Home Politics

Time to cut our military budget to the BONE!

2»

Replies

  • CaptBobBryantCaptBobBryant Posts: 5,716 Officer
    Cyclist wrote: »
    We spend more on our military and military arms than the the largest others combined.

    Then we give the arms away to "ally's" only to have our troops killed by them when they are no longer our "ally's".

    Remember to adjust China and Russia for the fact that they are Socialist and own the arms industry and don't pay full price like we do.....you know for all those UNION jobs with lifetime benefits
    National Association of Recreational Anglers - Add Your Voice
    https://www.facebook.com/RecAnglers?notif_t=page_new_likes
  • dstockwelldstockwell Posts: 13,813 AG
    sjm1582002 wrote: »
    How much longer will those freeloading deadbeats need US troops?

    As long as the liberal warmongers are still in Congress, we will continue the world welfare.
    It is not the responsibility of the United States to solve the problems of other countries.
  • BrewheddBrewhedd Posts: 1,096 Officer
    Remember to adjust China and Russia for the fact that they are Socialist and own the arms industry and don't pay full price like we do.....you know for all those UNION jobs with lifetime benefits

    When our representatives give up their lifetime benefits and jobs lobbyists hand them for when they leave office for selling us out then I'll worry about UNIONS.
    Corruption is the enemy. Lobbyists and the FED have ruined the country.
  • mustang190mustang190 Posts: 10,104 AG
    If all of you would look closely at what the cuts will entail it's maintaince and training, ie. beans and bullets. It costs money to keep a aircraft carrier going, a F15 flying and a M1 going plus the training of the crews. We expend more ammo in training than in battle.
    The DOD budget is about 19% of the entire federal budget and it is THE MAIN FUNCTION OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT! Let's also see 15-20% cuts in the rest of the budget.
  • ParkerboyParkerboy Posts: 7,048 Admiral
    sjm1582002 wrote: »
    Just who are we still "defending" Germany, Japan, and South Korea from?

    How much longer will those freeloading deadbeats need US troops?

    There ought to be at least a $1000 "defense tax" on every BMW, Honda/Toyota, and Hyundai
    imported into the USA.

    All those cars are made here in the USA. Wouldn't collect much in the way if $1,000 per import. BMW mages in South Carolina, Mercedes in Alabama, Toyota trucks made in Texas while the cars are made in other US plants, Honda in Ohio, and Hyundai made in Alabama. BTW, GM has a huge plant in China.
    Deo Vindice
  • doobiedorightdoobiedoright Posts: 644 Officer
    Cyclist wrote: »
    And spend more on social services that have been proven to work.


    Rank Country Spending ($)[3] % of GDP Per capita ($)

    US US 687,105,000,000 4.7% 2,141
    2 China China 114,300,000,000 2.2% 74
    3 Russia Russia 61,285,000,000 2.5% 428
    4 France France 57,424,000,000 2.7% 879
    5 UK UK 55,586,000,000 2.7% 893
    6 Japan Japan 54,420,000,000 1.0% 401
    7 Saudi A Saudi A 46,848,000,000 11.4% 1,558
    8 India India 44,917,000,000 2.5% 30
    9 Germany Germany 38,198,000,000 1.8% 593
    10 Italy Italy 34,816,000,000 1.8% 593


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures


    Heres some cuts we need to make!Government funding of forced unionism.
    On top of all of the special powers and immunities granted to organized labor, politicians even pour taxpayer money straight into union coffers. Union groups receive upwards of $160 million annually in direct federal grants. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg. In 2001, the federal Department of Labor doled out $148 million for “international labor programs” overwhelmingly controlled by an AFL-CIO front group. Federal bureaucrats spend approximately $2.6 billion per year on “job training programs” that, under the Workforce Investment Act, must be administered by boards filled with union officials. Union bosses also benefit from a plethora of state and local government giveaways.
  • VenturesomeVenturesome Posts: 1,743 Officer
    i am continually amazed at the ignorance of this political section.
    2392.jpg
  • i am continually amazed at the ignorance of this political section.

    X2

    Look back at history to remind yourself what happens when the US cuts the defense budget. It is not good, and now that we have China about to become the largest Naval power in the world, we better look out. This Obama guy just doesn't get it. It would be a shame if history had to repeat itself for these ignorant people.


    No Strong Military = Certain loss of our freedom!
  • ParkerboyParkerboy Posts: 7,048 Admiral
    X2

    Look back at history to remind yourself what happens when the US cuts the defense budget. It is not good, and now that we have China about to become the largest Naval power in the world, we better look out. This Obama guy just doesn't get it. It would be a shame if history had to repeat itself for these ignorant people.


    No Strong Military = Certain loss of our freedom!

    I don't think anyone is advocating completely gutting the defense department. I know I am not but I am in favor of consolidation of domestic bases and closing most overseas bases. We do not need all the bases we have in Europe.

    There are also weapons and systems the defense dept doesn't want but Congress Crooks push simply to buy votes. There is also huge administrative waste due to regulations and inefficient government agencies.

    The bottom line is all federal departments, agencies, and programs need to be cut. This includes entitlements and defense. We have to live within our means.
    Deo Vindice
  • silvergsilverg Posts: 1,456 Officer
    Cyclist wrote: »
    And spend more on social services that have been proven to work.


    I agree there is a lot of excess spending in the defense department.

    But what social services are you referring to that are proven to work?
  • dstockwelldstockwell Posts: 13,813 AG
    Parkerboy wrote: »
    The bottom line is all federal departments, agencies, and programs need to be cut. This includes entitlements and defense. We have to live within our means.

    Yep...
    It is not the responsibility of the United States to solve the problems of other countries.
  • chubascochubasco Posts: 18,390 Officer
    I think what many are missing is that the USA is providing free defense for many other countries and we cannot afford to keep doing this. While we pour money into the military these other countries use their money to build better infrastructure. Can anyone here why we need to have a huge military presence in Germany for one example. Does anyone think Germany might go to war against us again? No, we are there for two reasons; to protect Europe and because so many politicians are owned by corporations who's primary source of income if selling to the military. Ron Paul has made this point for years and no one listens.

    Romney has stated many times that not only will he not decrease the Pentagon/military budget but that he WILL INCREASE IT. I think this is the primary reason Ron Paul declined to support Romney like the other candidates have.
    Chubasco.jpg
  • navigator2navigator2 Posts: 22,511 AG
    chubasco wrote: »
    I think what many are missing is that the USA is providing free defense for many other countries and we cannot afford to keep doing this. While we pour money into the military these other countries use their money to build better infrastructure. Can anyone here why we need to have a huge military presence in Germany for one example. Does anyone think Germany might go to war against us again? No, we are there for two reasons; to protect Europe and because so many politicians are owned by corporations who's primary source of income if selling to the military.

    Romney has stated many times that not only will he not decrease the Pentagon/military budget but that he WILL INCREASE IT.

    First lucid post from you in some time. The salt air must have cleared your senses. Romney says a lot of things, I don't see him getting that by congress.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • CyclistCyclist Posts: 23,346 AG
    I think if we abandoned all over seas military aid and bases we would be in for a heap of trouble in the future. A big stinking heap.
  • ParkerboyParkerboy Posts: 7,048 Admiral
    Cyclist wrote: »
    I think if we abandoned all over seas military aid and bases we would be in for a heap of trouble in the future. A big stinking heap.

    Once again, I don't think anyone is advocating closing all over seas bases but research I have done indicates there are as many as 700 over seas bases at a cost of 250 billion dollars per year. It seems we have as many as 26 bases in Germany alone, 8 in Great Britian, and 8 in Italy. I think there is no need for that many bases, some, sure but not that many. How many are in Japan for example or Korea? Couldn't many of them be consolidated and still serve their intended purpose?

    Same goes for all the bases in the U.S. there are 18 Marine Corps bases, 58 Navy, 71 Air Force, and finally, 122 Army bases. BTW, I did not count Army National Guard Bases in this count.
    Deo Vindice
  • CyclistCyclist Posts: 23,346 AG
    Parkerboy wrote: »
    Once again, I don't think anyone is advocating closing all over seas bases but research I have done indicates there are as many as 700 over seas bases at a cost of 250 billion dollars per year. It seems we have as many as 26 bases in Germany alone, 8 in Great Britian, and 8 in Italy. I think there is no need for that many bases, some, sure but not that many. How many are in Japan for example or Korea? Couldn't many of them be consolidated and still serve their intended purpose?

    Same goes for all the bases in the U.S. there are 18 Marine Corps bases, 58 Navy, 71 Air Force, and finally, 122 Army bases. BTW, I did not count Army National Guard Bases in this count.


    Totally agree. It seems as if some of them benefit other economy's and are not needed for security.

    We all know there are dudes/dudettes somewhere underground in DC watching and listening to EVERYTHING going on in the world anyway.

    I would bet these bases are perks for close to retirement military big wigs on the taxpayers dime.
  • coldaircoldair Posts: 11,498 Officer
    Parkerboy wrote: »
    Once again, I don't think anyone is advocating closing all over seas bases but research I have done indicates there are as many as 700 over seas bases at a cost of 250 billion dollars per year. It seems we have as many as 26 bases in Germany alone, 8 in Great Britian, and 8 in Italy. I think there is no need for that many bases, some, sure but not that many. How many are in Japan for example or Korea? Couldn't many of them be consolidated and still serve their intended purpose?

    Same goes for all the bases in the U.S. there are 18 Marine Corps bases, 58 Navy, 71 Air Force, and finally, 122 Army bases. BTW, I did not count Army National Guard Bases in this count.

    it has always brought disaster when we lump all our eggs in one basket, we have squandered far more money on the war on poverty with zero results and that has made us have more poor.
    169304.GIF
  • ParkerboyParkerboy Posts: 7,048 Admiral
    Cyclist wrote: »
    Totally agree. It seems as if some of them benefit other economy's and are not needed for security.

    We all know there are dudes/dudettes somewhere underground in DC watching and listening to EVERYTHING going on in the world anyway.

    I would bet these bases are perks for close to retirement military big wigs on the taxpayers dime.

    You are right about some of these bases being real perks. I have a couple of retired 0 6s and one O 7 and one O 8 who report to me and I hear them discussing how nice the bases in Germany were and how much their families enjoying being stationed there. They also said serving over seas was very good for their careers just as going to jump school and Ranger School was required if you wanted to "get your bullet" i.e. star. All of these are retire Army BTW although we have one ring knocker from the Naval Academy who works for the company as well he doesn't report to me. All are very good technically at ther jobs and are very useful in their contacts with people still in the Army.
    Deo Vindice
  • Cyclist wrote: »
    Can you believe that crazy nitwit romney wants to increase the military budget?

    What a ****.

    You are the ****! how do you think you have the ability to sit back in the woods and play boy scout? Without a strong military, you freedom is short lived, knind of like it is with our current **** in the White House!
  • dstockwelldstockwell Posts: 13,813 AG
    Without a strong military, you freedom is short lived

    Oh, so we are required to provide a strong military for the rest of the world because they know we will pay and they can sit back and do nothing.
    It is not the responsibility of the United States to solve the problems of other countries.
  • CyclistCyclist Posts: 23,346 AG
    You are the ****! how do you think you have the ability to sit back in the woods and play boy scout? Without a strong military, you freedom is short lived, knind of like it is with our current **** in the White House!

    Short lived my butt. There has not been a valid America threatening war since WWII.
  • Cut runnerCut runner Posts: 948 Officer
    So the twin towers going down wasnt valid?
  • CyclistCyclist Posts: 23,346 AG
    Cut runner wrote: »
    So the twin towers going down wasnt valid?

    How are those wars working out?

    We didn't even attack the right countries.
  • Cut runnerCut runner Posts: 948 Officer
    While i dont agree with STILL being there and rebuilding their *****hole, i do think we did the right thing at first.
    Its not like WW2 where a legitimate country attacked us. So, its obviously not as easy to attack back. All of this im sure you understand. But please, its only been 11 years, dont think for a second that "it cant happen to us"
  • CyclistCyclist Posts: 23,346 AG
    Cut runner wrote: »
    While i dont agree with STILL being there and rebuilding their *****hole, i do think we did the right thing at first.
    Its not like WW2 where a legitimate country attacked us. So, its obviously not as easy to attack back. All of this im sure you understand. But please, its only been 11 years, dont think for a second that "it cant happen to us"

    I think the Afghanistan war had some merit and we should stuck with it. I do also believe that covert police actions would have been better in the long run.
  • coldaircoldair Posts: 11,498 Officer
    Wow Al Gore points out Bush's failure to understand the link between Saddam and world wide terror, Sorry Cycolist

    I could not get the video to load in Fire Fox

    [video=youtube_share;9JE48XHKG64]
    169304.GIF
  • CyclistCyclist Posts: 23,346 AG
    So now Gore started the bush wars????????????????????????????
  • coldaircoldair Posts: 11,498 Officer
    Cyclist wrote: »
    So now Gore started the bush wars????????????????????????????

    see you can't blame GWB for attacking Saddam, Clinton and gore laid it all out
    169304.GIF
  • dstockwelldstockwell Posts: 13,813 AG
    Yea, keep chasin that.
    It is not the responsibility of the United States to solve the problems of other countries.
  • sailfish2sailfish2 Posts: 4,315 Captain
    "Time to cut our military budget to the BONE!"

    What's the matter, you running short on free bones?

    I bet those 1%ers have plenty, you should write them a letter. Perhaps they'll toss you a few.

    :)
    Hoping for better luck next time...... and got it.

    WINNING!
Sign In or Register to comment.