Jump to content
Paulding.com

New Congress readies war machine


Recommended Posts

Afraid that the American Industrial War Machine might soon find themselves losing market share Congress is once again beating the drums of war and calling for "Boots on the Ground".

 

McCain: Get Ready for U.S. Troops on the Ground in Iraq and Syria

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) did not mince words during their joint- appearance on “60 Minutes” Sunday night in berating President Obama’s strategy for defeating ISIS and other terrorist threats in the Middle East.

“So there is no strategy,” he said. “It is delusional for them to think that what they're doing is succeeding. And we need more boots on the ground. I know that is a tough thing to say and a tough thing for Americans to swallow, but it doesn't mean the 82nd Airborne. It means forward air controllers. It means Special Forces. It means intelligence and it means other capabilities.

 

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/mccain-ready-u-troops-ground-175200999.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 124
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

We've been projecting a weak image since January 20, 2009.

We didn't lose Iraq and Afghanistan under Dubya; it was under Obama that we did. His pull out was disastrous!   Better do some reading up on what other world leaders think of Obama. Most think he is

I would argue that spending the last 14 years on a war-footing, losing Iraq and Afghanistan in the process, has weakened our "respect" around the globe more than cutting military spending could have e

Just put your money where your mouth is, and say nothing.

 

There's going to be plenty of volunteers, at first, and then the draft will be back. It may be like it was during recruitment for The Civil War. You may be able to hire someone to take your place in the draft. I think it was $500.00 back then. Most Americans couldn't afford that $500.

Edited by The Postman
Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the strongest defenses for war is to show you aren't afraid to go to war if needed. Project a weak image and your enemies will go to kick your ass.

We've been projecting a weak image since January 20, 2009.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Any casual observer would look at the posture of our political parties vis-a-vie other nations in the world since 1968 and conclude that the Republicans seek perpetual war and the Democrats don't... they just want to spend money to prepare for the wars the Republicans want to fight.

 

One of the strongest defenses for war is to show you aren't afraid to go to war if needed. Project a weak image and your enemies will go to kick your ass.

 

What we've done with military procurement actually shows greater weakness than about anything else we could do. I mean it will take us a two trillion dollars to build the F-35 program and still probably won't work. Given the inherent deficiencies we've developed in procurement, the wisest thing an enemy can do is lure us into a shooting war where we burn trillions to their chickenfeed and tumble head-first toward bankruptcy while they arm themselves with our surplus artillery shells (IEDs) given to their comrades to fight them in the first place.

 

Of course you might consider that a victory if you're purpose is to profit from the racket called war.

 

pubby

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at history, the U.S. tried to stay out of all the big ones, even when provoked. Not saying we should or should not go, but if we do the rules of engagement need to be rewritten. If it is easier for a citizen to be shot on U.S. soil, then it is to engage enemy personnel, we have a problem with the system. And until our house is fixed, we should be trying to fix others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any casual observer would look at the posture of our political parties vis-a-vie other nations in the world since 1968 and conclude that the Republicans seek perpetual war and the Democrats don't... they just want to spend money to prepare for the wars the Republicans want to fight.

 

 

What we've done with military procurement actually shows greater weakness than about anything else we could do. I mean it will take us a two trillion dollars to build the F-35 program and still probably won't work. Given the inherent deficiencies we've developed in procurement, the wisest thing an enemy can do is lure us into a shooting war where we burn trillions to their chickenfeed and tumble head-first toward bankruptcy while they arm themselves with our surplus artillery shells (IEDs) given to their comrades to fight them in the first place.

 

Of course you might consider that a victory if you're purpose is to profit from the racket called war.

 

pubby

You are failing miserably. Republicans don't seek perpetual war. What we believe in is to have the assets available and the willingness to go to war if necessary. If you are prepared to go to war and you show no fear about going to war, you stand a greater chance of deterring others from making war against you. As far as being prepared for war, you should have the best and be better than the rest.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

You are failing miserably. Republicans don't seek perpetual war. What we believe in is to have the assets available and the willingness to go to war if necessary. If you are prepared to go to war and you show no fear about going to war, you stand a greater chance of deterring others from making war against you. As far as being prepared for war, you should have the best and be better than the rest.

For the most part military spending is nothing more than a congressional slush fund, keeping bases the military doesn't need and buying weapons they do not need or have even asked for. The Pentagon waste billions every year so that some career politician can bring home the bacon to his state and dole out campaign payoffs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For the most part military spending is nothing more than a congressional slush fund, keeping bases the military doesn't need and buying weapons they do not need or have even asked for. The Pentagon waste billions every year so that some career politician can bring home the bacon to his state and dole out campaign payoffs.

What you're saying then is, "we shouldn't worry about building our military up until we are attacked first. Instead we should take that money and redistribute it to people who don't want to take responsibility for their own welfare and make them dependent upon the government."

Link to post
Share on other sites

What you're saying then is, "we shouldn't worry about building our military up until we are attacked first. Instead we should take that money and redistribute it to people who don't want to take responsibility for their own welfare and make them dependent upon the government."

 

No no jackoff I believe that's what you're saying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are failing miserably. Republicans don't seek perpetual war. What we believe in is to have the assets available and the willingness to go to war if necessary. If you are prepared to go to war and you show no fear about going to war, you stand a greater chance of deterring others from making war against you. As far as being prepared for war, you should have the best and be better than the rest.

 

This Map Shows Why The F-35 Has Turned Into A Trillion-Dollar Fiasco Why The Pentagon Is Spending So Unbelievably Much On The F-35

 

 

When you get headlines like this out of a conservative zine like finance.yahoo.com or "the business insider" ... you're in a world of hurt.

 

especially when it doesn't work.

 

pubby

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This Map Shows Why The F-35 Has Turned Into A Trillion-Dollar Fiasco Why The Pentagon Is Spending So Unbelievably Much On The F-35

 

 

When you get headlines like this out of a conservative zine like finance.yahoo.com or "the business insider" ... you're in a world of hurt.

 

especially when it doesn't work.

 

pubby

 

 

No no jackoff I believe that's what you're saying.

You apparently don't see the need to have strong military to serve as a deterrent to war. So what do you propose the government do with the money they currently spend on national defense?

 

This Map Shows Why The F-35 Has Turned Into A Trillion-Dollar Fiasco Why The Pentagon Is Spending So Unbelievably Much On The F-35

 

 

When you get headlines like this out of a conservative zine like finance.yahoo.com or "the business insider" ... you're in a world of hurt.

 

especially when it doesn't work.

 

pubby

An awful lot of blue states benefiting from the F-35.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You apparently don't see the need to have strong military to serve as a deterrent to war. So what do you propose the government do with the money they currently spend on national defense?

 

Maybe if we cut back spending to oh say the next 5 nations combined instead of the next 10 we might I don't know maybe repair some crumbling bridges, build an internet as good as say the ones in countries like Bulgaria or Romania. We might even god forbid invest in our people instead of pushing things onto the military like the Abrams tank that they have said over and over again it does not want or need.

Edited by CitizenCain
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't understand the thirst for war, especially from a man like John McCain who experienced the worst aspect of war, other than death, as a POW. If anyone should be looking at boots on the ground as a last resort, it should be him.

 

ISIS is another Taliban....we can't win. We aren't prepared, militarily, for non-traditional guerrilla styled warfare. The Soviets got their asses kicked in Afghanistan. The Americans got their asses kicked in Afghanistan. ISIS is just a more brutal version of the Taliban....they blend in with communities, they fight with no rules, and have a relatively unsophisticated means of taking land (kill, kill, kill, kidnap, kill). Our military is trained to take out enemy positions, naval aircraft carriers, depots, infrastructure, enemy fighter jets and ground assault vehicles, etc....under the laws we operate, we do not possess the means to take down a band of killers co-habitating with innocent civilians.

 

I firmly believe that offering support via fighter jets/bombers, intelligence via satellite or on the ground, drones, and weapons are more than enough to allow the countries actually threatened to win the fight against ISIS. Let them kill citizens, not us. We don't need more innocent blood on our hands from another war that does nothing to threaten our homeland.

 

mrnn

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Maybe if we cut back spending to oh say the next 5 nations combined instead of the next 10 we might I don't know maybe repair some crumbling bridges, build an internet as good as say the ones in countries like Bulgaria or Romania. We might even god forbid invest in our people instead of pushing things onto the military like the Abrams tank that they have said over and over again it does not want or need.

So what we should do is make it fair by making sure our military is no stronger than any other nation's military?

Here's a thought, instead of cutting the military, hows about we quit supporting criminals and their families that break into our country?

Just a thought, but it makes too much sense to ever happen.

I think the Democrats really want the illegals here so they have people who will clean their houses and take care of the lawns because they don't want to do those things for themselves or have to pay others a higher rate to have it done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what we should do is make it fair by making sure our military is no stronger than any other nation's military?

 

No thats not what I am saying, but being the ex civilian military contractor that you are and after all those years of suckeling off the taxpayers tit it's understandable why you might feel that way. Riding that gravy train would make anyone feel the same way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

No thats not what I am saying, but being the ex civilian military contractor that you are and after all those years of suckeling off the taxpayers tit it's understandable why you might feel that way. Riding that gravy train would make anyone feel the same way.

Really, 25 years of military service is riding a gravy train? You really think military life is gravy? You crack me up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what we should do is make it fair by making sure our military is no stronger than any other nation's military?

I think the Democrats really want the illegals here so they have people who will clean their houses and take care of the lawns because they don't want to do those things for themselves or have to pay others a higher rate to have it done.

And here I thought you wanted to keep the illegals out so you could force the Democrats to clean your house and take care of your lawns because you like to exhibit your superiority :)

 

pubby

Link to post
Share on other sites

And here I thought you wanted to keep the illegals out so you could force the Democrats to clean your house and take care of your lawns because you like to exhibit your superiority :)

 

pubby

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

 

And now you are a retired cop ?

I didn't retire as a cop. What's your point?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't understand the thirst for war, especially from a man like John McCain who experienced the worst aspect of war, other than death, as a POW. If anyone should be looking at boots on the ground as a last resort, it should be him.

 

ISIS is another Taliban....we can't win. We aren't prepared, militarily, for non-traditional guerrilla styled warfare. The Soviets got their asses kicked in Afghanistan. The Americans got their asses kicked in Afghanistan. ISIS is just a more brutal version of the Taliban....they blend in with communities, they fight with no rules, and have a relatively unsophisticated means of taking land (kill, kill, kill, kidnap, kill). Our military is trained to take out enemy positions, naval aircraft carriers, depots, infrastructure, enemy fighter jets and ground assault vehicles, etc....under the laws we operate, we do not possess the means to take down a band of killers co-habitating with innocent civilians.

 

I firmly believe that offering support via fighter jets/bombers, intelligence via satellite or on the ground, drones, and weapons are more than enough to allow the countries actually threatened to win the fight against ISIS. Let them kill citizens, not us. We don't need more innocent blood on our hands from another war that does nothing to threaten our homeland.

 

mrnn

 

 

First, thank you for being the only one who actually addressed the subject.

 

Second, please look into what our military experts are saying about defeating ISIS.

Obama knows what the score is here and he has said as much. He is trying to run

out the clock on making a decision. All the while the enemy is gaining more power.

 

Third, if you do not know that we already have boots on the ground fighting

ISIS in Iraq & Syria, you ain't paying attention. (this last one is mostly for CC...)

 

 

 

 

8)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was living at the taxpayers expense? Now that right there is one of the most stupid things you have ever said.

It's those on welfare and those who pay no federal tax who are living at the taxpayers' expense. And, those who expect the government to subsidize their lifestyles by increasing the taxes of others - these are truly leeches. Everyone should have to pay federal tax. Everyone.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's those on welfare and those who pay no federal tax who are living at the taxpayers' expense. And, those who expect the government to subsidize their lifestyles by increasing the taxes of others - these are truly leeches. Everyone should have to pay federal tax. Everyone.

People who serve in the military are earning their money. He must think they just sit on their asses all day long doing nothing. I wonder if he felt he was living off the taxpayers while he was in Vietnam?

Link to post
Share on other sites

People who serve in the military are earning their money. He must think they just sit on their asses all day long doing nothing. I wonder if he felt he was living off the taxpayers while he was in Vietnam?

 

I've seen plenty of MP's and sitting on their ass is their MOS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Religious wars are right down E Z, ally!

 

He's a God fearing man!

 

 

 

I am a God fearing man, but like the majority of God fearing men I prefer there were no wars. However, we live in an imperfect world where there will be wars and that's why I believe as a nation we should not be afraid to go to war in order to deter it. Hopefully that's simple enough for you to understand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a God fearing man, but like the majority of God fearing men I prefer there were no wars. However, we live in an imperfect world where there will be wars and that's why I believe as a nation we should not be afraid to go to war in order to deter it. Hopefully that's simple enough for you to understand.

 

 

Oh, yes, I understand, E Z!

 

You are a person who uses other people's work to benefit what you believe in. It's like you use P.com, for free, to broadcast your stuff, just like the man in the video, above. Like I have accused you of, "you left, p.com, to try to spread your propaganda on another website, but you came back." That other sight didn't let you broadcast for free; did it?

 

Did they train you, in the service, to use other sources, or other men and woman, to get what appeases you? :pardon:

Edited by The Postman
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So trucking what if it was only 10? Does that make any less admirable?

 

You idiots kill me.

There is a big difference between serving Active Duty and being a Weekend Warrior. You even asking this proves you never served! Don't post you served 25 years when most of that was sitting at home!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So trucking what if it was only 10? Does that make any less admirable?

 

You idiots kill me.

 

 

Hell yeah, it makes a lot of difference.

 

It's like 1%, in this country makes more money than the other 99% of us. Those 1% was who E Z was working for.

 

What really makes no difference to E Z, is the fact that Halliburton employees made a lot more money than he did, when they did military services for us. He is just unaware of his potential.

Edited by The Postman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...