Pentagon Plans to Shrink Army to Pre-World War II Level

[RandallFlagg]

In today's world there is no need for 570,000 troops. Several countries combined required a fraction of that number for the Normandy landings. In the age of cruise missiles and drone strikes 400,000 is more than enough.

No, you're probably right. Hell, we should just let some 15 year old, pimply faced nerd, sitting in his Mom's basement, playing "Call of Duty", have a couple of buttons to push, right?

Here's a quick lesson for you....

Algeria - Standing Army - 484,200

Bangledesh - Standing Army - 3,780,000

Belarus - Standing Army - 472,440

Brazil - Standing Army - 2,072,710

People's Republic of China - 7,054,000

Columbia - 1,378,615

Russia - 3,250,000

Korea - 5,180,000


List of countries by number of military and paramilitary personnel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Right now the US has a standing Military of just over 2 million, That will drop to around 1 million (Army Navy Air Force and Marines) in the future with a Army of just over 438,000.

Yeah, you're right. Why should a country with 330 million people need anything larger than that?? After all, if the "shit hits the fan" - maybe we'll have just enough time to start drafting folks like YOU to serve their country!

 

[Political Junky]

Before WWII the US was #17 in armed forces ... we won.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Before WWII the US was #17 in armed forces ... we won.

That's why I say to hell with it! Disband ALL the services and give all that money to the unemployed!!! and the 99%!!!!! Life will be great!!! A perpetual Eden on Earth!!!!

 

[aaronleland]

In today's world there is no need for 570,000 troops. Several countries combined required a fraction of that number for the Normandy landings. In the age of cruise missiles and drone strikes 400,000 is more than enough.

No, you're probably right. Hell, we should just let some 15 year old, pimply faced nerd, sitting in his Mom's basement, playing "Call of Duty", have a couple of buttons to push, right?

Here's a quick lesson for you....

Algeria - Standing Army - 484,200

Bangledesh - Standing Army - 3,780,000

Belarus - Standing Army - 472,440

Brazil - Standing Army - 2,072,710

People's Republic of China - 7,054,000

Columbia - 1,378,615

Russia - 3,250,000

Korea - 5,180,000


List of countries by number of military and paramilitary personnel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Right now the US has a standing Military of just over 2 million, That will drop to around 1 million (Army Navy Air Force and Marines) in the future with a Army of just over 438,000.

Yeah, you're right. Why should a country with 330 million people need anything larger than that?? After all, if the "shit hits the fan" - maybe we'll have just enough time to start drafting folks like YOU to serve their country!

List of countries by military expenditures - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The largest military force on your list didn't even make the top 15. The second largest still utilizes conscription. The third largest has obligatory military service in a country of billions. Not to mention we still have all the cool toys.

Supercarrier - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Political Junky]

Lawrence Korb, former Assistant Secretary of Defense under Reagan, discusses defense cuts.

Cheney attacks Obama over defense cuts | MSNBC

 

[sambino510]

This is the best news I've heard in quite a while coming out of the Pentagon. It's embarrassing the gross amount of money we spend on our war machine while things like bridges are crumbling and schools are shutting down all across our country. I'm not saying we don't need an adequate defensive force, but our global force is completely unnecessary. Someone would have a hard time convincing me that drone missiles are more financially important than funding our domestic educational system. I applaud Chuck Hagel for this welcome change of tone.

 

[Synthaholic]

Oh and thanks for proving my point about partisan politics.....

I never let an opportunity pass to remind people of why policy matters.

Exposing Right-Wing talking points is part of that.

Partisanship is not a bad thing, as long as both sides are able to honestly recognize facts. When you start denying or ignoring facts, that's when partisanship becomes twisted and bad for the country.

And who's there to expose left-wing talking points....... Don't fool yourself, partisanship is not honestly recognizing facts, any other attempt at justifying it is nothing less than pure rationalization.

I have no problems with you exposing Left-Wing talking points. Just do it with facts, that are backed up by data.

 

[Synthaholic]

Uuummmmm, kinda generalizing just a bit..... aren't we...... Missed the part about towns (local businesses) that cater to the military personnel as well as the civilian population.......

Yes. That's the government, by virtue of it's expanding size, creating jobs in places where there wouldn't be jobs otherwise.

And likewise, cutting government eliminates jobs, whether it's in those particular government offices, or the printers, restaurants, audio-visual, delivery, document management, document disposal, computer sales and service, etc., etc. which service those government jobs in that community. And that can be a branch of the EPA, or it could be a redundant military base. Still government.

The problem with that argument is most of those entrepreneurs will, by virtue of their nature, find other outlets that are not necessarily "government" related.

Good! Then stop opposing the closing of useless, redundant military bases.

The employees will look for work that is not necessarily "government" related when those jobs are no longer available. So your argument is technically a null point because people create these jobs, not the government or necessarily a government presence.

Until you can tell me why there would spring up a new supply (say, economic activity in Fayetteville, NC) absence a new demand (Ft. Bragg), your position makes no sense.

Government jobs like the Foresters of The National Forest Service and the military of Ft. Bragg attract not only the people who fill those jobs, but the entire community, through increased neighborhood construction, schools, and infrastructure. Which brings additional population in, as people and business always follow the money.

You can't tell me that if Ft. Bragg had never opened in Fayetteville that town would look anywhere near the same today.

 

[Theowl32]

Half of you (or all of you) that have this "intelligent" idea of closing our military bases around the world truly have no clue about logistics.

That makes all of you that think the military bases around the world are useless, amateurs. There is no other way to put it.

There dangerous spots everywhere on the globe. By having military bases in....Japan, or South Korea, we have a logistical advantage WHEN things happen. Also, OUR presence also PREVENTS things from happening. Yes, we do protect our allies. There are financial benefits as well.

Amateurs always talk about what the military SHOULD DO, and the professionals are always studying logistics.

Keep on thinking you have a clue.

 

[Indofred]

I say, "Prepare for war".
When someone proposes defence cuts, someone thinks of a great reason to go to war.

Dick Cheney - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://www.management-aims.com/PapersMgmt/23Gargan.pdf

Korea and Vietnam are a very long way from the United states but it was deemed essential to go to war to protect America.
In Vietnam, for whatever reason, you lost but there was absolutely no danger to the U.S. mainland.
The reasons were invalid.

So, why did America go to war?

Easy, major defence contracts.
Take a look at the wars and who made the cash from them - yes - the very rich and well connected U.S. defence industry.

Every time the American military looks like it's about to be cut, something happens to build it back up.
That's one of the main reasons I'm so suspicious about the 9/11 attacks.
Before you start on the tin foil hat jobs, take a look at the history of defence contracts and spending.
Before each and every threat to America, there was a downsizing and spending cutbacks then, as if by magic, a reason for war - usually a crap one.

 

[Indofred]

Luckily, Obama seems to be holding the idiots back from starting any wars at the moment but one will be started as soon as the American arms industry buy a new president.

 

[rightwinger]

Luckily, Obama seems to be holding the idiots back from starting any wars at the moment but one will be started as soon as the American arms industry buy a new president.

Or as soon as we elect another Republican

 

[bedowin62]

YAWN
another ignorant left-wing loser making a fool of himself

liberal APPEASEMENT leads to wars; and no not just from American Presidents; it is the cause of WWII.

 

[JWBooth]

YAWN
another ignorant left-wing loser making a fool of himself

liberal APPEASEMENT leads to wars; and no not just from American Presidents; it is the cause of WWII.

Long view ignorance of history also leads to wars, it led to WWII.

 

[bedowin62]

LIBS ARE COMICAL MORONS WHO LIE TO THEMSELVES


funny watching people who sent millions to Vietnam; funded and carried out both "Bush" wars; even troop surging in Afghanistan; rained missiles on Libya until AL QAEDA took the country over; insist they could INVADE SYRIA WITHOUT EVEN ASKING FOR THE CONSENT OF CONGRESS


are ranting about starting wars?

the world is in flames in places it hasnt been since WWII; from the Ukraine to North Africa

libs are losers who lie to themselves

 

[bedowin62]

YAWN
another ignorant left-wing loser making a fool of himself

liberal APPEASEMENT leads to wars; and no not just from American Presidents; it is the cause of WWII.

Long view ignorance of history also leads to wars, it led to WWII.

oh goody; another moron that wants democrats to stay in power forever.

you certainly must; because spewing hatred for both sides only helps Dems; you dont have enough power to do anything else

 

[bedowin62]

I say, "Prepare for war".
When someone proposes defence cuts, someone thinks of a great reason to go to war.

Dick Cheney - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://www.management-aims.com/PapersMgmt/23Gargan.pdf

Korea and Vietnam are a very long way from the United states but it was deemed essential to go to war to protect America.
In Vietnam, for whatever reason, you lost but there was absolutely no danger to the U.S. mainland.
The reasons were invalid.

So, why did America go to war?

Easy, major defence contracts.
Take a look at the wars and who made the cash from them - yes - the very rich and well connected U.S. defence industry.

Every time the American military looks like it's about to be cut, something happens to build it back up.
That's one of the main reasons I'm so suspicious about the 9/11 attacks.
Before you start on the tin foil hat jobs, take a look at the history of defence contracts and spending.
Before each and every threat to America, there was a downsizing and spending cutbacks then, as if by magic, a reason for war - usually a crap one.

beware of people ranting paranoid delusions about the Defense industry who can't even spell defense correctly


Are you even American?

 

[JWBooth]

Deleted because it makes no sense to take troll bait.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

We don't need armed forces.

Everybody in the world loves us.

It's been that way since January, 2009.

Hasn't it?

57% say Obama and the US aren't respected in the world...so HELL? Cut the military and open the door to attack/invasion...

Hagel and Obama are playing a very dangerous game.

Yeah, they should be playing it as safe as Bush and Cheney did. Nothing happened during their terms....

 

[RandomVariable]

YAWN
another ignorant left-wing loser making a fool of himself

liberal APPEASEMENT leads to wars; and no not just from American Presidents; it is the cause of WWII.

Long view ignorance of history also leads to wars, it led to WWII.

No. That would have been the Versailles Treaty, but then a knowledge of history is not necessary to rewrite it, it helps, but not necessary.