fair and even hand took a scalpel to the budget it wouldn't be enough. There are too many folks depending on the system for a living. What would happen tomorrow if 1.6 million military jobs were lost? Where do those people go? And what of their families? It's gone beyond "needing" a military- we have to keep the wheels turning. Pick any "program" and it's the same story.
All we can do at this point is keep working and pumping our taxes into the deep, dark, bottomless pit.
DISCLAIMER: I'm a veteran of the US Navy (was an O-3 when I left) so I'm definitely pro-military...but I'm only pro-military when it's not just a welfare program for uneducated 18 year olds without any real career path. I believe in a highly technologically advanced military made up of R&D and special forces, which has a significanly higher value than 500,000 enlisted kids who do PT 6 times a week and sit around the barracks watching porn and playing football (that's what we did at Camp Pendleton...and I was an officer).
We have tons of troops stationed in non-combat zones. Men and women earning salaries and costing the government a ton in keeping them abroad while they contribute next to nothing to our economy (and contribute to the economies of those places instead) is clearly a major reason why our economy is struggling.
We have more than 9,000 troops in each of the following places:
Japan - 36,000
South Korea - 28,500
England - 9,300
Italy - 10,800
Germany - 53,500
So let's assume a (lowball) annual cost of $50,000 for those ~138,000 men and women. That's a cost of $6,900,000,000 (6.9 Billion) every year for soldiers stationed in places where they are absolutely not needed at all. That's about $23 from every single American each year to support those people, which to me is the exact definition of Socialism.
So if you're for a lower budget, you HAVE to be for the shrinking of our overseas military. Otherwise you're just a hypocrite.
Is that you John Kerry?
Gee-wiz skipper, what can you say about an O-3 who comes on a public forum to express his or her sh***y opinion of patriotic enlisted eighteen-year-olds?
Not everyone has had your opportunities, and just because they address you as Sir or Ma'am doesn't mean you're superior to them.
It's just that they just have a greater level of commitment and this, so much so, they'll even put up with officers who make use of military structure and discipline to help resolve their obvious personal issues.
I admire anyone who volunteers to do the real work of defending the nation.
They deserve much better pay and benefits and they definitely deserve the very best equipment we can provide for them, but even more that that, they deserve our respect.
There are certainly areas in the defense budget that should be looked at, but this should come only after we have done everything possible to improve the lives of enlisted military personnel and completely restructured the federal government.
North Korea’s per capita income is less than 5 percent of the South’s. Each year the dollar value of South Korea’s GDP expansion equals the entire North Korean economy. The North’s population is half the South’s and rising thanks to a high birth rate. North and South also barely trade with each other.
Would someone please explain to me why South Korea cannot defend themselves?
Tea Party Senator Rand Paul gives a pretty rational view here on national defense. Yes, we do not need troops in 130 countries.
ThisWe could cut the deficit to 75% of what it is simply by cutting our military budget by 50%, which would still give us a military budget bigger than the next 3 largest military budgets in the world COMBINED. We'd still have 4x China's budget and 10x Saudi Arabia's.
If this is true, then I'm sold. I was sold before this but now even more so. Tea partiers are hypocrites, plain and simple. Ask them if we should cut union workers....they'll say yes. Cut federal workers? they'll say yes. Give federal workers pay freezes..yes. Eliminate government agencies...yes. But then ask them to cut defense and military and it becomes a non-starter. Seriously, the Tea Party needs to get their heads out of their you know whats so that things start getting accomplished becausing digging in and saying no to everything gets us nowhere.
Because first defnse it the first duty of a governamnt;second we cut defnse to a steady % $5 i budgetted item. Its time to cut te other lower priorities and grwowing stuff for the good of the nation gnerally now.
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.
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.
