General Political Thread

[Hixter]

That is a huge statement, please explain.

President Obama intends to make drastic cuts to the military because social spending like Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, etc. is growing by leaps and bounds (already dwarfing defense spending) and he needs someone to wield the axe. The president can't be seen slashing social spending, so defense is up for huge cuts and Hagel will be on board because he's already been quoted as saying that the Pentagon is "bloated."

 

As it is, our Navy is shrinking while China's is growing. They're beginning fo field their first aircraft carriers, while one of ours is sitting in port waiting for a 4-year refueling that we can't afford, so we're short a carrier in the Persian Gulf while things heat up in Iran. Russian bombers armed with nuclear-tipped cruise missiles just circled Guam, while Hagel recommends huge cuts to our nuclear arsenal. We're going to cut something like 70,000 Marines (there aren't a whole lot to begin with) even though the've been fighting non-stop for more than a decade and places like Syria, Mali and Yemen keep flashing up on the radar.

 

The president wants to make cuts and Hagel will be the hatchet man. Any decisions he makes will affect the American military for decades and won't be easily undone, so I'm more than a little worried about putting a "yes man" in the SecDef's chair.

 

And I love how republicans want to cut spending on everything under the sun, but when the idea of reducing military spending is proposed it's considered borderline treasonous. We spend more on our military than China, Russia & the next umpteen countries combined. We will still be #1 militarily despite any cuts.

Hagel is a Republican. 

 

Don't put too much weight behind China's military spending, as they're a secretive nation that hides much of their spending. And as much as we spend, it remains a fact that Russia is flying nuclear weapons off American shores for the first time in more than a decade and China is asserting itself in the Pacific. They're developing aircraft carrier killing missiles and their cyberwar is already in full swing. Iran is working on nuclear weapons, Africa is heating up and the Middle East is a tense as ever. 

 

Our nation must tread very carefully as it cuts military spending because the world is still a very dangerous place. It's nice to imagine a scenario where the United States didn't have to spend trillions of dollars to defend itself and protect much of the world, but there's a strong likelihood that the results of such cuts would make the last few decades of conflict seem like a walk in the park.

 

[Mr. Heartbreak]

Last time I checked, we still had a large enough nuclear arsenal to blow up the entire planet several times over. Have I missed something?

 

As for our ongoing spending, i8music is right: we spend 700 billion to China's 120 billion. It is bloated.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/06/defense-spending-fact-of-the-day_n_1746685.html

 

[lost highway]

We're going to cut something like 70,000 Marines (there aren't a whole lot to begin with)

 

182,000.  There are currently about 202,000.  I don't know where you're finding these numbers.

 

Cutting the military budget is common sense.  There is a population mushroom that leaves a baby boom generation ready to receive their entitlements all at once.  That needs to be paid for.  We have to care for our elderly.  We don't need to spend the trillion dollars the air force would put into the F-35 cash cow.

 

It's also no coincidence that the Navy has shrunk.  That didn't happen on accident.  Naval battle is mostly obsolete.  The remaining purpose is transportation for aircraft.

 

As per Russia, do you remember the New START treaty that both Obama and Medvedev signed a few years ago?

 

The problem with all of this choose-you-own-adventure style speculation, is that it allows the fact that other powerful nations also have arsenals to set a tone that there is an immediate existential threat coming from multiple directions.  This type of fear is exactly what got us into two wars that we didn't pay for which is the exact reason we have to cut our precious military now.  The war chest credit card has rung up too many duckets and it hasn't made us safer.  The cost was also paid in dear by U.S. military lives, and innocent citizens of Iraq, and Afghanistan.

 

The Bush years are over.  Only now we have drones picking people off.... which is a whole other can of worms.

[LouieB]

Let's send out you guys with the guns out to defend us. You have the hardware, now all we need is the "well regulated militia"  part and we don't have to worry about defense cuts.

 

My other thought is, wow, so NOW we are going to have to ramp up our military spending to keep up with the Chinese since the Russians are no longer the problem.  Or we can start up the draft again and get all those unemployed men and women in the militar, armed and working.  Endless war; dig it.

 

(side note- how mamy air craft carriers do we have comparted to China?  Just curious I honestly don't know but I bet we have alot more.)

 

LouieB

[Hixter]

182,000.  There are currently about 202,000.  I don't know where you're finding these numbers.

I was going from memory and I guess I added the planned USMC cuts (20,000) with the planned Army cuts (50,000) to get the 70,000 figure. Sorry about that.

 

 

 

It's also no coincidence that the Navy has shrunk.  That didn't happen on accident.  Naval battle is mostly obsolete. 

I think we'll prove that false if/when China acts against the various disputed territories in the Pacific.

 

 

 

The problem with all of this choose-you-own-adventure style speculation, is that it allows the fact that other powerful nations also have arsenals to set a tone that there is an immediate existential threat coming from multiple directions.

If you don't think that nuclear-armed bombers and subs prowling our nation's borders aren't an immediate threat then I guess we have nothing more to discuss.

[lost highway]

If you don't think that nuclear-armed bombers and subs prowling our nation's borders aren't an immediate threat then I guess we have nothing more to discuss.

 

But here's why that is some hawk bullshit:

 

There is no evidence that they had nuclear anything.  They're planes that could carry bombs of any variety.  Already there is an escalated tone from two Russian bombers, to nuclear-armed bombers.  See the difference there?

 

Secondly they never left international airspace, they didn't do anything illegal.  Our own military officials said that it wasn't provocative, but unusual.  Do you really think the Russians are going to attack us?  Seriously?  Our air force has flown in cooperative anti-terrorism training operations with theirs several times over the last few years.  Last August they flew through my home state of Colorado.

 

Thirdly, how does this event cause alarm that we're trimming our military budget?  Is someone stripping our last couple F-15's for parts? We have a more than adequate air force should the nation of Russia suddenly lose its mind- not to mention our allies in Japan are a lot closer.

 

This is what I mean: a nation should be armed based on reason, not rabid fear.  A false perception of threat can lead to tens of thousands of deaths, not to mention grinding us hundreds of billions further into debt.  That is the cautionary tale of the last six decades of our nation's military history.

[lost highway]

 

(side note- how mamy air craft carriers do we have comparted to China?  Just curious I honestly don't know but I bet we have alot more.)

 

LouieB

 

 

According to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_carriers_by_country we have 10 in service, while they have 1.  They are apparently planning on building 2 more since their defense budget has soared to roughly a fifth of our current defense budget.

[KevinG]

Back to my original point, if I may, on Hagel and his confirmation.  Everything Hixler brought up was really why he does like or agree with Hagel, not why he isn't qualified for the post.  Here is the thing, like it or not, in November of 2012 Barack Obama was re-elected to the presidency.  He has the choice to put whomever he wants in his cabinet (as well as judgeships and other high level positions).  These people have to be confirmed by the senate.  The senate needs to judge if these people are qualified for the position.  However the senate is playing games with their constitutional authority.  They are refusing to confirm someone because of their political views.  Which should be the last thing a senator should look at.  PBO has said he wants to reduce the size of the military, etc.  Of course he is going to nominate someone who feels the same way, or is in line with his views on the subject.  This isn't a secret, but you know what if you wanted a different Sec of Def then maybe you should have worked harder to get the other guy elected.       

[LouieB]

  A false perception of threat can lead to tens of thousands of deaths, not to mention grinding us hundreds of billions further into debt.  That is the cautionary tale of the last six decades of our nation's military history.

Hawks like Hixter don't care about debt.  The Neo-Cons don't care about it either unless it is created from supporting sick, elderly, disabled, or school age children.  All this talk about the national debt is just bullshit.  Most politicians don't care. The cuts to the military are about jobs and contracts, not about national defense. We have a plenty big armed forces to subdue anyone if we so choose (just drop the big one...!!), the rest is just crap. 

 

Edit- Thanks for the update on our aircraft carriers.  Glad to know that we are still way ahead of the Chinese. I will sleep better tonight.

 

LouieB

[Hixter]

The debt is our nation's number one problem. That said, I'm nervous about cutting our military in the present climate. I'm 35,000 feet over western Texas and trying to catch a quick nap, but you'll have to take me at my word when I assure you that I'm not talking partisan politics or hawks or doves when I say that I'm concerned about our military and defense capabilities. Ugly things are on the horizon and our nation may soon find itself at its most vulnerable position in more than 80 years in the near future. China is on course to match us militarily in the next 10 years, so if we find ourselves or the allies that we've promised to defend on the losing side of a war with them then I'll throw Obama's election back in your face like you threw it in mine.

[KevinG]

China is on course to match us militarily in the next 10 years, so if we find ourselves or the allies that we've promised to defend on the losing side of a war with them then I'll throw Obama's election back in your face like you threw it in mine.

 

I welcome that day.  

 

It probably won't matter anyway since come March 1st were are in for a shit storm of cuts across the board if congress and the White House doesn't get its act together.  

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/19/obama-sequester-speech_n_2716921.html

[Hixter]

I welcome that day.

You welcome the day that we lose a war to China? Hopefully you and your loved ones won't be smoking cinders so that you can enjoy that day.

[LouieB]

Now it is al lcoming clear: Hixter is a not only a gun enthusiast, but also al vet.  So when and where did you serve? 

 

LouieB

[KevinG]

You welcome the day that we lose a war to China? Hopefully you and your loved ones won't be smoking cinders so that you can enjoy that day.

 

Well since it ain't gonna happen, yes.  

 

And you seem so concerned over something that may or may not happen in 10-80 years, it seems a bit ridiculous.  While in 10 days we will have some drastic cuts because two sides can't work out a deal.  Talk about damage to military readiness, it ain't coming because of Hagel, it is coming because of sequestration and on March 1st.    

[LouieB]

Well since it ain't gonna happen, yes.  

 

And you seem so concerned over something that may or may not happen in 10-80 years, it seems a bit ridiculous.  While in 10 days we will have some drastic cuts because two sides can't work out a deal.  Talk about damage to military readiness, it ain't coming because of Hagel, it is coming because of sequestration and on March 1st.    

Of course he is worried about stuff that isn't going to happen.  What do you think all that paranoia about the government taking his guns that are there to protect his family is all about?

 

I guess I am lukewarm on the sequester.  I don't relish the economy coming to a crashing halt, but maybe it needs to for a few weeks.  Then maybe Congress will get serious about sensibly reducing the deficit and raising whatever kind of revenue is needed to support our big old bloated defense system.  It is hard for me to worry about a war with China in 30 years too, since at the moment I think we can still kick their ass pretty good if we need to. 

 

LouieB

[Hixter]

Now it is al lcoming clear: Hixter is a not only a gun enthusiast, but also al vet.  So when and where did you serve? 

United States Army: 1985-1989

[KevinG]

Super glad that we are more concerned about finger pointing then actually trying to solve this mess:

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323495104578314240032274944.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

[Winston Legthigh]

United States Army: 1985-1989

Thank you for your service.

[Hixter]

Thank you for your service.

Thanks. It was fun most of the time. I'm in Los Angeles to visit my kids, grandson and an old Army buddy.

[KevinG]

So Boehner after trying to lay all of the blame on this sequester at the feet of the President won't call the house back in session to deal with it, or try to comprise.  

 

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/election/2013/02/20/democrats-to-boehner-call-house-back-avoid-sequester/

 

This is the most dysfunctional group of lawmakers I have ever witnessed.

 

And I know no one here cares about this, but I do, it is important.  

[LouieB]

United States Army: 1985-1989

Now it all makes sense.  At least you aren't a chicken hawk.

 

LouieB

[Mr. Heartbreak]

This is the most dysfunctional group of lawmakers I have ever witnessed.

 

And I know no one here cares about this, but I do, it is important.  

I care about it too. And I agree they are the most dysfunctional group ever. They make the '94 "revolution" people look like reasonable adults.

Apparently, there was no lesson learned from the 2012 election. They are basing their approach on the 2010 election, meaning, Let's obstruct as much as possible and continue to demonize the President in the hopes that we can replicate 2010 in 2014. Sick bastards, and unpatriotic to boot. Screw 'em all.

[Tweedling]

So if the deadline passes and the cuts to defense and entitlements go into effect what are your predictions? Economic collapse? China invades US?

I'm being a smart ass at the end of that question but I am interested in what some of you think will happen. I'm afraid we have to stop spending so much so why not start there?

I'm being serious in asking about predictions. Not trying to be an overall smart ass.

[Winston Legthigh]

So if the deadline passes and the cuts to defense and entitlements go into effect what are your predictions?

My prediction is that the deadline doesn't pass without some sort of compromise, and a deal is struck.

[KevinG]

So if the deadline passes and the cuts to defense and entitlements go into effect what are your predictions? Economic collapse? China invades US?

I'm being a smart ass at the end of that question but I am interested in what some of you think will happen. I'm afraid we have to stop spending so much so why not start there?

I'm being serious in asking about predictions. Not trying to be an overall smart ass.

 

These things will happen, this is not what might happen (or what I think might happen) this will happen:

 

The US meat plants will shut down, leading to higher meat prices http://money.msn.com/now/post.aspx?post=3fae916f-0293-4836-ab43-92541a83ad38

 

Long lines at airports http://www.hstoday.us/focused-topics/customs-immigration/single-article-page/former-faa-chief-fears-impact-of-sequester-on-air-travel-tsa-security/2556c05b6d8d49da692fc2df24d6b098.html (note article is from Nov 2012 and talks about sequester of Jan 1, 2013, but since all congress did was kick the can down the road it is apt.) 

 

Teacher layoffs http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/21/arne-duncan-sequestration_n_2733414.html

 

The WIC nutrition program (Women Infants and Children) will be cut by 5.1% eliminating 600,000 people form the program.  http://www.nwica.org/?q=advocacy/1

 

800,000 Department of Defense workers would face furloughs http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/02/20/800-000-DOD-Employees-May-Be-Furloughed

 

So look at these things that will happen and you can infer the effect on our country, it ain't good.  Listen, I am not going to argue about the need for cuts in our spending, but this is a hatchet job, this blindly makes cuts that will drastically effect you personally.  Unless of course you don't eat meat, don't have kids in school, or use police, fire or military services.

 

So yeah this is a big fucking deal.  Work together, get something done.