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.
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.
Maintaining a military is one of the very few things the federal government is required to do. However, you will find that a lot of TEA party folks would not mind seeing our force reductions inside foreign countries around the world, but the problem is we have treaties with those countries to help defend them.
You think US was following a treaty of defense when they invaded Iraq in 2003???
Quote:
Originally Posted by OICU812
Maintaining a military is one of the very few things the federal government is required to do. However, you will find that a lot of TEA party folks would not mind seeing our force reductions inside foreign countries around the world, but the problem is we have treaties with those countries to help defend them.
...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).
That may be what YOU did your entire time but is not necessarily what everyone else is doing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThinkBeforeYouVote
When the military budget IS the deficit, it's obviously something that needs to shrink
The military budget is the majority of our government spending.
The military budget accounts for approximately 24% of the annual federal budget. The only way that you can semi-accurately state that the defense budget is the majority of government spending is when you limit the discussion to discretionary spending. Mandatory Spending (aka "entitlement spending") makes up about 55% of the budget and is growing. Discretionary spending is the remainder. DoD is about 55% of discretionary spending, but only 24% of the budget overall.
I share these thoughts with you because your credibility suffers when you claim to be a former military officer but post factually inaccurate information about military spending that is readily available with a quick google search. Also, most military officers whom I've ever met already posses a pretty solid grasp on the makeup of the federal budget and would not have post inaccurate or dare I say "deceitful" information simply to bolster his/her argument.
With that said, I support spending cuts across all sectors of government, even DoD. Every branch has to do its part to cut spending. But the real savings are in the entitlement spending, which is squeezing out discretionary spending a little more so with every passing year. Reforms for entitlement spending are long overdo, and any spending cut discussions that do not involve entitlement reforms should not be taken seriously.
I was in basic training with a couple of those "gang bangers" you are referring to. That is the only way they knew how to get out of the gang life. I guess in your world they should have just kept selling dope and contributed to society through the thug life. The military turned their life around. Your hatred of people who serve is quite disturbing especially coming from someone who they themselves say they served. It appears you think your above it all and everybody else is just some leech who joins. Why the held did you volunteer to begin with if you had to associate with all these idiot gang bangers and felons an illegals? One would think you would fit in better at some elitist university looking down on everyone and telling them how much better you are than they.
THinkBeforeYouVote doesn't make sense at all. I agreed with him that we need to bring out troops home from foreign military bases so they can spend their money here but he goes off on me with that so I guess he would rather cut the defense budget so much that many many military personnel don't get their enlistment contracts renewed, recruitment numbers drops dramatically or stop altogether, then what? All those people are going to be added to the unemployment numbers. So, all that money he wants to save by trimming military personnel gets shifted onto the state welfare department. So, what has been accomplished? Nothing. This is the real world, not the idealist world that everyone says "cut the defense budget!" lives in. There's plenty to cut in the defense budget, but I wouldn't cut a single cent if that money is directly going to the enlisted people and officers. Like another poster said, a lot of the waste is towards private contractors.
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.
Many of your remarks in this thread, Lieutenant (or was it Captain USMC?) appear to be elitist and condescending. Trust that this attitude was suppressed during your active duty years and not displayed with the enlisted personnel you led. Some of them may have actually been more intelligent than yourself, differing only in that they were unable to receive a formal education before entering the service. Many of these young enlistees learn job and life skills that serve them very well in later life, in the service should they decide to stay, or when they return to civilian life.
That said, in spite of being very conservative, very pro military, and very hawkish, do agree with many of the arguments, also being increasingly opposed to foreign aid and an aggressive interventionist policy. While in some ways am still fighting the Cold War and still detest and mistrust the Russians, do think that the damn Euro-Socialists should have long ago assumed the resposibility for their own defense, and the stationing of US ground forces in Europe should end. Air bases and naval facilities are another matter. In Asia, again many ground forces should be brought home, but unsure about South Korea, the North still remains a dangerous, uncertain nation.
Much of what appears to be a bloated military budget is caused by politics. Congressmen try to get projects and facilities for their districts and generals and admirals lobbying for funding for their pet projects and newest toys. While large savings can be had by trimming our overseas presence in non strategic places and not funding not needed hardware, under no circumstances can we allow our forces to be reduced to the point that it places our nation at high risk. The world is still a place filled with enemies, as recent events in the Mid East has shown us.
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 a thief more likely to break into the home of a known gun owner or the home of a person known have just a bat or no weapons?
You think US was following a treaty of defense when they invaded Iraq in 2003???
uhm
they were following:
1 the congresssional approval of it
2. the un approval of it
3. the polity of the USA to change regemes as set forth by bill clinton
I'm for bringing the soldiers home and cutting the defense budget, but the reality is the military is the only way out for so many people. Would you rather have them at least do something for their time, rather than sit at home, sell drugs, and collecting a welfare check for nothing at home? At least our military men and women are doing something. I think that funding needs to be cut for all the advanced toys the military has, and put that money towards more personnel and practical weapons and navy ships.
Yes, they should do something with their time. Bring them home and have them work in CCC or WPA like programs around the US. How long would it take an Engineering Brigade to repave an 8 lane highway? How many low income people could a Medical Unit help? How many soldiers could work litter patrol, or help to build labor intensive but low cost projects such as wetland restoration? Or could deliver meals to seniors? Read to children?
Doing what exactly? Have you ever served? The majority of people in the military never do a single thing for the country other than make money and spend it abroad. Only about 15% of our military is actually in a combat zone, the rest is here in the US living in bases like Ft Hood or Andrews or Pendleton, or partying it up in Japan, Germany, Guam, etc. They aren't keeping us safe, but they're certainly keeping us poor.
Is it a welfare case to you then? It's the same thing the way you state it. Personally, I'd rather we spend the money training those kids in Computers, Science, Medicine, ECONOMICS...you know, things that actually matter...instead of teaching a bunch of 18 year olds how to use a gun and how to live off the government. I have nothing against the military, what I have a problem with is the massively bloated military that seems more like welfare than our welfare program...we're even giving them fake jobs.
I mostly chased tale and drank a lot when I was in the service. Most, if not all of my friends did the same. Thanks taxpayers. It was fun.
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.
