Gallup- Americans Less Likely to See U.S. as No. 1 Militarily

[rightwinger]

Like Carter, Obama ran our military into the dirt and spit on them. America will rise again, and there will be debts collected in the future

-Geaux

Carter reduced the military after Vietnam. It is what you are supposed to do

Obama's reductions are the result of pulling troops out of Iraq/Afghanistan and the stupid 10% sequester that Congress forced on him

After Vietnam our military needed rebuilt, not reduced.

Really? Explain that one. There was a draft during Vietnam. Once the conflict is over, those men get to go home. That's an automatic reduction. You're not making any sense.

Why didn't you address the sequestration issue?

A reduction in manpower makes sense when the war is over.

But while the US was mired in Vietnam, the soviets were building tanks and planes and nukes.

Our conventional forces needed upgraded and our military needed to have the damage of Vietnam fixed.


Did you ever see the military build up that Carter Planned for after the Soviets sent him a reality check with their invasion of Afghanistan?

It was GLORIOUS.

Even Carter realize, albeit late, that the military needed more funding, not less.

How did that work out for the Soviets?

Russia is still using that ancient equipment

 

[Correll]

Like Carter, Obama ran our military into the dirt and spit on them. America will rise again, and there will be debts collected in the future

-Geaux

Carter reduced the military after Vietnam. It is what you are supposed to do

Obama's reductions are the result of pulling troops out of Iraq/Afghanistan and the stupid 10% sequester that Congress forced on him

After Vietnam our military needed rebuilt, not reduced.

Reagan tried to rebuild by throwing money at it. Problem is he spent money to fight the wrong war and bought equipment to fight the wrong mission

Tell it to the Soviets.

Oh, wait, you can't.

Also, Tell it to the Iraqis. Reagans' military is the one we have for the Hundred Hours War.

 

[rightwinger]

What kind of idiot stick is reeetarded enough to consider the US being #2 militarily at ANYTHING!!!!!

Our military isn't #2 at anything BY FAR!!!!!

Who's the dumb ass?

China has a larger Army.

The primary mission of the Chinese Army is to keep 1.5 billion Chinese under control
They have limited global reach outside their borders

 

[rightwinger]

Like Carter, Obama ran our military into the dirt and spit on them. America will rise again, and there will be debts collected in the future

-Geaux

Carter reduced the military after Vietnam. It is what you are supposed to do

Obama's reductions are the result of pulling troops out of Iraq/Afghanistan and the stupid 10% sequester that Congress forced on him

After Vietnam our military needed rebuilt, not reduced.

Reagan tried to rebuild by throwing money at it. Problem is he spent money to fight the wrong war and bought equipment to fight the wrong mission

Tell it to the Soviets.

Oh, wait, you can't.

Also, Tell it to the Iraqis. Reagans' military is the one we have for the Hundred Hours War.

Reagan built a Cold War military that was obsolete once the Berlin Wall fell

 

[Correll]

Like Carter, Obama ran our military into the dirt and spit on them. America will rise again, and there will be debts collected in the future

-Geaux

Carter reduced the military after Vietnam. It is what you are supposed to do

Obama's reductions are the result of pulling troops out of Iraq/Afghanistan and the stupid 10% sequester that Congress forced on him

After Vietnam our military needed rebuilt, not reduced.

Really? Explain that one. There was a draft during Vietnam. Once the conflict is over, those men get to go home. That's an automatic reduction. You're not making any sense.

Why didn't you address the sequestration issue?

A reduction in manpower makes sense when the war is over.

But while the US was mired in Vietnam, the soviets were building tanks and planes and nukes.

Our conventional forces needed upgraded and our military needed to have the damage of Vietnam fixed.


Did you ever see the military build up that Carter Planned for after the Soviets sent him a reality check with their invasion of Afghanistan?

It was GLORIOUS.

Even Carter realize, albeit late, that the military needed more funding, not less.

And Reagan took care of that didn't he. He went and outspent the Russians. We have our looming debt to show for it.

You're still dodging the current sequestration issue. Funny that.

If you are all over the place in your posts, I will pick with points I want to address.

It's the down side of the Shotgun Fallacy you libs like so much.

And debt is better than a Cold War, or a Hot one for that matter.

COld War ended a long time ago. We've had 16 years of democratic presidents since then. Haven't seen to much from you guys on addressing the debt.

 

[Correll]

Like Carter, Obama ran our military into the dirt and spit on them. America will rise again, and there will be debts collected in the future

-Geaux

Carter reduced the military after Vietnam. It is what you are supposed to do

Obama's reductions are the result of pulling troops out of Iraq/Afghanistan and the stupid 10% sequester that Congress forced on him

After Vietnam our military needed rebuilt, not reduced.

Really? Explain that one. There was a draft during Vietnam. Once the conflict is over, those men get to go home. That's an automatic reduction. You're not making any sense.

Why didn't you address the sequestration issue?

A reduction in manpower makes sense when the war is over.

But while the US was mired in Vietnam, the soviets were building tanks and planes and nukes.

Our conventional forces needed upgraded and our military needed to have the damage of Vietnam fixed.


Did you ever see the military build up that Carter Planned for after the Soviets sent him a reality check with their invasion of Afghanistan?

It was GLORIOUS.

Even Carter realize, albeit late, that the military needed more funding, not less.

How did that work out for the Soviets?

Russia is still using that ancient equipment

It was working out fine for them until Reagan came along.

How does that relate to my point about the Carter military reduction in spending?

 

[Correll]

Like Carter, Obama ran our military into the dirt and spit on them. America will rise again, and there will be debts collected in the future

-Geaux

Carter reduced the military after Vietnam. It is what you are supposed to do

Obama's reductions are the result of pulling troops out of Iraq/Afghanistan and the stupid 10% sequester that Congress forced on him

After Vietnam our military needed rebuilt, not reduced.

Reagan tried to rebuild by throwing money at it. Problem is he spent money to fight the wrong war and bought equipment to fight the wrong mission

Tell it to the Soviets.

Oh, wait, you can't.

Also, Tell it to the Iraqis. Reagans' military is the one we have for the Hundred Hours War.

Reagan built a Cold War military that was obsolete once the Berlin Wall fell

Oh My God.

Well, yes. It succeeded and thus was no longer needed.

One could say the same about the military that FDR built. ONce WWII was over it was obsolete.

I'm not sure what the point of that is.

I made breakfast this morning. Once I was full, what was left was no longer needed.


Once the Soviets were cracked under the pressure. Reagan and then GHWBush started cutting, faster and faster.

 

[Correll]

What kind of idiot stick is reeetarded enough to consider the US being #2 militarily at ANYTHING!!!!!

Our military isn't #2 at anything BY FAR!!!!!

Who's the dumb ass?

China has a larger Army.

The primary mission of the Chinese Army is to keep 1.5 billion Chinese under control
They have limited global reach outside their borders

They can reach South Korea, which we are treaty bound to protect.

 

[hazlnut]

The title speaks for itself. A very, very disturbing data point

-Geaux

=================

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• 49% say U.S. is No. 1 military power in world, down from last year
• Views that U.S. is spending too little on defense are edging up
• Republicans much more likely to say military spending is too little

PRINCETON, N.J. -- Americans are evenly split when asked if the U.S. is No. 1 in the world militarily, with 49% saying "yes" and 49% saying "no." The current percentage who view the U.S. as No. 1 is, by a small margin, the lowest Gallup has recorded in its 23-year trend. It also marks a significant downturn from last February, when 59% said the U.S. was the world's top military power.

Americans Less Likely to See U.S. as No. 1 Militarily

Despite the facts to the contrary.

Another pole revealing how stupid and uninformed Americans are.

The next 8 navies could fit inside our Navy.

 

[mamooth]

How does that relate to my point about the Carter military reduction in spending?

No, those were the Nixon/Ford reductions. Defense spending went down sharply from 1968-1976, and then rose slightly during the Carter years.

But then, we understand. TheParty fed you that alternate-reality version of history, so there was really no way you could have known about the real world.

 

[rightwinger]

Carter reduced the military after Vietnam. It is what you are supposed to do

Obama's reductions are the result of pulling troops out of Iraq/Afghanistan and the stupid 10% sequester that Congress forced on him

After Vietnam our military needed rebuilt, not reduced.

Really? Explain that one. There was a draft during Vietnam. Once the conflict is over, those men get to go home. That's an automatic reduction. You're not making any sense.

Why didn't you address the sequestration issue?

A reduction in manpower makes sense when the war is over.

But while the US was mired in Vietnam, the soviets were building tanks and planes and nukes.

Our conventional forces needed upgraded and our military needed to have the damage of Vietnam fixed.


Did you ever see the military build up that Carter Planned for after the Soviets sent him a reality check with their invasion of Afghanistan?

It was GLORIOUS.

Even Carter realize, albeit late, that the military needed more funding, not less.

How did that work out for the Soviets?

Russia is still using that ancient equipment

It was working out fine for them until Reagan came along.

How does that relate to my point about the Carter military reduction in spending?

I worked for the DOD while both Carter and Reagan were President

Under Carter, we were drawing down our forces and regrouping. Carter did fund many modernization efforts and aircraft that we still use today

With Reagan, it was like Christmas. Any military project you proposed got approved. It was the days of Star Wars and Cold War on steroids

I also saw what happened with all the equipment and projects that Reagan green lighted. The Cold War doctrine was obsolete. Our Army was too slow to fight modern engagements. Our Air Force was built around dropping nukes and not tactical missions. Our Navy had the wrong mix of ships

By the 90s, we had to start over

 

[Correll]

After Vietnam our military needed rebuilt, not reduced.

Really? Explain that one. There was a draft during Vietnam. Once the conflict is over, those men get to go home. That's an automatic reduction. You're not making any sense.

Why didn't you address the sequestration issue?

A reduction in manpower makes sense when the war is over.

But while the US was mired in Vietnam, the soviets were building tanks and planes and nukes.

Our conventional forces needed upgraded and our military needed to have the damage of Vietnam fixed.


Did you ever see the military build up that Carter Planned for after the Soviets sent him a reality check with their invasion of Afghanistan?

It was GLORIOUS.

Even Carter realize, albeit late, that the military needed more funding, not less.

How did that work out for the Soviets?

Russia is still using that ancient equipment

It was working out fine for them until Reagan came along.

How does that relate to my point about the Carter military reduction in spending?

I worked for the DOD while both Carter and Reagan were President

Under Carter, we were drawing down our forces and regrouping. Carter did fund many modernization efforts and aircraft that we still use today

With Reagan, it was like Christmas. Any military project you proposed got approved. It was the days of Star Wars and Cold War on steroids

I also saw what happened with all the equipment and projects that Reagan green lighted. The Cold War doctrine was obsolete. Our Army was too slow to fight modern engagements. Our Air Force was built around dropping nukes and not tactical missions. Our Navy had the wrong mix of ships

By the 90s, we had to start over

Reagan inherited a military that didn't trust sentries to have bullets in war zones.

8 years later GHWBush inherited a military that won the Hundred Hours War.

 

[kaz]

The title speaks for itself. A very, very disturbing data point

-Geaux

=================

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• 49% say U.S. is No. 1 military power in world, down from last year
• Views that U.S. is spending too little on defense are edging up
• Republicans much more likely to say military spending is too little

PRINCETON, N.J. -- Americans are evenly split when asked if the U.S. is No. 1 in the world militarily, with 49% saying "yes" and 49% saying "no." The current percentage who view the U.S. as No. 1 is, by a small margin, the lowest Gallup has recorded in its 23-year trend. It also marks a significant downturn from last February, when 59% said the U.S. was the world's top military power.

Americans Less Likely to See U.S. as No. 1 Militarily

Anyone who doesn't know the US is by far the strongest military in the world is an idiot and not worth trying to educate

 

[paulitician]

We have the most powerful military force ever created in human history. So obviously we're #1. However, we're an absolute embarrassment when it comes to taking care of our soldiers and their families. So many of them are resorting to welfare for survival. And that's just an awful indignity for folks who risked their lives for our country.

And we're even more of an embarassment when it comes to taking care of our Veterans. So many have died waiting for treatment. And they're still dying. It seems so many truly enjoy sending our kids off to die and be maimed, but they hate taking caring of them and their families. We can definitely do better. If you want war, you have to accept all the costs. Period, end of story.

 

[rightwinger]

Really? Explain that one. There was a draft during Vietnam. Once the conflict is over, those men get to go home. That's an automatic reduction. You're not making any sense.

Why didn't you address the sequestration issue?

A reduction in manpower makes sense when the war is over.

But while the US was mired in Vietnam, the soviets were building tanks and planes and nukes.

Our conventional forces needed upgraded and our military needed to have the damage of Vietnam fixed.


Did you ever see the military build up that Carter Planned for after the Soviets sent him a reality check with their invasion of Afghanistan?

It was GLORIOUS.

Even Carter realize, albeit late, that the military needed more funding, not less.

How did that work out for the Soviets?

Russia is still using that ancient equipment

It was working out fine for them until Reagan came along.

How does that relate to my point about the Carter military reduction in spending?

I worked for the DOD while both Carter and Reagan were President

Under Carter, we were drawing down our forces and regrouping. Carter did fund many modernization efforts and aircraft that we still use today

With Reagan, it was like Christmas. Any military project you proposed got approved. It was the days of Star Wars and Cold War on steroids

I also saw what happened with all the equipment and projects that Reagan green lighted. The Cold War doctrine was obsolete. Our Army was too slow to fight modern engagements. Our Air Force was built around dropping nukes and not tactical missions. Our Navy had the wrong mix of ships

By the 90s, we had to start over

Reagan inherited a military that didn't trust sentries to have bullets in war zones.

8 years later GHWBush inherited a military that won the Hundred Hours War.

Reagan used the military buildup to end his recession. Much of the money he spent did not make for a better military because it was for fighting a Cold War

Bush kicked Saddam out of Kuwait in 100 days, Carter could have done the same, there was minimal resistance

 

[candycorn]

The title speaks for itself. A very, very disturbing data point

-Geaux

=================

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• 49% say U.S. is No. 1 military power in world, down from last year
• Views that U.S. is spending too little on defense are edging up
• Republicans much more likely to say military spending is too little

PRINCETON, N.J. -- Americans are evenly split when asked if the U.S. is No. 1 in the world militarily, with 49% saying "yes" and 49% saying "no." The current percentage who view the U.S. as No. 1 is, by a small margin, the lowest Gallup has recorded in its 23-year trend. It also marks a significant downturn from last February, when 59% said the U.S. was the world's top military power.

Americans Less Likely to See U.S. as No. 1 Militarily

Anyone who doesn't know the US is by far the strongest military in the world is an idiot and not worth trying to educate

Many of them are seeking the GOP nomination for President. Not surprisingly.

 

[kaz]

The title speaks for itself. A very, very disturbing data point

-Geaux

=================

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• 49% say U.S. is No. 1 military power in world, down from last year
• Views that U.S. is spending too little on defense are edging up
• Republicans much more likely to say military spending is too little

PRINCETON, N.J. -- Americans are evenly split when asked if the U.S. is No. 1 in the world militarily, with 49% saying "yes" and 49% saying "no." The current percentage who view the U.S. as No. 1 is, by a small margin, the lowest Gallup has recorded in its 23-year trend. It also marks a significant downturn from last February, when 59% said the U.S. was the world's top military power.

Americans Less Likely to See U.S. as No. 1 Militarily

Anyone who doesn't know the US is by far the strongest military in the world is an idiot and not worth trying to educate

Many of them are seeking the GOP nomination for President. Not surprisingly.

Who? Can you back that up?

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

What kind of idiot stick is reeetarded enough to consider the US being #2 militarily at ANYTHING!!!!!

Our military isn't #2 at anything BY FAR!!!!!

Who's the dumb ass?

China has a larger Army.

The primary mission of the Chinese Army is to keep 1.5 billion Chinese under control
They have limited global reach outside their borders[/QUOTE

Either Korea or Taiwan could draw us into a conflict with China. Right now I'm not particular worried about that the US still holds a technological lead over China , but if the US military continues with to cut the forces that lead won't mean crap against a force numbering in the millions.

 

[candycorn]

The title speaks for itself. A very, very disturbing data point

-Geaux

=================

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• 49% say U.S. is No. 1 military power in world, down from last year
• Views that U.S. is spending too little on defense are edging up
• Republicans much more likely to say military spending is too little

PRINCETON, N.J. -- Americans are evenly split when asked if the U.S. is No. 1 in the world militarily, with 49% saying "yes" and 49% saying "no." The current percentage who view the U.S. as No. 1 is, by a small margin, the lowest Gallup has recorded in its 23-year trend. It also marks a significant downturn from last February, when 59% said the U.S. was the world's top military power.

Americans Less Likely to See U.S. as No. 1 Militarily

Anyone who doesn't know the US is by far the strongest military in the world is an idiot and not worth trying to educate

Many of them are seeking the GOP nomination for President. Not surprisingly.

Who? Can you back that up?

Trump, Rubio, Cruz.

 

[kaz]

Either Korea or Taiwan could draw us into a conflict with China. Right now I'm not particular worried about that the US still holds a technological lead over China , but if the US military continues with to cut the forces that lead won't mean crap against a force numbering in the millions.

Nonsense. Combat troops are not what protects us from China. Technology does. And no one is advocating cutting that.

Why do we need to be able to conduct two foreign wars at the same time? Why do we need to be able to conduct one? How does that protect the United States?

But if it comes down to troops actually protecting us, we're screwed, china is five times as big as we are. We need to be able to kill their troops before they get here