Guess Who Has The Most Powerful Military Force In The World

[Camp]

Military spending is, and has been, rife with corruption since Eisenhower's warning as perhaps our greatest and wisest military President left office. We do not build our military strength pragmatically, we build it by the dictates of profiteers who lobby elected officials with the promise of jobs and funds flowing into and maintained in the districts and states of elected officials. We are so corrupt that we buy weapons and hardware the military tells us emphatically that they don't need or want just to keep those funds and jobs flowing into those districts and states for the benefit of politicians who in turn get huge campaign donations from the industries profit. This isn't a Republican or Democrat thing. It is a national political weakness and wasting time and effort blaming one party or the other makes us weaker.

straw man. a huge part of our military budget doesnt even go toward weapons systems

Nonsense. The funds are used for development through phases of production and implementation and maintenance. A forward operating base with all it's hardware and personnel in a foreign location is part of a weapons system.

really leftard?? can i get an NSN for that "weapons system"?????
what is the name of the weapons system that includes not only all the hardware and personnel but the whole base?

is it called the US military you idiot?

you only mention weapons and hardware i your original post, moron

Words, terms and phrases can have and more often than not, have multiple meanings. A smart person knows how to differentiate those different meaning by evaluating the context they are being used in. A knee slapper like yourself resorts to picking the definition that fits a presupposed agenda and accepts only the one definition that fits that agenda.
Sounds like everyone who disagrees with you is a moron or idiot. Reality is that your constant and persistent reliance on name calling and feeble insults make you look like the insecure and not very bright individual.

 

[bedowin62]

Military spending is, and has been, rife with corruption since Eisenhower's warning as perhaps our greatest and wisest military President left office. We do not build our military strength pragmatically, we build it by the dictates of profiteers who lobby elected officials with the promise of jobs and funds flowing into and maintained in the districts and states of elected officials. We are so corrupt that we buy weapons and hardware the military tells us emphatically that they don't need or want just to keep those funds and jobs flowing into those districts and states for the benefit of politicians who in turn get huge campaign donations from the industries profit. This isn't a Republican or Democrat thing. It is a national political weakness and wasting time and effort blaming one party or the other makes us weaker.

straw man. a huge part of our military budget doesnt even go toward weapons systems

Nonsense. The funds are used for development through phases of production and implementation and maintenance. A forward operating base with all it's hardware and personnel in a foreign location is part of a weapons system.

really leftard?? can i get an NSN for that "weapons system"?????
what is the name of the weapons system that includes not only all the hardware and personnel but the whole base?

is it called the US military you idiot?

you only mention weapons and hardware i your original post, moron

Words, terms and phrases can have and more often than not, have multiple meanings. A smart person knows how to differentiate those different meaning by evaluating the context they are being used in. A knee slapper like yourself resorts to picking the definition that fits a presupposed agenda and accepts only the one definition that fits that agenda.
Sounds like everyone who disagrees with you is a moron or idiot. Reality is that your constant and persistent reliance on name calling and feeble insults make you look like the insecure and not very bright individual.

of course you are doing exactly what you're accusing me of. that's why you're a feaking joke and cannot be taken seriously. you took the quote of a general as being a caution against the military when in fact he's saying FIRED WEAPONS are a waste, meaning of course a strong military is the best deterrent.

i name-call only the arrogant, self-impressed morons on your side; and many agree with me. it's not about being insecure, i'm just calling them as i see them.

 

[bedowin62]

Deterrence theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaDeterrence_theory

• Cached

Wikipedia
Loading...
Jump to United States' policy of deterrence - United States policy of deterrence during the ... that he never advocated military intervention, ...
‎The concept of deterrence - ‎Rational deterrence theory

 

[bedowin62]

Operation Dragon Spear Shows U.S. Army Is a Deterrence ...
www.usnews.com/.../operation-dragon-spear-...

• Cached

U.S. News & World Report
Loading...
Aug 12, 2015 - Operation Dragon Spear showed the U.S. Army is very much a force for deterrence.

 

[rightwinger]

Military spending is, and has been, rife with corruption since Eisenhower's warning as perhaps our greatest and wisest military President left office. We do not build our military strength pragmatically, we build it by the dictates of profiteers who lobby elected officials with the promise of jobs and funds flowing into and maintained in the districts and states of elected officials. We are so corrupt that we buy weapons and hardware the military tells us emphatically that they don't need or want just to keep those funds and jobs flowing into those districts and states for the benefit of politicians who in turn get huge campaign donations from the industries profit. This isn't a Republican or Democrat thing. It is a national political weakness and wasting time and effort blaming one party or the other makes us weaker.

straw man. a huge part of our military budget doesnt even go toward weapons systems

Nonsense. The funds are used for development through phases of production and implementation and maintenance. A forward operating base with all it's hardware and personnel in a foreign location is part of a weapons system.

really leftard?? can i get an NSN for that "weapons system"?????
what is the name of the weapons system that includes not only all the hardware and personnel but the whole base?

is it called the US military you idiot?

you only mention weapons and hardware i your original post, moron

Words, terms and phrases can have and more often than not, have multiple meanings. A smart person knows how to differentiate those different meaning by evaluating the context they are being used in. A knee slapper like yourself resorts to picking the definition that fits a presupposed agenda and accepts only the one definition that fits that agenda.
Sounds like everyone who disagrees with you is a moron or idiot. Reality is that your constant and persistent reliance on name calling and feeble insults make you look like the insecure and not very bright individual.

of course you are doing exactly what you're accusing me of. that's why you're a feaking joke and cannot be taken seriously. you took the quote of a general as being a caution against the military when in fact he's saying FIRED WEAPONS are a waste, meaning of course a strong military is the best deterrent.

i name-call only the arrogant, self-impressed morons on your side; and many agree with me. it's not about being insecure, i'm just calling them as i see them.

 

[bedowin62]

food stamps have grown by more than 13 MILLION under obama and are STILL 13 milion HIGHER THAN THEY WERE UNDER BUSH, heading into obama's EIGHTH YEAR

what are you idiots offering that puts into CONTEXT Eisenhower's statements? where are children going hungry here because of the size of our military? specific examples please

nothing you morons say adds up, holds up to scrutiny. that's why you get called names

 

[rightwinger]

food stamps have grown by more than 13 MILLION under obama and are STILL 13 milion HIGHER THAN THEY WERE UNDER BUSH, heading into obama's EIGHTH YEAR

what are you idiots offering that puts into CONTEXT Eisenhower's statements? where are children going hungry here because of the size of our military? specific examples please

nothing you morons say adds up, holds up to scrutiny. that's why you get called names

Very good point

Food stamps are a good indicator of our economy and the need for good paying jobs for lower skilled workers. Eisenhowers quote about military spending coming at the expense of helping the poor is appropriate

If our military was not deployed around the world, propping up puppet dictators in lands that hate the US, we would have more money to help those in poverty

 

[Camp]

food stamps have grown by more than 13 MILLION under obama and are STILL 13 milion HIGHER THAN THEY WERE UNDER BUSH, heading into obama's EIGHTH YEAR

what are you idiots offering that puts into CONTEXT Eisenhower's statements? where are children going hungry here because of the size of our military? specific examples please

nothing you morons say adds up, holds up to scrutiny. that's why you get called names

You always have to deflect. Your defense is that it is that it is OK for waste and mismanagement in the MIC because there are plenty of funds being spent on food stamps.
There are multiple threads on food stamps and children's hunger issues. Those issue's have nothing to do with the MIC swallowing up tax payer funds that could be wiser spent. The funds could be spent on military, national security and defense issue's and programs. The point is that huge amounts are being wasted and mismanaged.

 

[frigidweirdo]

What does our GDP have to do with the potential threat against our country?

We spend 42 cents of every military dollar to defend a country that hasn't been invaded in 200 years

Hmmm, soooooooooooooo, 9/11/2001 was 200 years ago?

9/11 was an invasion?

what would you call it? an attack? a terrorist bombing? an act of war? or "bush did it" ?

Do you understand what an invasion is?

It takes a occupying force capturing territory

Pearl Harbor was an attack, not an invasion

OK, fine. Attack. do you think our military only exists to prevent a physical invasion force?

No I don't.

The US armed forces are mostly used to do the bidding of the political elite, invading being one of those things.

 

[TooTall]

...We took over Iraq and Afghanistan with no trouble...

The shades of 200+ American (and so-called 'Coalition') dead during the Invasion, and the 5000+ dead in the years after the initial victory, might disagree with you.

...Just didn't know what to do after...

True. It's what happens when you fail to construct an effective, realistic front-to-back (invasion-to-exit) strategy and then stick to it.

In the case of Iraq, it's what happens when you invade another country for no damned good reason and lie to your own people and the world about the causes.

In the case of Afghanistan, it's what happens when you force-out the Bad Guys, fail to capture the Head Bad Guy let him escape to another kindred country next-door, then hang around, for years, afterwards, for no good reason, and to no useful purpose, in a region of formidable and tortuous terrain that historically swallows and buries invaders.

In the case of Iraq, Bush got the US Congress including Senators Clinton and Kerry to authorize the act as well as the right to enforce the UN Resolution that verified material breach of the cease fire that was in place.
The fact that OBL escaped to Pakistan could not be blamed on Bush, but the special ops teams he was responsible for finally located and eliminated the SOB.
You really need to pull you head out of Obama's ass and find out what is real and what is make believe.

I'm an Obama fan?

You're out of your tiny little mind.

In the case of Iraq, it doesn't matter one good goddamn who Shrub managed to sucker into going to war - he and his people knew it was bullshit - that's all that counts.

In the case of Afghanistan, the US military - operating under Shrub's command - flubbed the capture at Tora Bora, and then stayed years too long, for no good reason.

Afghanistan was as close to a 'righteous shoot' as we're like to come in modern times, but we should have been in and out of there within six months, tops.

Iraq was total bullshit - a squandering of American blood and treasure - although I made a great show of supporting the troops in my blogging at the time, so as to avoid giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

Who signed-on and who did not sign-on is not the frigging point.

If you bullshit people, then, of course they're going to be more inclined to agree with you.

It is the bullshitting that is at-issue with respect to Iraq, not who inadvertently bought into the bullshit.

Not everyone who keenly focuses upon the 'bullshit' is an Obama fan, nor even a Democrat.

The world is a little more than simple black and white, although 'grey' is not dreamt of in your philosophy.

You mentioned tiny little minds and proceeded to exhibit a perfect example of one with the nonsense in your post.

 

[bedowin62]

food stamps have grown by more than 13 MILLION under obama and are STILL 13 milion HIGHER THAN THEY WERE UNDER BUSH, heading into obama's EIGHTH YEAR

what are you idiots offering that puts into CONTEXT Eisenhower's statements? where are children going hungry here because of the size of our military? specific examples please

nothing you morons say adds up, holds up to scrutiny. that's why you get called names

Very good point

Food stamps are a good indicator of our economy and the need for good paying jobs for lower skilled workers. Eisenhowers quote about military spending coming at the expense of helping the poor is appropriate

If our military was not deployed around the world, propping up puppet dictators in lands that hate the US, we would have more money to help those in poverty

again dimwit; where is the CAUSATION?? you're saying more money would be available. that isnt the same as saying one s causing the other.

there are about 45 MILLION OF FOOD STAMPS RIGHT NOW, and that is COUNTING the small decrease from the record highs. JUST HOW MANY do you think need to be on food stamps in what you morons call this roaring obamaconomy???

how many are starving because the military budget is too high??

you simply cant quantify or explain anything y ou post here. it's the same thing EVERY DAY.

but you seem to think quantity replaces quality; and when called out on your bullshit you simply respond with more bullshit

 

[kaz]

OP is confusing "Powerful" with "Expensive".

Russia, In Syria, is doing in a matter of weeks what the US couldn't do in years.

That has nothing to do with power, that has to do with that Obama doesn't have the decency to stay out of other people's shit or the courage to follow through on his actions

 

[bedowin62]

food stamps have grown by more than 13 MILLION under obama and are STILL 13 milion HIGHER THAN THEY WERE UNDER BUSH, heading into obama's EIGHTH YEAR

what are you idiots offering that puts into CONTEXT Eisenhower's statements? where are children going hungry here because of the size of our military? specific examples please

nothing you morons say adds up, holds up to scrutiny. that's why you get called names

You always have to deflect. Your defense is that it is that it is OK for waste and mismanagement in the MIC because there are plenty of funds being spent on food stamps.
There are multiple threads on food stamps and children's hunger issues. Those issue's have nothing to do with the MIC swallowing up tax payer funds that could be wiser spent. The funds could be spent on military, national security and defense issue's and programs. The point is that huge amounts are being wasted and mismanaged.

it's not "deflecting" when you're simply a coward READING INTO what i posted. that's just how pathetic you are. when did i say i am for waste and mismanagement in the MIC???? when did i IMPLY THAT?????

and isnt that just a straw man on your part anyway leftard? do people on the Left only want the military cut by the amount fraud and mismanagement you say exists? wasnt your, and the other idiot's arguement that we just dont need a military this big????

can you losers be honest about ANYTHING????


YES there are multiple threads on food stamps and children's hunger issues. it was the left-wing idiot you're trying to defend that made the connection that money spent on the military leads to children going hungry, and used Eisenhowers' quote to that end.

 

[bedowin62]

food stamps have grown by more than 13 MILLION under obama and are STILL 13 milion HIGHER THAN THEY WERE UNDER BUSH, heading into obama's EIGHTH YEAR

what are you idiots offering that puts into CONTEXT Eisenhower's statements? where are children going hungry here because of the size of our military? specific examples please

nothing you morons say adds up, holds up to scrutiny. that's why you get called names

Very good point

Food stamps are a good indicator of our economy and the need for good paying jobs for lower skilled workers. Eisenhowers quote about military spending coming at the expense of helping the poor is appropriate

If our military was not deployed around the world, propping up puppet dictators in lands that hate the US, we would have more money to help those in poverty

so you agree taking out saddam was the right thing to do????? i mean isnt that an example of a puppet dictator???

then why hasnt obama removed Assad yet? isnt he allowing russia to prop up THAT puppet?

and didnt obama take out khadafy?

why is that puppet any different than the rest dullard?

can you be consistent??

 

[rightwinger]

food stamps have grown by more than 13 MILLION under obama and are STILL 13 milion HIGHER THAN THEY WERE UNDER BUSH, heading into obama's EIGHTH YEAR

what are you idiots offering that puts into CONTEXT Eisenhower's statements? where are children going hungry here because of the size of our military? specific examples please

nothing you morons say adds up, holds up to scrutiny. that's why you get called names

Very good point

Food stamps are a good indicator of our economy and the need for good paying jobs for lower skilled workers. Eisenhowers quote about military spending coming at the expense of helping the poor is appropriate

If our military was not deployed around the world, propping up puppet dictators in lands that hate the US, we would have more money to help those in poverty

again dimwit; where is the CAUSATION?? you're saying more money would be available. that isnt the same as saying one s causing the other.

there are about 45 MILLION OF FOOD STAMPS RIGHT NOW, and that is COUNTING the small decrease from the record highs. JUST HOW MANY do you think need to be on food stamps in what you morons call this roaring obamaconomy???

how many are starving because the military budget is too high??

you simply cant quantify or explain anything y ou post here. it's the same thing EVERY DAY.

but you seem to think quantity replaces quality; and when called out on your bullshit you simply respond with more bullshit

Again with the tirades.....have you considered Valium?

Why the obsession over food stamps? Do you have issues with helping your fellow Americans?

 

[rightwinger]

food stamps have grown by more than 13 MILLION under obama and are STILL 13 milion HIGHER THAN THEY WERE UNDER BUSH, heading into obama's EIGHTH YEAR

what are you idiots offering that puts into CONTEXT Eisenhower's statements? where are children going hungry here because of the size of our military? specific examples please

nothing you morons say adds up, holds up to scrutiny. that's why you get called names

Very good point

Food stamps are a good indicator of our economy and the need for good paying jobs for lower skilled workers. Eisenhowers quote about military spending coming at the expense of helping the poor is appropriate

If our military was not deployed around the world, propping up puppet dictators in lands that hate the US, we would have more money to help those in poverty

so you agree taking out saddam was the right thing to do????? i mean isnt that an example of a puppet dictator???

then why hasnt obama removed Assad yet? isnt he allowing russia to prop up THAT puppet?

and didnt obama take out khadafy?

why is that puppet any different than the rest dullard?

can you be consistent??

Not all puppets are created equal are they?

We propped up the Shah, Diem, Batista....all were corrupt dictators

 

[bedowin62]

food stamps have grown by more than 13 MILLION under obama and are STILL 13 milion HIGHER THAN THEY WERE UNDER BUSH, heading into obama's EIGHTH YEAR

what are you idiots offering that puts into CONTEXT Eisenhower's statements? where are children going hungry here because of the size of our military? specific examples please

nothing you morons say adds up, holds up to scrutiny. that's why you get called names

Very good point

Food stamps are a good indicator of our economy and the need for good paying jobs for lower skilled workers. Eisenhowers quote about military spending coming at the expense of helping the poor is appropriate

If our military was not deployed around the world, propping up puppet dictators in lands that hate the US, we would have more money to help those in poverty

so you agree taking out saddam was the right thing to do????? i mean isnt that an example of a puppet dictator???

then why hasnt obama removed Assad yet? isnt he allowing russia to prop up THAT puppet?

and didnt obama take out khadafy?

why is that puppet any different than the rest dullard?

can you be consistent??

Not all puppets are created equal are they?

We propped up the Shah, Diem, Batista....all were corrupt dictators

again with straw man. i never said they are all equal. i asked YOU to make the distinction why your own leader chose to prop up one and depose another.

it's like you idiots cant even admit your Party has had the White House for going on 8 years

 

[rightwinger]

food stamps have grown by more than 13 MILLION under obama and are STILL 13 milion HIGHER THAN THEY WERE UNDER BUSH, heading into obama's EIGHTH YEAR

what are you idiots offering that puts into CONTEXT Eisenhower's statements? where are children going hungry here because of the size of our military? specific examples please

nothing you morons say adds up, holds up to scrutiny. that's why you get called names

Very good point

Food stamps are a good indicator of our economy and the need for good paying jobs for lower skilled workers. Eisenhowers quote about military spending coming at the expense of helping the poor is appropriate

If our military was not deployed around the world, propping up puppet dictators in lands that hate the US, we would have more money to help those in poverty

so you agree taking out saddam was the right thing to do????? i mean isnt that an example of a puppet dictator???

then why hasnt obama removed Assad yet? isnt he allowing russia to prop up THAT puppet?

and didnt obama take out khadafy?

why is that puppet any different than the rest dullard?

can you be consistent??

Not all puppets are created equal are they?

We propped up the Shah, Diem, Batista....all were corrupt dictators

again with straw man. i never said they are all equal. i asked YOU to make the distinction why your own leader chose to prop up one and depose another.

it's like you idiots cant even admit your Party has had the White House for going on 8 years

Don't look at me skippy

I'm the one advocating cutting our role as the worlds policeman and using the money domestically

 

[Kondor3]

...We took over Iraq and Afghanistan with no trouble...

The shades of 200+ American (and so-called 'Coalition') dead during the Invasion, and the 5000+ dead in the years after the initial victory, might disagree with you.

...Just didn't know what to do after...

True. It's what happens when you fail to construct an effective, realistic front-to-back (invasion-to-exit) strategy and then stick to it.

In the case of Iraq, it's what happens when you invade another country for no damned good reason and lie to your own people and the world about the causes.

In the case of Afghanistan, it's what happens when you force-out the Bad Guys, fail to capture the Head Bad Guy let him escape to another kindred country next-door, then hang around, for years, afterwards, for no good reason, and to no useful purpose, in a region of formidable and tortuous terrain that historically swallows and buries invaders.

In the case of Iraq, Bush got the US Congress including Senators Clinton and Kerry to authorize the act as well as the right to enforce the UN Resolution that verified material breach of the cease fire that was in place.
The fact that OBL escaped to Pakistan could not be blamed on Bush, but the special ops teams he was responsible for finally located and eliminated the SOB.
You really need to pull you head out of Obama's ass and find out what is real and what is make believe.

I'm an Obama fan?

You're out of your tiny little mind.

In the case of Iraq, it doesn't matter one good goddamn who Shrub managed to sucker into going to war - he and his people knew it was bullshit - that's all that counts.

In the case of Afghanistan, the US military - operating under Shrub's command - flubbed the capture at Tora Bora, and then stayed years too long, for no good reason.

Afghanistan was as close to a 'righteous shoot' as we're like to come in modern times, but we should have been in and out of there within six months, tops.

Iraq was total bullshit - a squandering of American blood and treasure - although I made a great show of supporting the troops in my blogging at the time, so as to avoid giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

Who signed-on and who did not sign-on is not the frigging point.

If you bullshit people, then, of course they're going to be more inclined to agree with you.

It is the bullshitting that is at-issue with respect to Iraq, not who inadvertently bought into the bullshit.

Not everyone who keenly focuses upon the 'bullshit' is an Obama fan, nor even a Democrat.

The world is a little more than simple black and white, although 'grey' is not dreamt of in your philosophy.

You mentioned tiny little minds and proceeded to exhibit a perfect example of one with the nonsense in your post.

No.

I make perfect sense in this context.

Stop defending the indefensible.

We owe it to the thousands of dead American kids and the dozens of thousands of maimed ones.

We must own-up to our mistakes and commit to not making them again.

Much as we learned the lessons of Vietnam, and applied them to the Gulf War of 1991.

Then promptly forgot them again, in 2002 and beyond.

1. only undertake righteous missions

2. fight to win

3. walk away afterwards - don't try to nation-build - or, at a minimum, merely participate alongside other wealthy nations, in the rebuilding, and leave, if there's trouble

4. indict and convict and lock-up politicians who bullshit the American People or the Congress into making war for no good purpose

We owe that to the ghosts of those kids, and their maimed and wounded and traumatized comrades.

Stop defending the indefensible.

 

[kaz]

food stamps have grown by more than 13 MILLION under obama and are STILL 13 milion HIGHER THAN THEY WERE UNDER BUSH, heading into obama's EIGHTH YEAR

what are you idiots offering that puts into CONTEXT Eisenhower's statements? where are children going hungry here because of the size of our military? specific examples please

nothing you morons say adds up, holds up to scrutiny. that's why you get called names

Very good point

Food stamps are a good indicator of our economy and the need for good paying jobs for lower skilled workers. Eisenhowers quote about military spending coming at the expense of helping the poor is appropriate

If our military was not deployed around the world, propping up puppet dictators in lands that hate the US, we would have more money to help those in poverty

so you agree taking out saddam was the right thing to do????? i mean isnt that an example of a puppet dictator???

then why hasnt obama removed Assad yet? isnt he allowing russia to prop up THAT puppet?

and didnt obama take out khadafy?

why is that puppet any different than the rest dullard?

can you be consistent??

RW is completely consistent. he blows Democrats