Why do you think this country needs more invested in the Military.

[Spare_change]

"I respect every person who goes in the service ..." "... even though they are mindless robots ..." " ... who aren't afraid to meet the threat on THEIR land instead of ours ..."

You got ANY idea how stupid you sound?

Do you got any idea how much I care what you think. you people are amazing. I respect every person that is in our country's military but if you come out spewing hate and saying they know it all because they were in the service, then your just another ass hole that was in the military at one time. You can always pick these clowns out in these forums , their name and the picture image they use with that name is always military oriented.
My complaint with these people that are in the military ,is using them for cannon fodder for the bottom line of some corporations. We have been in over 100 wars, only 4 of which we needed to be in and only 2 that attacked this country. The rest were straight out murder or sending our young as cannon fodder for some corporation or some macho idea about what this country is.

Just like you hate military veterans who spout what you called "hate", I don't like ignorant little piss ants who have no experience in the real world, who believe that the world ends at the tips of their fingers, that they know everything about everything, and don't need to learn anything, but feel somehow entitled to lecture people about things of which they are blissfully ignorant.

If you know any of those, please tell them I said that.

Now, as for your absolute stupidity claiming that the military is nothing but "cannon fodder" for corporations, I can think of nothing more naive, inane, and unrealistic. Your absolute ignorance of the threats in our world today make you a danger to yourself, to me, and to our country. You are the classical egotist, so comfortable in your myopic little view of the world, that you have no understanding of what the real world looks like. Further, to call veterans murderers on a blog, using a right protected by those "murderers", is the ultimate in hubris and childish inanity. Your ignorance IS the enemy of this country, and if left unchallenged, will be the cause of your death.

You need to get out of the basement - see what the real world is like and ............ grow the fuck up.

You people are so ignorant. we have been in over 100 wars, we have only been attacked twice wwII and the war of 1812.. WWII AND WWI, the war of 1812 and the civil war had to be fought. . Tell me how any of the other wars were necessary. WE are waiting hot dog.

Your insular lack of world knowledge ensures that anything I say won't mean anything to you. If I have to explain, it only means two things: 1) you are geopolitically and historically ignorant, and 2) you ain't worth fighting a war for.

Tell me something ---- WHY did we have to fight WWI. You admit that we HAD to fight that. Why? We weren't attacked. The Civil War? Why did we HAVE to fight that? Why didn't we just let the South secede? They were no threat to us.

See? You can justify some things - because it is politically expedient for you to do so. The same applies for the nonsense about wars we didn't HAVE to fight .... you claim that simply because it is politically expedient for you to do so. You conveniently want to confine the "reason" for war to a very myopic point of view - whether we are under direct attack or threat. You do not consider what would have been the impact if we had NOT fought those "wars" - you conveniently forget the impact on those we have promised to protect. You want us to use them - and then desert them when they need us in return. I can think of nothing more selfish. You care not that people die, and we have the ability to stop it. You just want to let them die - as long as your cowardly ass isn't involved, right?

100 wars? You don't even know what WAR is, much less how many there were. Mayhaps you can give us a list of those 96 "wars" we shouldn't have fought.

So, let's not fight terrorism - let if flourish. Let it sweep over Africa, Europe, and Asia. Let them get stronger - let them capture wealth, resources, and slaves. It's not our fight, right? Then, when they bring those resources to our shores - when an army backed by the might, economies, and resources of the rest of the world, we can watch them sweep thru our country, too. Then, will you be willing to take up arms, or will you just turn your daughters over to them, and stand meekly by?

Frankly, your ignorance and your lack of humanity is disgusting.

I asked this clown a simple question, I told him there has only been 4 wars in over 100 wars this country has been in, that were justifiable. So I asked him to justify the rest, backed this half thinker right into a corner so he comes out with this embarrassing none answer. He thinks some how spending more the the 600 billion we spend now is needed because of Terrorism and to top off the display said he is the all knowing on this subject.
Does anyone else think I can't supply the list of wars that we have been in, and will you admit your stupidity after I list them for you.

You talk such childish bullshit.

You claim only 4 wars were "necessary" - and now you can't defend your position. List the other 96 and tell us why they weren't necessary ---- I'll debate that with you. Hell, you can't even defend the 4 you CLAIM were necessary - and you know I'll agree with you about those

As for the rest of your childish little attack, I don't claim to be all knowing [sic] on the subject, but I can damn well guarantee that I know more than you. Twenty years military, 4 years in the Pentagon Planning Office, and 3 years in WHCA (White House Communications Agency) guarantees that I have a stronger foundation, and a more profound understanding, than you. Why don't you tell us all about YOUR experience?

You ask about $600 billion, but do not have a single clue what that money is spent for. Well, I'll give you targets to shoot at -----

Components Funding Change, 2012 to 2013
Operations and maintenance $258.277 billion -9.9%
Military Personnel $153.531 billion -3.0%
Procurement $97.757 billion -17.4%
Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation $63.347 billion -12.1%
Military Construction $8.069 billion -29.0%
Family Housing $1.483 billion -12.2%
Other Miscellaneous Costs $2.775 billion -59.5%
Atomic energy defense activities $17.424 billion -4.8%
Defense-related activities $7.433 billion -3.8%
Total Spending $610.096 billion -10.5%

Which ones of those do you suggest we get rid of? If you like, I'll be happy to explain each of those line items you object to. You've whined, you've spouted, and you've attacked ---- now, it's time to put up or shut up.

So, we wait for:

1) Your list of 96 "unnecessary wars" with an explanation about why they are unnecessary
2) Your recommendations on what line items we should cut, with an explanation of why, and what we will do to backfill the resultant gap.

I suspect we are going to be waiting a long, long time.

 

[rightwinger]

Do you got any idea how much I care what you think. you people are amazing. I respect every person that is in our country's military but if you come out spewing hate and saying they know it all because they were in the service, then your just another ass hole that was in the military at one time. You can always pick these clowns out in these forums , their name and the picture image they use with that name is always military oriented.
My complaint with these people that are in the military ,is using them for cannon fodder for the bottom line of some corporations. We have been in over 100 wars, only 4 of which we needed to be in and only 2 that attacked this country. The rest were straight out murder or sending our young as cannon fodder for some corporation or some macho idea about what this country is.

Just like you hate military veterans who spout what you called "hate", I don't like ignorant little piss ants who have no experience in the real world, who believe that the world ends at the tips of their fingers, that they know everything about everything, and don't need to learn anything, but feel somehow entitled to lecture people about things of which they are blissfully ignorant.

If you know any of those, please tell them I said that.

Now, as for your absolute stupidity claiming that the military is nothing but "cannon fodder" for corporations, I can think of nothing more naive, inane, and unrealistic. Your absolute ignorance of the threats in our world today make you a danger to yourself, to me, and to our country. You are the classical egotist, so comfortable in your myopic little view of the world, that you have no understanding of what the real world looks like. Further, to call veterans murderers on a blog, using a right protected by those "murderers", is the ultimate in hubris and childish inanity. Your ignorance IS the enemy of this country, and if left unchallenged, will be the cause of your death.

You need to get out of the basement - see what the real world is like and ............ grow the fuck up.

You people are so ignorant. we have been in over 100 wars, we have only been attacked twice wwII and the war of 1812.. WWII AND WWI, the war of 1812 and the civil war had to be fought. . Tell me how any of the other wars were necessary. WE are waiting hot dog.

Your insular lack of world knowledge ensures that anything I say won't mean anything to you. If I have to explain, it only means two things: 1) you are geopolitically and historically ignorant, and 2) you ain't worth fighting a war for.

Tell me something ---- WHY did we have to fight WWI. You admit that we HAD to fight that. Why? We weren't attacked. The Civil War? Why did we HAVE to fight that? Why didn't we just let the South secede? They were no threat to us.

See? You can justify some things - because it is politically expedient for you to do so. The same applies for the nonsense about wars we didn't HAVE to fight .... you claim that simply because it is politically expedient for you to do so. You conveniently want to confine the "reason" for war to a very myopic point of view - whether we are under direct attack or threat. You do not consider what would have been the impact if we had NOT fought those "wars" - you conveniently forget the impact on those we have promised to protect. You want us to use them - and then desert them when they need us in return. I can think of nothing more selfish. You care not that people die, and we have the ability to stop it. You just want to let them die - as long as your cowardly ass isn't involved, right?

100 wars? You don't even know what WAR is, much less how many there were. Mayhaps you can give us a list of those 96 "wars" we shouldn't have fought.

So, let's not fight terrorism - let if flourish. Let it sweep over Africa, Europe, and Asia. Let them get stronger - let them capture wealth, resources, and slaves. It's not our fight, right? Then, when they bring those resources to our shores - when an army backed by the might, economies, and resources of the rest of the world, we can watch them sweep thru our country, too. Then, will you be willing to take up arms, or will you just turn your daughters over to them, and stand meekly by?

Frankly, your ignorance and your lack of humanity is disgusting.

I asked this clown a simple question, I told him there has only been 4 wars in over 100 wars this country has been in, that were justifiable. So I asked him to justify the rest, backed this half thinker right into a corner so he comes out with this embarrassing none answer. He thinks some how spending more the the 600 billion we spend now is needed because of Terrorism and to top off the display said he is the all knowing on this subject.
Does anyone else think I can't supply the list of wars that we have been in, and will you admit your stupidity after I list them for you.

You talk such childish bullshit.

You claim only 4 wars were "necessary" - and now you can't defend your position. List the other 96 and tell us why they weren't necessary ---- I'll debate that with you. Hell, you can't even defend the 4 you CLAIM were necessary - and you know I'll agree with you about those

As for the rest of your childish little attack, I don't claim to be all knowing [sic] on the subject, but I can damn well guarantee that I know more than you. Twenty years military, 4 years in the Pentagon Planning Office, and 3 years in WHCA (White House Communications Agency) guarantees that I have a stronger foundation, and a more profound understanding, than you. Why don't you tell us all about YOUR experience?

You ask about $600 billion, but do not have a single clue what that money is spent for. Well, I'll give you targets to shoot at -----

Components Funding Change, 2012 to 2013
Operations and maintenance $258.277 billion -9.9%
Military Personnel $153.531 billion -3.0%
Procurement $97.757 billion -17.4%
Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation $63.347 billion -12.1%
Military Construction $8.069 billion -29.0%
Family Housing $1.483 billion -12.2%
Other Miscellaneous Costs $2.775 billion -59.5%
Atomic energy defense activities $17.424 billion -4.8%
Defense-related activities $7.433 billion -3.8%
Total Spending $610.096 billion -10.5%

Which ones of those do you suggest we get rid of? If you like, I'll be happy to explain each of those line items you object to. You've whined, you've spouted, and you've attacked ---- now, it's time to put up or shut up.

So, we wait for:

1) Your list of 96 "unnecessary wars" with an explanation about why they are unnecessary
2) Your recommendations on what line items we should cut, with an explanation of why, and what we will do to backfill the resultant gap.

I suspect we are going to be waiting a long, long time.

It is not a question of "getting rid of" but giving a new look at the mission of our services

Do we need ten active Army Divisions deployed around the world?
Do we need our current troop strength?
Can we redefine our Navy's mission to cut down on the number of active ships?
Do we need 11 supercarrier task forces when no other nation has more than one?
Do we need 3000 functioning nuclear warheads?
Do we need the hundreds of bases around the world?

Other nations get by without spending $600 billion on Defense
What makes us special?

 

[jbander]

Do you got any idea how much I care what you think. you people are amazing. I respect every person that is in our country's military but if you come out spewing hate and saying they know it all because they were in the service, then your just another ass hole that was in the military at one time. You can always pick these clowns out in these forums , their name and the picture image they use with that name is always military oriented.
My complaint with these people that are in the military ,is using them for cannon fodder for the bottom line of some corporations. We have been in over 100 wars, only 4 of which we needed to be in and only 2 that attacked this country. The rest were straight out murder or sending our young as cannon fodder for some corporation or some macho idea about what this country is.

Just like you hate military veterans who spout what you called "hate", I don't like ignorant little piss ants who have no experience in the real world, who believe that the world ends at the tips of their fingers, that they know everything about everything, and don't need to learn anything, but feel somehow entitled to lecture people about things of which they are blissfully ignorant.

If you know any of those, please tell them I said that.

Now, as for your absolute stupidity claiming that the military is nothing but "cannon fodder" for corporations, I can think of nothing more naive, inane, and unrealistic. Your absolute ignorance of the threats in our world today make you a danger to yourself, to me, and to our country. You are the classical egotist, so comfortable in your myopic little view of the world, that you have no understanding of what the real world looks like. Further, to call veterans murderers on a blog, using a right protected by those "murderers", is the ultimate in hubris and childish inanity. Your ignorance IS the enemy of this country, and if left unchallenged, will be the cause of your death.

You need to get out of the basement - see what the real world is like and ............ grow the fuck up.

You people are so ignorant. we have been in over 100 wars, we have only been attacked twice wwII and the war of 1812.. WWII AND WWI, the war of 1812 and the civil war had to be fought. . Tell me how any of the other wars were necessary. WE are waiting hot dog.

Your insular lack of world knowledge ensures that anything I say won't mean anything to you. If I have to explain, it only means two things: 1) you are geopolitically and historically ignorant, and 2) you ain't worth fighting a war for.

Tell me something ---- WHY did we have to fight WWI. You admit that we HAD to fight that. Why? We weren't attacked. The Civil War? Why did we HAVE to fight that? Why didn't we just let the South secede? They were no threat to us.

See? You can justify some things - because it is politically expedient for you to do so. The same applies for the nonsense about wars we didn't HAVE to fight .... you claim that simply because it is politically expedient for you to do so. You conveniently want to confine the "reason" for war to a very myopic point of view - whether we are under direct attack or threat. You do not consider what would have been the impact if we had NOT fought those "wars" - you conveniently forget the impact on those we have promised to protect. You want us to use them - and then desert them when they need us in return. I can think of nothing more selfish. You care not that people die, and we have the ability to stop it. You just want to let them die - as long as your cowardly ass isn't involved, right?

100 wars? You don't even know what WAR is, much less how many there were. Mayhaps you can give us a list of those 96 "wars" we shouldn't have fought.

So, let's not fight terrorism - let if flourish. Let it sweep over Africa, Europe, and Asia. Let them get stronger - let them capture wealth, resources, and slaves. It's not our fight, right? Then, when they bring those resources to our shores - when an army backed by the might, economies, and resources of the rest of the world, we can watch them sweep thru our country, too. Then, will you be willing to take up arms, or will you just turn your daughters over to them, and stand meekly by?

Frankly, your ignorance and your lack of humanity is disgusting.

I asked this clown a simple question, I told him there has only been 4 wars in over 100 wars this country has been in, that were justifiable. So I asked him to justify the rest, backed this half thinker right into a corner so he comes out with this embarrassing none answer. He thinks some how spending more the the 600 billion we spend now is needed because of Terrorism and to top off the display said he is the all knowing on this subject.
Does anyone else think I can't supply the list of wars that we have been in, and will you admit your stupidity after I list them for you.

You talk such childish bullshit.

You claim only 4 wars were "necessary" - and now you can't defend your position. List the other 96 and tell us why they weren't necessary ---- I'll debate that with you. Hell, you can't even defend the 4 you CLAIM were necessary - and you know I'll agree with you about those

As for the rest of your childish little attack, I don't claim to be all knowing [sic] on the subject, but I can damn well guarantee that I know more than you. Twenty years military, 4 years in the Pentagon Planning Office, and 3 years in WHCA (White House Communications Agency) guarantees that I have a stronger foundation, and a more profound understanding, than you. Why don't you tell us all about YOUR experience?

You ask about $600 billion, but do not have a single clue what that money is spent for. Well, I'll give you targets to shoot at -----

Components Funding Change, 2012 to 2013
Operations and maintenance $258.277 billion -9.9%
Military Personnel $153.531 billion -3.0%
Procurement $97.757 billion -17.4%
Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation $63.347 billion -12.1%
Military Construction $8.069 billion -29.0%
Family Housing $1.483 billion -12.2%
Other Miscellaneous Costs $2.775 billion -59.5%
Atomic energy defense activities $17.424 billion -4.8%
Defense-related activities $7.433 billion -3.8%
Total Spending $610.096 billion -10.5%

Which ones of those do you suggest we get rid of? If you like, I'll be happy to explain each of those line items you object to. You've whined, you've spouted, and you've attacked ---- now, it's time to put up or shut up.

So, we wait for:

1) Your list of 96 "unnecessary wars" with an explanation about why they are unnecessary
2) Your recommendations on what line items we should cut, with an explanation of why, and what we will do to backfill the resultant gap.

I suspect we are going to be waiting a long, long time.

Do you got any idea how much I care what you think. you people are amazing. I respect every person that is in our country's military but if you come out spewing hate and saying they know it all because they were in the service, then your just another ass hole that was in the military at one time. You can always pick these clowns out in these forums , their name and the picture image they use with that name is always military oriented.
My complaint with these people that are in the military ,is using them for cannon fodder for the bottom line of some corporations. We have been in over 100 wars, only 4 of which we needed to be in and only 2 that attacked this country. The rest were straight out murder or sending our young as cannon fodder for some corporation or some macho idea about what this country is.

Just like you hate military veterans who spout what you called "hate", I don't like ignorant little piss ants who have no experience in the real world, who believe that the world ends at the tips of their fingers, that they know everything about everything, and don't need to learn anything, but feel somehow entitled to lecture people about things of which they are blissfully ignorant.

If you know any of those, please tell them I said that.

Now, as for your absolute stupidity claiming that the military is nothing but "cannon fodder" for corporations, I can think of nothing more naive, inane, and unrealistic. Your absolute ignorance of the threats in our world today make you a danger to yourself, to me, and to our country. You are the classical egotist, so comfortable in your myopic little view of the world, that you have no understanding of what the real world looks like. Further, to call veterans murderers on a blog, using a right protected by those "murderers", is the ultimate in hubris and childish inanity. Your ignorance IS the enemy of this country, and if left unchallenged, will be the cause of your death.

You need to get out of the basement - see what the real world is like and ............ grow the fuck up.

You people are so ignorant. we have been in over 100 wars, we have only been attacked twice wwII and the war of 1812.. WWII AND WWI, the war of 1812 and the civil war had to be fought. . Tell me how any of the other wars were necessary. WE are waiting hot dog.

Your insular lack of world knowledge ensures that anything I say won't mean anything to you. If I have to explain, it only means two things: 1) you are geopolitically and historically ignorant, and 2) you ain't worth fighting a war for.

Tell me something ---- WHY did we have to fight WWI. You admit that we HAD to fight that. Why? We weren't attacked. The Civil War? Why did we HAVE to fight that? Why didn't we just let the South secede? They were no threat to us.

See? You can justify some things - because it is politically expedient for you to do so. The same applies for the nonsense about wars we didn't HAVE to fight .... you claim that simply because it is politically expedient for you to do so. You conveniently want to confine the "reason" for war to a very myopic point of view - whether we are under direct attack or threat. You do not consider what would have been the impact if we had NOT fought those "wars" - you conveniently forget the impact on those we have promised to protect. You want us to use them - and then desert them when they need us in return. I can think of nothing more selfish. You care not that people die, and we have the ability to stop it. You just want to let them die - as long as your cowardly ass isn't involved, right?

100 wars? You don't even know what WAR is, much less how many there were. Mayhaps you can give us a list of those 96 "wars" we shouldn't have fought.

So, let's not fight terrorism - let if flourish. Let it sweep over Africa, Europe, and Asia. Let them get stronger - let them capture wealth, resources, and slaves. It's not our fight, right? Then, when they bring those resources to our shores - when an army backed by the might, economies, and resources of the rest of the world, we can watch them sweep thru our country, too. Then, will you be willing to take up arms, or will you just turn your daughters over to them, and stand meekly by?

Frankly, your ignorance and your lack of humanity is disgusting.

I asked this clown a simple question, I told him there has only been 4 wars in over 100 wars this country has been in, that were justifiable. So I asked him to justify the rest, backed this half thinker right into a corner so he comes out with this embarrassing none answer. He thinks some how spending more the the 600 billion we spend now is needed because of Terrorism and to top off the display said he is the all knowing on this subject.
Does anyone else think I can't supply the list of wars that we have been in, and will you admit your stupidity after I list them for you.

You talk such childish bullshit.

You claim only 4 wars were "necessary" - and now you can't defend your position. List the other 96 and tell us why they weren't necessary ---- I'll debate that with you. Hell, you can't even defend the 4 you CLAIM were necessary - and you know I'll agree with you about those

As for the rest of your childish little attack, I don't claim to be all knowing [sic] on the subject, but I can damn well guarantee that I know more than you. Twenty years military, 4 years in the Pentagon Planning Office, and 3 years in WHCA (White House Communications Agency) guarantees that I have a stronger foundation, and a more profound understanding, than you. Why don't you tell us all about YOUR experience?

You ask about $600 billion, but do not have a single clue what that money is spent for. Well, I'll give you targets to shoot at -----

Components Funding Change, 2012 to 2013
Operations and maintenance $258.277 billion -9.9%
Military Personnel $153.531 billion -3.0%
Procurement $97.757 billion -17.4%
Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation $63.347 billion -12.1%
Military Construction $8.069 billion -29.0%
Family Housing $1.483 billion -12.2%
Other Miscellaneous Costs $2.775 billion -59.5%
Atomic energy defense activities $17.424 billion -4.8%
Defense-related activities $7.433 billion -3.8%
Total Spending $610.096 billion -10.5%

Which ones of those do you suggest we get rid of? If you like, I'll be happy to explain each of those line items you object to. You've whined, you've spouted, and you've attacked ---- now, it's time to put up or shut up.

So, we wait for:

1) Your list of 96 "unnecessary wars" with an explanation about why they are unnecessary
2) Your recommendations on what line items we should cut, with an explanation of why, and what we will do to backfill the resultant gap.

I suspect we are going to be waiting a long, long time.

TI simply asked him a question, and backed this bullshitter right back into a corner, this is a very reasonable question considering the bullshit he's trying to sell here MY COMMENT "You people are so ignorant. we have been in over 100 wars, we have only been attacked twice wwII and the war of 1812.. WWII AND WWI, the war of 1812 and the civil war had to be fought. . Tell me how any of the other wars were necessary. WE are waiting hot dog." He is totally unable to do this so he is trying to sell his bullshit that the reason he can't answer is because of me, Two stupid long drawn out reply's and nothing but bullshit. This guy has no clue.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Just like you hate military veterans who spout what you called "hate", I don't like ignorant little piss ants who have no experience in the real world, who believe that the world ends at the tips of their fingers, that they know everything about everything, and don't need to learn anything, but feel somehow entitled to lecture people about things of which they are blissfully ignorant.

If you know any of those, please tell them I said that.

Now, as for your absolute stupidity claiming that the military is nothing but "cannon fodder" for corporations, I can think of nothing more naive, inane, and unrealistic. Your absolute ignorance of the threats in our world today make you a danger to yourself, to me, and to our country. You are the classical egotist, so comfortable in your myopic little view of the world, that you have no understanding of what the real world looks like. Further, to call veterans murderers on a blog, using a right protected by those "murderers", is the ultimate in hubris and childish inanity. Your ignorance IS the enemy of this country, and if left unchallenged, will be the cause of your death.

You need to get out of the basement - see what the real world is like and ............ grow the fuck up.

You people are so ignorant. we have been in over 100 wars, we have only been attacked twice wwII and the war of 1812.. WWII AND WWI, the war of 1812 and the civil war had to be fought. . Tell me how any of the other wars were necessary. WE are waiting hot dog.

Your insular lack of world knowledge ensures that anything I say won't mean anything to you. If I have to explain, it only means two things: 1) you are geopolitically and historically ignorant, and 2) you ain't worth fighting a war for.

Tell me something ---- WHY did we have to fight WWI. You admit that we HAD to fight that. Why? We weren't attacked. The Civil War? Why did we HAVE to fight that? Why didn't we just let the South secede? They were no threat to us.

See? You can justify some things - because it is politically expedient for you to do so. The same applies for the nonsense about wars we didn't HAVE to fight .... you claim that simply because it is politically expedient for you to do so. You conveniently want to confine the "reason" for war to a very myopic point of view - whether we are under direct attack or threat. You do not consider what would have been the impact if we had NOT fought those "wars" - you conveniently forget the impact on those we have promised to protect. You want us to use them - and then desert them when they need us in return. I can think of nothing more selfish. You care not that people die, and we have the ability to stop it. You just want to let them die - as long as your cowardly ass isn't involved, right?

100 wars? You don't even know what WAR is, much less how many there were. Mayhaps you can give us a list of those 96 "wars" we shouldn't have fought.

So, let's not fight terrorism - let if flourish. Let it sweep over Africa, Europe, and Asia. Let them get stronger - let them capture wealth, resources, and slaves. It's not our fight, right? Then, when they bring those resources to our shores - when an army backed by the might, economies, and resources of the rest of the world, we can watch them sweep thru our country, too. Then, will you be willing to take up arms, or will you just turn your daughters over to them, and stand meekly by?

Frankly, your ignorance and your lack of humanity is disgusting.

I asked this clown a simple question, I told him there has only been 4 wars in over 100 wars this country has been in, that were justifiable. So I asked him to justify the rest, backed this half thinker right into a corner so he comes out with this embarrassing none answer. He thinks some how spending more the the 600 billion we spend now is needed because of Terrorism and to top off the display said he is the all knowing on this subject.
Does anyone else think I can't supply the list of wars that we have been in, and will you admit your stupidity after I list them for you.

You talk such childish bullshit.

You claim only 4 wars were "necessary" - and now you can't defend your position. List the other 96 and tell us why they weren't necessary ---- I'll debate that with you. Hell, you can't even defend the 4 you CLAIM were necessary - and you know I'll agree with you about those

As for the rest of your childish little attack, I don't claim to be all knowing [sic] on the subject, but I can damn well guarantee that I know more than you. Twenty years military, 4 years in the Pentagon Planning Office, and 3 years in WHCA (White House Communications Agency) guarantees that I have a stronger foundation, and a more profound understanding, than you. Why don't you tell us all about YOUR experience?

You ask about $600 billion, but do not have a single clue what that money is spent for. Well, I'll give you targets to shoot at -----

Components Funding Change, 2012 to 2013
Operations and maintenance $258.277 billion -9.9%
Military Personnel $153.531 billion -3.0%
Procurement $97.757 billion -17.4%
Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation $63.347 billion -12.1%
Military Construction $8.069 billion -29.0%
Family Housing $1.483 billion -12.2%
Other Miscellaneous Costs $2.775 billion -59.5%
Atomic energy defense activities $17.424 billion -4.8%
Defense-related activities $7.433 billion -3.8%
Total Spending $610.096 billion -10.5%

Which ones of those do you suggest we get rid of? If you like, I'll be happy to explain each of those line items you object to. You've whined, you've spouted, and you've attacked ---- now, it's time to put up or shut up.

So, we wait for:

1) Your list of 96 "unnecessary wars" with an explanation about why they are unnecessary
2) Your recommendations on what line items we should cut, with an explanation of why, and what we will do to backfill the resultant gap.

I suspect we are going to be waiting a long, long time.

It is not a question of "getting rid of" but giving a new look at the mission of our services

Do we need ten active Army Divisions deployed around the world?
Do we need our current troop strength?
Can we redefine our Navy's mission to cut down on the number of active ships?
Do we need 11 supercarrier task forces when no other nation has more than one?
Do we need 3000 functioning nuclear warheads?
Do we need the hundreds of bases around the world?

Other nations get by without spending $600 billion on Defense
What makes us special?

A better question is what makes you think you can better determine the needs of our military than those trained and paid to do that very job?

 

[9thIDdoc]

Just like you hate military veterans who spout what you called "hate", I don't like ignorant little piss ants who have no experience in the real world, who believe that the world ends at the tips of their fingers, that they know everything about everything, and don't need to learn anything, but feel somehow entitled to lecture people about things of which they are blissfully ignorant.

If you know any of those, please tell them I said that.

Now, as for your absolute stupidity claiming that the military is nothing but "cannon fodder" for corporations, I can think of nothing more naive, inane, and unrealistic. Your absolute ignorance of the threats in our world today make you a danger to yourself, to me, and to our country. You are the classical egotist, so comfortable in your myopic little view of the world, that you have no understanding of what the real world looks like. Further, to call veterans murderers on a blog, using a right protected by those "murderers", is the ultimate in hubris and childish inanity. Your ignorance IS the enemy of this country, and if left unchallenged, will be the cause of your death.

You need to get out of the basement - see what the real world is like and ............ grow the fuck up.

You people are so ignorant. we have been in over 100 wars, we have only been attacked twice wwII and the war of 1812.. WWII AND WWI, the war of 1812 and the civil war had to be fought. . Tell me how any of the other wars were necessary. WE are waiting hot dog.

Your insular lack of world knowledge ensures that anything I say won't mean anything to you. If I have to explain, it only means two things: 1) you are geopolitically and historically ignorant, and 2) you ain't worth fighting a war for.

Tell me something ---- WHY did we have to fight WWI. You admit that we HAD to fight that. Why? We weren't attacked. The Civil War? Why did we HAVE to fight that? Why didn't we just let the South secede? They were no threat to us.

See? You can justify some things - because it is politically expedient for you to do so. The same applies for the nonsense about wars we didn't HAVE to fight .... you claim that simply because it is politically expedient for you to do so. You conveniently want to confine the "reason" for war to a very myopic point of view - whether we are under direct attack or threat. You do not consider what would have been the impact if we had NOT fought those "wars" - you conveniently forget the impact on those we have promised to protect. You want us to use them - and then desert them when they need us in return. I can think of nothing more selfish. You care not that people die, and we have the ability to stop it. You just want to let them die - as long as your cowardly ass isn't involved, right?

100 wars? You don't even know what WAR is, much less how many there were. Mayhaps you can give us a list of those 96 "wars" we shouldn't have fought.

So, let's not fight terrorism - let if flourish. Let it sweep over Africa, Europe, and Asia. Let them get stronger - let them capture wealth, resources, and slaves. It's not our fight, right? Then, when they bring those resources to our shores - when an army backed by the might, economies, and resources of the rest of the world, we can watch them sweep thru our country, too. Then, will you be willing to take up arms, or will you just turn your daughters over to them, and stand meekly by?

Frankly, your ignorance and your lack of humanity is disgusting.

I asked this clown a simple question, I told him there has only been 4 wars in over 100 wars this country has been in, that were justifiable. So I asked him to justify the rest, backed this half thinker right into a corner so he comes out with this embarrassing none answer. He thinks some how spending more the the 600 billion we spend now is needed because of Terrorism and to top off the display said he is the all knowing on this subject.
Does anyone else think I can't supply the list of wars that we have been in, and will you admit your stupidity after I list them for you.

You talk such childish bullshit.

You claim only 4 wars were "necessary" - and now you can't defend your position. List the other 96 and tell us why they weren't necessary ---- I'll debate that with you. Hell, you can't even defend the 4 you CLAIM were necessary - and you know I'll agree with you about those

As for the rest of your childish little attack, I don't claim to be all knowing [sic] on the subject, but I can damn well guarantee that I know more than you. Twenty years military, 4 years in the Pentagon Planning Office, and 3 years in WHCA (White House Communications Agency) guarantees that I have a stronger foundation, and a more profound understanding, than you. Why don't you tell us all about YOUR experience?

You ask about $600 billion, but do not have a single clue what that money is spent for. Well, I'll give you targets to shoot at -----

Components Funding Change, 2012 to 2013
Operations and maintenance $258.277 billion -9.9%
Military Personnel $153.531 billion -3.0%
Procurement $97.757 billion -17.4%
Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation $63.347 billion -12.1%
Military Construction $8.069 billion -29.0%
Family Housing $1.483 billion -12.2%
Other Miscellaneous Costs $2.775 billion -59.5%
Atomic energy defense activities $17.424 billion -4.8%
Defense-related activities $7.433 billion -3.8%
Total Spending $610.096 billion -10.5%

Which ones of those do you suggest we get rid of? If you like, I'll be happy to explain each of those line items you object to. You've whined, you've spouted, and you've attacked ---- now, it's time to put up or shut up.

So, we wait for:

1) Your list of 96 "unnecessary wars" with an explanation about why they are unnecessary
2) Your recommendations on what line items we should cut, with an explanation of why, and what we will do to backfill the resultant gap.

I suspect we are going to be waiting a long, long time.

Just like you hate military veterans who spout what you called "hate", I don't like ignorant little piss ants who have no experience in the real world, who believe that the world ends at the tips of their fingers, that they know everything about everything, and don't need to learn anything, but feel somehow entitled to lecture people about things of which they are blissfully ignorant.

If you know any of those, please tell them I said that.

Now, as for your absolute stupidity claiming that the military is nothing but "cannon fodder" for corporations, I can think of nothing more naive, inane, and unrealistic. Your absolute ignorance of the threats in our world today make you a danger to yourself, to me, and to our country. You are the classical egotist, so comfortable in your myopic little view of the world, that you have no understanding of what the real world looks like. Further, to call veterans murderers on a blog, using a right protected by those "murderers", is the ultimate in hubris and childish inanity. Your ignorance IS the enemy of this country, and if left unchallenged, will be the cause of your death.

You need to get out of the basement - see what the real world is like and ............ grow the fuck up.

You people are so ignorant. we have been in over 100 wars, we have only been attacked twice wwII and the war of 1812.. WWII AND WWI, the war of 1812 and the civil war had to be fought. . Tell me how any of the other wars were necessary. WE are waiting hot dog.

Your insular lack of world knowledge ensures that anything I say won't mean anything to you. If I have to explain, it only means two things: 1) you are geopolitically and historically ignorant, and 2) you ain't worth fighting a war for.

Tell me something ---- WHY did we have to fight WWI. You admit that we HAD to fight that. Why? We weren't attacked. The Civil War? Why did we HAVE to fight that? Why didn't we just let the South secede? They were no threat to us.

See? You can justify some things - because it is politically expedient for you to do so. The same applies for the nonsense about wars we didn't HAVE to fight .... you claim that simply because it is politically expedient for you to do so. You conveniently want to confine the "reason" for war to a very myopic point of view - whether we are under direct attack or threat. You do not consider what would have been the impact if we had NOT fought those "wars" - you conveniently forget the impact on those we have promised to protect. You want us to use them - and then desert them when they need us in return. I can think of nothing more selfish. You care not that people die, and we have the ability to stop it. You just want to let them die - as long as your cowardly ass isn't involved, right?

100 wars? You don't even know what WAR is, much less how many there were. Mayhaps you can give us a list of those 96 "wars" we shouldn't have fought.

So, let's not fight terrorism - let if flourish. Let it sweep over Africa, Europe, and Asia. Let them get stronger - let them capture wealth, resources, and slaves. It's not our fight, right? Then, when they bring those resources to our shores - when an army backed by the might, economies, and resources of the rest of the world, we can watch them sweep thru our country, too. Then, will you be willing to take up arms, or will you just turn your daughters over to them, and stand meekly by?

Frankly, your ignorance and your lack of humanity is disgusting.

I asked this clown a simple question, I told him there has only been 4 wars in over 100 wars this country has been in, that were justifiable. So I asked him to justify the rest, backed this half thinker right into a corner so he comes out with this embarrassing none answer. He thinks some how spending more the the 600 billion we spend now is needed because of Terrorism and to top off the display said he is the all knowing on this subject.
Does anyone else think I can't supply the list of wars that we have been in, and will you admit your stupidity after I list them for you.

You talk such childish bullshit.

You claim only 4 wars were "necessary" - and now you can't defend your position. List the other 96 and tell us why they weren't necessary ---- I'll debate that with you. Hell, you can't even defend the 4 you CLAIM were necessary - and you know I'll agree with you about those

As for the rest of your childish little attack, I don't claim to be all knowing [sic] on the subject, but I can damn well guarantee that I know more than you. Twenty years military, 4 years in the Pentagon Planning Office, and 3 years in WHCA (White House Communications Agency) guarantees that I have a stronger foundation, and a more profound understanding, than you. Why don't you tell us all about YOUR experience?

You ask about $600 billion, but do not have a single clue what that money is spent for. Well, I'll give you targets to shoot at -----

Components Funding Change, 2012 to 2013
Operations and maintenance $258.277 billion -9.9%
Military Personnel $153.531 billion -3.0%
Procurement $97.757 billion -17.4%
Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation $63.347 billion -12.1%
Military Construction $8.069 billion -29.0%
Family Housing $1.483 billion -12.2%
Other Miscellaneous Costs $2.775 billion -59.5%
Atomic energy defense activities $17.424 billion -4.8%
Defense-related activities $7.433 billion -3.8%
Total Spending $610.096 billion -10.5%

Which ones of those do you suggest we get rid of? If you like, I'll be happy to explain each of those line items you object to. You've whined, you've spouted, and you've attacked ---- now, it's time to put up or shut up.

So, we wait for:

1) Your list of 96 "unnecessary wars" with an explanation about why they are unnecessary
2) Your recommendations on what line items we should cut, with an explanation of why, and what we will do to backfill the resultant gap.

I suspect we are going to be waiting a long, long time.

TI simply asked him a question, and backed this bullshitter right back into a corner, this is a very reasonable question considering the bullshit he's trying to sell here MY COMMENT "You people are so ignorant. we have been in over 100 wars, we have only been attacked twice wwII and the war of 1812.. WWII AND WWI, the war of 1812 and the civil war had to be fought. . Tell me how any of the other wars were necessary. WE are waiting hot dog." He is totally unable to do this so he is trying to sell his bullshit that the reason he can't answer is because of me, Two stupid long drawn out reply's and nothing but bullshit. This guy has no clue.

You don't answer reasonable questions; so why would anyone answer yours (even if you knew any).
And when someone does do you the courtesy of answering your idiotic questions you invariably simply discount the explanation as "bullshit" without the first clue as to the warped thinking (if any) on the matter. In short you argue like a retarded 2nd grader.

 

[rightwinger]

You people are so ignorant. we have been in over 100 wars, we have only been attacked twice wwII and the war of 1812.. WWII AND WWI, the war of 1812 and the civil war had to be fought. . Tell me how any of the other wars were necessary. WE are waiting hot dog.

Your insular lack of world knowledge ensures that anything I say won't mean anything to you. If I have to explain, it only means two things: 1) you are geopolitically and historically ignorant, and 2) you ain't worth fighting a war for.

Tell me something ---- WHY did we have to fight WWI. You admit that we HAD to fight that. Why? We weren't attacked. The Civil War? Why did we HAVE to fight that? Why didn't we just let the South secede? They were no threat to us.

See? You can justify some things - because it is politically expedient for you to do so. The same applies for the nonsense about wars we didn't HAVE to fight .... you claim that simply because it is politically expedient for you to do so. You conveniently want to confine the "reason" for war to a very myopic point of view - whether we are under direct attack or threat. You do not consider what would have been the impact if we had NOT fought those "wars" - you conveniently forget the impact on those we have promised to protect. You want us to use them - and then desert them when they need us in return. I can think of nothing more selfish. You care not that people die, and we have the ability to stop it. You just want to let them die - as long as your cowardly ass isn't involved, right?

100 wars? You don't even know what WAR is, much less how many there were. Mayhaps you can give us a list of those 96 "wars" we shouldn't have fought.

So, let's not fight terrorism - let if flourish. Let it sweep over Africa, Europe, and Asia. Let them get stronger - let them capture wealth, resources, and slaves. It's not our fight, right? Then, when they bring those resources to our shores - when an army backed by the might, economies, and resources of the rest of the world, we can watch them sweep thru our country, too. Then, will you be willing to take up arms, or will you just turn your daughters over to them, and stand meekly by?

Frankly, your ignorance and your lack of humanity is disgusting.

I asked this clown a simple question, I told him there has only been 4 wars in over 100 wars this country has been in, that were justifiable. So I asked him to justify the rest, backed this half thinker right into a corner so he comes out with this embarrassing none answer. He thinks some how spending more the the 600 billion we spend now is needed because of Terrorism and to top off the display said he is the all knowing on this subject.
Does anyone else think I can't supply the list of wars that we have been in, and will you admit your stupidity after I list them for you.

You talk such childish bullshit.

You claim only 4 wars were "necessary" - and now you can't defend your position. List the other 96 and tell us why they weren't necessary ---- I'll debate that with you. Hell, you can't even defend the 4 you CLAIM were necessary - and you know I'll agree with you about those

As for the rest of your childish little attack, I don't claim to be all knowing [sic] on the subject, but I can damn well guarantee that I know more than you. Twenty years military, 4 years in the Pentagon Planning Office, and 3 years in WHCA (White House Communications Agency) guarantees that I have a stronger foundation, and a more profound understanding, than you. Why don't you tell us all about YOUR experience?

You ask about $600 billion, but do not have a single clue what that money is spent for. Well, I'll give you targets to shoot at -----

Components Funding Change, 2012 to 2013
Operations and maintenance $258.277 billion -9.9%
Military Personnel $153.531 billion -3.0%
Procurement $97.757 billion -17.4%
Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation $63.347 billion -12.1%
Military Construction $8.069 billion -29.0%
Family Housing $1.483 billion -12.2%
Other Miscellaneous Costs $2.775 billion -59.5%
Atomic energy defense activities $17.424 billion -4.8%
Defense-related activities $7.433 billion -3.8%
Total Spending $610.096 billion -10.5%

Which ones of those do you suggest we get rid of? If you like, I'll be happy to explain each of those line items you object to. You've whined, you've spouted, and you've attacked ---- now, it's time to put up or shut up.

So, we wait for:

1) Your list of 96 "unnecessary wars" with an explanation about why they are unnecessary
2) Your recommendations on what line items we should cut, with an explanation of why, and what we will do to backfill the resultant gap.

I suspect we are going to be waiting a long, long time.

It is not a question of "getting rid of" but giving a new look at the mission of our services

Do we need ten active Army Divisions deployed around the world?
Do we need our current troop strength?
Can we redefine our Navy's mission to cut down on the number of active ships?
Do we need 11 supercarrier task forces when no other nation has more than one?
Do we need 3000 functioning nuclear warheads?
Do we need the hundreds of bases around the world?

Other nations get by without spending $600 billion on Defense
What makes us special?

A better question is what makes you think you can better determine the needs of our military than those trained and paid to do that very job?

Because I am a world renowned message board poster

That gives me the right to question what I don't agree with

Right now, I don't agree with paying for the U.S. to be the worlds policeman

 

[jbander]

You people are so ignorant. we have been in over 100 wars, we have only been attacked twice wwII and the war of 1812.. WWII AND WWI, the war of 1812 and the civil war had to be fought. . Tell me how any of the other wars were necessary. WE are waiting hot dog.

Your insular lack of world knowledge ensures that anything I say won't mean anything to you. If I have to explain, it only means two things: 1) you are geopolitically and historically ignorant, and 2) you ain't worth fighting a war for.

Tell me something ---- WHY did we have to fight WWI. You admit that we HAD to fight that. Why? We weren't attacked. The Civil War? Why did we HAVE to fight that? Why didn't we just let the South secede? They were no threat to us.

See? You can justify some things - because it is politically expedient for you to do so. The same applies for the nonsense about wars we didn't HAVE to fight .... you claim that simply because it is politically expedient for you to do so. You conveniently want to confine the "reason" for war to a very myopic point of view - whether we are under direct attack or threat. You do not consider what would have been the impact if we had NOT fought those "wars" - you conveniently forget the impact on those we have promised to protect. You want us to use them - and then desert them when they need us in return. I can think of nothing more selfish. You care not that people die, and we have the ability to stop it. You just want to let them die - as long as your cowardly ass isn't involved, right?

100 wars? You don't even know what WAR is, much less how many there were. Mayhaps you can give us a list of those 96 "wars" we shouldn't have fought.

So, let's not fight terrorism - let if flourish. Let it sweep over Africa, Europe, and Asia. Let them get stronger - let them capture wealth, resources, and slaves. It's not our fight, right? Then, when they bring those resources to our shores - when an army backed by the might, economies, and resources of the rest of the world, we can watch them sweep thru our country, too. Then, will you be willing to take up arms, or will you just turn your daughters over to them, and stand meekly by?

Frankly, your ignorance and your lack of humanity is disgusting.

I asked this clown a simple question, I told him there has only been 4 wars in over 100 wars this country has been in, that were justifiable. So I asked him to justify the rest, backed this half thinker right into a corner so he comes out with this embarrassing none answer. He thinks some how spending more the the 600 billion we spend now is needed because of Terrorism and to top off the display said he is the all knowing on this subject.
Does anyone else think I can't supply the list of wars that we have been in, and will you admit your stupidity after I list them for you.

You talk such childish bullshit.

You claim only 4 wars were "necessary" - and now you can't defend your position. List the other 96 and tell us why they weren't necessary ---- I'll debate that with you. Hell, you can't even defend the 4 you CLAIM were necessary - and you know I'll agree with you about those

As for the rest of your childish little attack, I don't claim to be all knowing [sic] on the subject, but I can damn well guarantee that I know more than you. Twenty years military, 4 years in the Pentagon Planning Office, and 3 years in WHCA (White House Communications Agency) guarantees that I have a stronger foundation, and a more profound understanding, than you. Why don't you tell us all about YOUR experience?

You ask about $600 billion, but do not have a single clue what that money is spent for. Well, I'll give you targets to shoot at -----

Components Funding Change, 2012 to 2013
Operations and maintenance $258.277 billion -9.9%
Military Personnel $153.531 billion -3.0%
Procurement $97.757 billion -17.4%
Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation $63.347 billion -12.1%
Military Construction $8.069 billion -29.0%
Family Housing $1.483 billion -12.2%
Other Miscellaneous Costs $2.775 billion -59.5%
Atomic energy defense activities $17.424 billion -4.8%
Defense-related activities $7.433 billion -3.8%
Total Spending $610.096 billion -10.5%

Which ones of those do you suggest we get rid of? If you like, I'll be happy to explain each of those line items you object to. You've whined, you've spouted, and you've attacked ---- now, it's time to put up or shut up.

So, we wait for:

1) Your list of 96 "unnecessary wars" with an explanation about why they are unnecessary
2) Your recommendations on what line items we should cut, with an explanation of why, and what we will do to backfill the resultant gap.

I suspect we are going to be waiting a long, long time.

You people are so ignorant. we have been in over 100 wars, we have only been attacked twice wwII and the war of 1812.. WWII AND WWI, the war of 1812 and the civil war had to be fought. . Tell me how any of the other wars were necessary. WE are waiting hot dog.

Your insular lack of world knowledge ensures that anything I say won't mean anything to you. If I have to explain, it only means two things: 1) you are geopolitically and historically ignorant, and 2) you ain't worth fighting a war for.

Tell me something ---- WHY did we have to fight WWI. You admit that we HAD to fight that. Why? We weren't attacked. The Civil War? Why did we HAVE to fight that? Why didn't we just let the South secede? They were no threat to us.

See? You can justify some things - because it is politically expedient for you to do so. The same applies for the nonsense about wars we didn't HAVE to fight .... you claim that simply because it is politically expedient for you to do so. You conveniently want to confine the "reason" for war to a very myopic point of view - whether we are under direct attack or threat. You do not consider what would have been the impact if we had NOT fought those "wars" - you conveniently forget the impact on those we have promised to protect. You want us to use them - and then desert them when they need us in return. I can think of nothing more selfish. You care not that people die, and we have the ability to stop it. You just want to let them die - as long as your cowardly ass isn't involved, right?

100 wars? You don't even know what WAR is, much less how many there were. Mayhaps you can give us a list of those 96 "wars" we shouldn't have fought.

So, let's not fight terrorism - let if flourish. Let it sweep over Africa, Europe, and Asia. Let them get stronger - let them capture wealth, resources, and slaves. It's not our fight, right? Then, when they bring those resources to our shores - when an army backed by the might, economies, and resources of the rest of the world, we can watch them sweep thru our country, too. Then, will you be willing to take up arms, or will you just turn your daughters over to them, and stand meekly by?

Frankly, your ignorance and your lack of humanity is disgusting.

I asked this clown a simple question, I told him there has only been 4 wars in over 100 wars this country has been in, that were justifiable. So I asked him to justify the rest, backed this half thinker right into a corner so he comes out with this embarrassing none answer. He thinks some how spending more the the 600 billion we spend now is needed because of Terrorism and to top off the display said he is the all knowing on this subject.
Does anyone else think I can't supply the list of wars that we have been in, and will you admit your stupidity after I list them for you.

You talk such childish bullshit.

You claim only 4 wars were "necessary" - and now you can't defend your position. List the other 96 and tell us why they weren't necessary ---- I'll debate that with you. Hell, you can't even defend the 4 you CLAIM were necessary - and you know I'll agree with you about those

As for the rest of your childish little attack, I don't claim to be all knowing [sic] on the subject, but I can damn well guarantee that I know more than you. Twenty years military, 4 years in the Pentagon Planning Office, and 3 years in WHCA (White House Communications Agency) guarantees that I have a stronger foundation, and a more profound understanding, than you. Why don't you tell us all about YOUR experience?

You ask about $600 billion, but do not have a single clue what that money is spent for. Well, I'll give you targets to shoot at -----

Components Funding Change, 2012 to 2013
Operations and maintenance $258.277 billion -9.9%
Military Personnel $153.531 billion -3.0%
Procurement $97.757 billion -17.4%
Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation $63.347 billion -12.1%
Military Construction $8.069 billion -29.0%
Family Housing $1.483 billion -12.2%
Other Miscellaneous Costs $2.775 billion -59.5%
Atomic energy defense activities $17.424 billion -4.8%
Defense-related activities $7.433 billion -3.8%
Total Spending $610.096 billion -10.5%

Which ones of those do you suggest we get rid of? If you like, I'll be happy to explain each of those line items you object to. You've whined, you've spouted, and you've attacked ---- now, it's time to put up or shut up.

So, we wait for:

1) Your list of 96 "unnecessary wars" with an explanation about why they are unnecessary
2) Your recommendations on what line items we should cut, with an explanation of why, and what we will do to backfill the resultant gap.

I suspect we are going to be waiting a long, long time.

TI simply asked him a question, and backed this bullshitter right back into a corner, this is a very reasonable question considering the bullshit he's trying to sell here MY COMMENT "You people are so ignorant. we have been in over 100 wars, we have only been attacked twice wwII and the war of 1812.. WWII AND WWI, the war of 1812 and the civil war had to be fought. . Tell me how any of the other wars were necessary. WE are waiting hot dog." He is totally unable to do this so he is trying to sell his bullshit that the reason he can't answer is because of me, Two stupid long drawn out reply's and nothing but bullshit. This guy has no clue.

You don't answer reasonable questions; so why would anyone answer yours (even if you knew any).
And when someone does do you the courtesy of answering your idiotic questions you invariably simply discount the explanation as "bullshit" without the first clue as to the warped thinking (if any) on the matter. In short you argue like a retarded 2nd grader.

THIS guy is 100% bullshit and can't back up a thing he says."I simply asked him a question, and backed this bullshitter right back into a corner, this is a very reasonable question considering the bullshit he's trying to sell here MY COMMENT "You people are so ignorant. we have been in over 100 wars, we have only been attacked twice wwII and the war of 1812.. WWII AND WWI, the war of 1812 and the civil war had to be fought. . Tell me how any of the other wars were necessary. WE are waiting hot dog." He is totally unable to do this so he is trying to sell his bullshit that the reason he can't answer is because of me, Two stupid long drawn out reply's and nothing but bullshit. This guy has no clue."

 

[jbander]

These people are brain dead when it comes to justifying this ridiculous 600 billion a year spent on the military. There is one reason why the controllers of the hate party want this , It's because they get the money , what maybe 90% goes into the top golden few's pocket. And their puppet party members jumps and does little tricks when their controllers tell them how to think.

 

[rightwinger]

These people are brain dead when it comes to justifying this ridiculous 600 billion a year spent on the military. There is one reason why the controllers of the hate party want this , It's because they get the money , what maybe 90% goes into the top golden few's pocket. And their puppet party members jumps and does little tricks when their controllers tell them how to think.

They inflate imaginary threats to justify a military budget larger than the next eight largest militaries

 

[jbander]

These people are brain dead when it comes to justifying this ridiculous 600 billion a year spent on the military. There is one reason why the controllers of the hate party want this , It's because they get the money , what maybe 90% goes into the top golden few's pocket. And their puppet party members jumps and does little tricks when their controllers tell them how to think.

They inflate imaginary threats to justify a military budget larger than the next eight largest militaries

That and commies behind every bush and terrorist around every corner, they are so easily played that these robot minds can be told anything and boy is it apparent when they open their mouth or respond in a forum like this. Brain dead nonsense.

 

[jbander]

That's not the complete story , the complete story is The US and It's allies are by far the center of technology in the world and add the fact that this group pays about 3 out of every 4 dollars in the world on this worlds military spending. These goofballs are nuts thinking more is needed. . That Guaranties that with our Allies we could take on every country in the world and kick their asses ten time over. Again totally brain dead.

 

[rightwinger]

That's not the complete story , the complete story is The US and It's allies are by far the center of technology in the world and add the fact that this group pays about 3 out of every 4 dollars in the world on this worlds military spending. These goofballs are nuts thinking more is needed. . That Guaranties that with our Allies we could take on every country in the world and kick their asses ten time over. Again totally brain dead.

That is the key...our allies
We have a lot of them and they have powerful militaries

Why are we obligated to defend areas in the EUs area of influence?
Why do we defend areas best served by Japan and S Korea?

Russia and China are not allies. They are on their own

 

[9thIDdoc]

Gosh, wonder why these guys couldn't be bothered to speak up when the Obama administration was "misplacing" billions and giving it to enemy nations along with weapons to use against us and our allies while at the same time being too cheap to provide reasonable security for our diplomats.

 

[rightwinger]

Gosh, wonder why these guys couldn't be bothered to speak up when the Obama administration was "misplacing" billions and giving it to enemy nations along with weapons to use against us and our allies while at the same time being too cheap to provide reasonable security for our diplomats.

Deflection noted

 

[jbander]

Gosh, wonder why these guys couldn't be bothered to speak up when the Obama administration was "misplacing" billions and giving it to enemy nations along with weapons to use against us and our allies while at the same time being too cheap to provide reasonable security for our diplomats.

Because it is just another brain dead lie. that's why. That's all you have is lies. Shit you wouldn't even recognize the truth if it was tattooed on your forehead.
BY the way were's your response , you said you had all the answers this simple one seemed to throw you big timer. To much bullshit, thats the problem------This is what happened everyone,
I simply asked brain dead a question, and backed this bullshitter right back into a corner, this is a very reasonable question considering the bullshit he's trying to sell here MY COMMENT "You people are so ignorant. we have been in over 100 wars, we have only been attacked twice wwII and the war of 1812.. WWII AND WWI, the war of 1812 and the civil war had to be fought. . Tell me how any of the other wars were necessary. WE are waiting hot dog." He is totally unable to do this so he is trying to sell his bullshit that the reason he can't answer is because of me, Two stupid long drawn out reply's and nothing but bullshit. This guy has no clue.

 

[Spare_change]

Just like you hate military veterans who spout what you called "hate", I don't like ignorant little piss ants who have no experience in the real world, who believe that the world ends at the tips of their fingers, that they know everything about everything, and don't need to learn anything, but feel somehow entitled to lecture people about things of which they are blissfully ignorant.

If you know any of those, please tell them I said that.

Now, as for your absolute stupidity claiming that the military is nothing but "cannon fodder" for corporations, I can think of nothing more naive, inane, and unrealistic. Your absolute ignorance of the threats in our world today make you a danger to yourself, to me, and to our country. You are the classical egotist, so comfortable in your myopic little view of the world, that you have no understanding of what the real world looks like. Further, to call veterans murderers on a blog, using a right protected by those "murderers", is the ultimate in hubris and childish inanity. Your ignorance IS the enemy of this country, and if left unchallenged, will be the cause of your death.

You need to get out of the basement - see what the real world is like and ............ grow the fuck up.

You people are so ignorant. we have been in over 100 wars, we have only been attacked twice wwII and the war of 1812.. WWII AND WWI, the war of 1812 and the civil war had to be fought. . Tell me how any of the other wars were necessary. WE are waiting hot dog.

Your insular lack of world knowledge ensures that anything I say won't mean anything to you. If I have to explain, it only means two things: 1) you are geopolitically and historically ignorant, and 2) you ain't worth fighting a war for.

Tell me something ---- WHY did we have to fight WWI. You admit that we HAD to fight that. Why? We weren't attacked. The Civil War? Why did we HAVE to fight that? Why didn't we just let the South secede? They were no threat to us.

See? You can justify some things - because it is politically expedient for you to do so. The same applies for the nonsense about wars we didn't HAVE to fight .... you claim that simply because it is politically expedient for you to do so. You conveniently want to confine the "reason" for war to a very myopic point of view - whether we are under direct attack or threat. You do not consider what would have been the impact if we had NOT fought those "wars" - you conveniently forget the impact on those we have promised to protect. You want us to use them - and then desert them when they need us in return. I can think of nothing more selfish. You care not that people die, and we have the ability to stop it. You just want to let them die - as long as your cowardly ass isn't involved, right?

100 wars? You don't even know what WAR is, much less how many there were. Mayhaps you can give us a list of those 96 "wars" we shouldn't have fought.

So, let's not fight terrorism - let if flourish. Let it sweep over Africa, Europe, and Asia. Let them get stronger - let them capture wealth, resources, and slaves. It's not our fight, right? Then, when they bring those resources to our shores - when an army backed by the might, economies, and resources of the rest of the world, we can watch them sweep thru our country, too. Then, will you be willing to take up arms, or will you just turn your daughters over to them, and stand meekly by?

Frankly, your ignorance and your lack of humanity is disgusting.

I asked this clown a simple question, I told him there has only been 4 wars in over 100 wars this country has been in, that were justifiable. So I asked him to justify the rest, backed this half thinker right into a corner so he comes out with this embarrassing none answer. He thinks some how spending more the the 600 billion we spend now is needed because of Terrorism and to top off the display said he is the all knowing on this subject.
Does anyone else think I can't supply the list of wars that we have been in, and will you admit your stupidity after I list them for you.

You talk such childish bullshit.

You claim only 4 wars were "necessary" - and now you can't defend your position. List the other 96 and tell us why they weren't necessary ---- I'll debate that with you. Hell, you can't even defend the 4 you CLAIM were necessary - and you know I'll agree with you about those

As for the rest of your childish little attack, I don't claim to be all knowing [sic] on the subject, but I can damn well guarantee that I know more than you. Twenty years military, 4 years in the Pentagon Planning Office, and 3 years in WHCA (White House Communications Agency) guarantees that I have a stronger foundation, and a more profound understanding, than you. Why don't you tell us all about YOUR experience?

You ask about $600 billion, but do not have a single clue what that money is spent for. Well, I'll give you targets to shoot at -----

Components Funding Change, 2012 to 2013
Operations and maintenance $258.277 billion -9.9%
Military Personnel $153.531 billion -3.0%
Procurement $97.757 billion -17.4%
Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation $63.347 billion -12.1%
Military Construction $8.069 billion -29.0%
Family Housing $1.483 billion -12.2%
Other Miscellaneous Costs $2.775 billion -59.5%
Atomic energy defense activities $17.424 billion -4.8%
Defense-related activities $7.433 billion -3.8%
Total Spending $610.096 billion -10.5%

Which ones of those do you suggest we get rid of? If you like, I'll be happy to explain each of those line items you object to. You've whined, you've spouted, and you've attacked ---- now, it's time to put up or shut up.

So, we wait for:

1) Your list of 96 "unnecessary wars" with an explanation about why they are unnecessary
2) Your recommendations on what line items we should cut, with an explanation of why, and what we will do to backfill the resultant gap.

I suspect we are going to be waiting a long, long time.

It is not a question of "getting rid of" but giving a new look at the mission of our services

Do we need ten active Army Divisions deployed around the world?
Do we need our current troop strength?
Can we redefine our Navy's mission to cut down on the number of active ships?
Do we need 11 supercarrier task forces when no other nation has more than one?
Do we need 3000 functioning nuclear warheads?
Do we need the hundreds of bases around the world?

Other nations get by without spending $600 billion on Defense
What makes us special?

Do we need ten active Army Divisions deployed around the world? YES
Do we need our current troop strength? NO - WE NEED MORE
Can we redefine our Navy's mission to cut down on the number of active ships? NO -
Do we need 11 supercarrier task forces when no other nation has more than one? NO - WE NEED FOURTEEN
Do we need 3000 functioning nuclear warheads? YES
Do we need the hundreds of bases around the world? YES

Other nations get by without spending $600 billion on Defense
What makes us special?

Other nations don't have our responsibilities, commitments, treaties, or global reach requirements.

Pick a question - I'll be glad to provide you a detailed analysis of why I answered as I did.

 

[Spare_change]

Just like you hate military veterans who spout what you called "hate", I don't like ignorant little piss ants who have no experience in the real world, who believe that the world ends at the tips of their fingers, that they know everything about everything, and don't need to learn anything, but feel somehow entitled to lecture people about things of which they are blissfully ignorant.

If you know any of those, please tell them I said that.

Now, as for your absolute stupidity claiming that the military is nothing but "cannon fodder" for corporations, I can think of nothing more naive, inane, and unrealistic. Your absolute ignorance of the threats in our world today make you a danger to yourself, to me, and to our country. You are the classical egotist, so comfortable in your myopic little view of the world, that you have no understanding of what the real world looks like. Further, to call veterans murderers on a blog, using a right protected by those "murderers", is the ultimate in hubris and childish inanity. Your ignorance IS the enemy of this country, and if left unchallenged, will be the cause of your death.

You need to get out of the basement - see what the real world is like and ............ grow the fuck up.

You people are so ignorant. we have been in over 100 wars, we have only been attacked twice wwII and the war of 1812.. WWII AND WWI, the war of 1812 and the civil war had to be fought. . Tell me how any of the other wars were necessary. WE are waiting hot dog.

Your insular lack of world knowledge ensures that anything I say won't mean anything to you. If I have to explain, it only means two things: 1) you are geopolitically and historically ignorant, and 2) you ain't worth fighting a war for.

Tell me something ---- WHY did we have to fight WWI. You admit that we HAD to fight that. Why? We weren't attacked. The Civil War? Why did we HAVE to fight that? Why didn't we just let the South secede? They were no threat to us.

See? You can justify some things - because it is politically expedient for you to do so. The same applies for the nonsense about wars we didn't HAVE to fight .... you claim that simply because it is politically expedient for you to do so. You conveniently want to confine the "reason" for war to a very myopic point of view - whether we are under direct attack or threat. You do not consider what would have been the impact if we had NOT fought those "wars" - you conveniently forget the impact on those we have promised to protect. You want us to use them - and then desert them when they need us in return. I can think of nothing more selfish. You care not that people die, and we have the ability to stop it. You just want to let them die - as long as your cowardly ass isn't involved, right?

100 wars? You don't even know what WAR is, much less how many there were. Mayhaps you can give us a list of those 96 "wars" we shouldn't have fought.

So, let's not fight terrorism - let if flourish. Let it sweep over Africa, Europe, and Asia. Let them get stronger - let them capture wealth, resources, and slaves. It's not our fight, right? Then, when they bring those resources to our shores - when an army backed by the might, economies, and resources of the rest of the world, we can watch them sweep thru our country, too. Then, will you be willing to take up arms, or will you just turn your daughters over to them, and stand meekly by?

Frankly, your ignorance and your lack of humanity is disgusting.

I asked this clown a simple question, I told him there has only been 4 wars in over 100 wars this country has been in, that were justifiable. So I asked him to justify the rest, backed this half thinker right into a corner so he comes out with this embarrassing none answer. He thinks some how spending more the the 600 billion we spend now is needed because of Terrorism and to top off the display said he is the all knowing on this subject.
Does anyone else think I can't supply the list of wars that we have been in, and will you admit your stupidity after I list them for you.

You talk such childish bullshit.

You claim only 4 wars were "necessary" - and now you can't defend your position. List the other 96 and tell us why they weren't necessary ---- I'll debate that with you. Hell, you can't even defend the 4 you CLAIM were necessary - and you know I'll agree with you about those

As for the rest of your childish little attack, I don't claim to be all knowing [sic] on the subject, but I can damn well guarantee that I know more than you. Twenty years military, 4 years in the Pentagon Planning Office, and 3 years in WHCA (White House Communications Agency) guarantees that I have a stronger foundation, and a more profound understanding, than you. Why don't you tell us all about YOUR experience?

You ask about $600 billion, but do not have a single clue what that money is spent for. Well, I'll give you targets to shoot at -----

Components Funding Change, 2012 to 2013
Operations and maintenance $258.277 billion -9.9%
Military Personnel $153.531 billion -3.0%
Procurement $97.757 billion -17.4%
Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation $63.347 billion -12.1%
Military Construction $8.069 billion -29.0%
Family Housing $1.483 billion -12.2%
Other Miscellaneous Costs $2.775 billion -59.5%
Atomic energy defense activities $17.424 billion -4.8%
Defense-related activities $7.433 billion -3.8%
Total Spending $610.096 billion -10.5%

Which ones of those do you suggest we get rid of? If you like, I'll be happy to explain each of those line items you object to. You've whined, you've spouted, and you've attacked ---- now, it's time to put up or shut up.

So, we wait for:

1) Your list of 96 "unnecessary wars" with an explanation about why they are unnecessary
2) Your recommendations on what line items we should cut, with an explanation of why, and what we will do to backfill the resultant gap.

I suspect we are going to be waiting a long, long time.

Just like you hate military veterans who spout what you called "hate", I don't like ignorant little piss ants who have no experience in the real world, who believe that the world ends at the tips of their fingers, that they know everything about everything, and don't need to learn anything, but feel somehow entitled to lecture people about things of which they are blissfully ignorant.

If you know any of those, please tell them I said that.

Now, as for your absolute stupidity claiming that the military is nothing but "cannon fodder" for corporations, I can think of nothing more naive, inane, and unrealistic. Your absolute ignorance of the threats in our world today make you a danger to yourself, to me, and to our country. You are the classical egotist, so comfortable in your myopic little view of the world, that you have no understanding of what the real world looks like. Further, to call veterans murderers on a blog, using a right protected by those "murderers", is the ultimate in hubris and childish inanity. Your ignorance IS the enemy of this country, and if left unchallenged, will be the cause of your death.

You need to get out of the basement - see what the real world is like and ............ grow the fuck up.

You people are so ignorant. we have been in over 100 wars, we have only been attacked twice wwII and the war of 1812.. WWII AND WWI, the war of 1812 and the civil war had to be fought. . Tell me how any of the other wars were necessary. WE are waiting hot dog.

Your insular lack of world knowledge ensures that anything I say won't mean anything to you. If I have to explain, it only means two things: 1) you are geopolitically and historically ignorant, and 2) you ain't worth fighting a war for.

Tell me something ---- WHY did we have to fight WWI. You admit that we HAD to fight that. Why? We weren't attacked. The Civil War? Why did we HAVE to fight that? Why didn't we just let the South secede? They were no threat to us.

See? You can justify some things - because it is politically expedient for you to do so. The same applies for the nonsense about wars we didn't HAVE to fight .... you claim that simply because it is politically expedient for you to do so. You conveniently want to confine the "reason" for war to a very myopic point of view - whether we are under direct attack or threat. You do not consider what would have been the impact if we had NOT fought those "wars" - you conveniently forget the impact on those we have promised to protect. You want us to use them - and then desert them when they need us in return. I can think of nothing more selfish. You care not that people die, and we have the ability to stop it. You just want to let them die - as long as your cowardly ass isn't involved, right?

100 wars? You don't even know what WAR is, much less how many there were. Mayhaps you can give us a list of those 96 "wars" we shouldn't have fought.

So, let's not fight terrorism - let if flourish. Let it sweep over Africa, Europe, and Asia. Let them get stronger - let them capture wealth, resources, and slaves. It's not our fight, right? Then, when they bring those resources to our shores - when an army backed by the might, economies, and resources of the rest of the world, we can watch them sweep thru our country, too. Then, will you be willing to take up arms, or will you just turn your daughters over to them, and stand meekly by?

Frankly, your ignorance and your lack of humanity is disgusting.

I asked this clown a simple question, I told him there has only been 4 wars in over 100 wars this country has been in, that were justifiable. So I asked him to justify the rest, backed this half thinker right into a corner so he comes out with this embarrassing none answer. He thinks some how spending more the the 600 billion we spend now is needed because of Terrorism and to top off the display said he is the all knowing on this subject.
Does anyone else think I can't supply the list of wars that we have been in, and will you admit your stupidity after I list them for you.

You talk such childish bullshit.

You claim only 4 wars were "necessary" - and now you can't defend your position. List the other 96 and tell us why they weren't necessary ---- I'll debate that with you. Hell, you can't even defend the 4 you CLAIM were necessary - and you know I'll agree with you about those

As for the rest of your childish little attack, I don't claim to be all knowing [sic] on the subject, but I can damn well guarantee that I know more than you. Twenty years military, 4 years in the Pentagon Planning Office, and 3 years in WHCA (White House Communications Agency) guarantees that I have a stronger foundation, and a more profound understanding, than you. Why don't you tell us all about YOUR experience?

You ask about $600 billion, but do not have a single clue what that money is spent for. Well, I'll give you targets to shoot at -----

Components Funding Change, 2012 to 2013
Operations and maintenance $258.277 billion -9.9%
Military Personnel $153.531 billion -3.0%
Procurement $97.757 billion -17.4%
Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation $63.347 billion -12.1%
Military Construction $8.069 billion -29.0%
Family Housing $1.483 billion -12.2%
Other Miscellaneous Costs $2.775 billion -59.5%
Atomic energy defense activities $17.424 billion -4.8%
Defense-related activities $7.433 billion -3.8%
Total Spending $610.096 billion -10.5%

Which ones of those do you suggest we get rid of? If you like, I'll be happy to explain each of those line items you object to. You've whined, you've spouted, and you've attacked ---- now, it's time to put up or shut up.

So, we wait for:

1) Your list of 96 "unnecessary wars" with an explanation about why they are unnecessary
2) Your recommendations on what line items we should cut, with an explanation of why, and what we will do to backfill the resultant gap.

I suspect we are going to be waiting a long, long time.

TI simply asked him a question, and backed this bullshitter right back into a corner, this is a very reasonable question considering the bullshit he's trying to sell here MY COMMENT "You people are so ignorant. we have been in over 100 wars, we have only been attacked twice wwII and the war of 1812.. WWII AND WWI, the war of 1812 and the civil war had to be fought. . Tell me how any of the other wars were necessary. WE are waiting hot dog." He is totally unable to do this so he is trying to sell his bullshit that the reason he can't answer is because of me, Two stupid long drawn out reply's and nothing but bullshit. This guy has no clue.

Your personal attack, coupled with your non-responsiveness, is duly noted.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Pick a question - I'll be glad to provide you a detailed analysis of why I answered as I did.

Well, how are we gonna pay for it?

 

[Spare_change]

These people are brain dead when it comes to justifying this ridiculous 600 billion a year spent on the military. There is one reason why the controllers of the hate party want this , It's because they get the money , what maybe 90% goes into the top golden few's pocket. And their puppet party members jumps and does little tricks when their controllers tell them how to think.

What moronic drivel.

 

[Spare_change]

Pick a question - I'll be glad to provide you a detailed analysis of why I answered as I did.

Well, how are we gonna pay for it?

Your choices are simple - you can pay it now, or you can pay it later.

It is nonsensical and naive to believe that we can lower our military posture without enhancing the goals of our enemies. As we saw in the mid-70s (thank you, Carter) and late 90s (thank you, Clinton), degradation of our military capabilities emboldened our enemies world wide. We were attacked - and we were forced to rebuild our military so we could respond.

Like all things, we need to prioritize our spending. What's more important? The Dept of Education or national security? What's more important? The Agriculture Department or national security?

I hope you realize that we spend almost twice our defense budget on Medicare and healthcare ($1.04 TRILLION in 2016). Is that more important than national security? Do we need to change the enrollment requirements in order to better manage limited dollars? Do we have people on our healthcare rolls that should be responsible for their own healthcare?

Frankly, you've been sold a bill of goods ---- consider this: Mandatory government spending in 2016 was $4.1 trillion. Discretionary spending, including defense spending, was $1.15 trillion. Total budget was $4.25 trillion. Defense spending was only 14.5% of the budget.

Defense spending is an obvious target for the ignorant - they don't have to understand what the money is being spent on. They just have to know they hate war, and we shouldn't have to spend money preparing for something we hate. In the meantime, the real theft goes ignored in mandatory spending.

As an aside, let me remind you that we are geographically unique. We go - literally - from sea to shining sea. That means we have significantly more land to protect, and two oceans to guard. We are an international country - we deal with countries all over the world. Our assets need to be protected, no matter where they go. People ask why we need "hundreds" of bases world wide - the answer is simple. It is cheaper to pre-position them there, than it is to keep them here and deploy them when needed.

Back to your question - how do we pay for it?

We have to sacrifice "nice-to-have" government benefits in order to fund the primary mission of the government - our national security. We have to halt the government over-reach that ensures that our budgets will always fall short of our expenditures.