Printable View
[QUOTE=CBGBConnisur]A large number of voters who were and are anti war voted for Obama. If he does not make good on that promise he will probably lose those voters or just discourage them. I do think US foreign policy will change radically under Obama, especially with regards to military matters.[/QUOTE]
Well, we can certainly hope so.
It was the policies (the draft) and failures of Vietnam, which caused the decline of the US military. Which still at that point were a more effective force then the Soviets on their best day (a very rare day indeed). Carter is best known for the abortive Iranian rescue mission (a friend of mine was actually there). Instead of sending in a small commando group he should have sent in the Marine Corps and the 5th Fleet. The hostages would have been killed but it would have sent a strong message. But then again who knows, maybe Jimmy the humanitarian had it right.
Obama is all for pressing the war in Afghanistan while drawing down Iraq.
The US military and government buying foreign helicopters, planes and for that matter anything else is just out and out wrong.
[QUOTE=Doctor_Skank]As long as he doesn't try to rip the balls off the military like Carter did, OK.
Main issues for me aren't even the wars, it's the self-serving corruption involved in weapons appropriation... where the decision to buy which weapons and equipment is more about jobs, egos and profit than providing our soldiers with the best equipment to get the job done.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Cruiser D]It was the policies (the draft) and failures of Vietnam, which caused the decline of the US military. Which still at that point were a more effective force then the Soviets on their best day (a very rare day indeed). Carter is best known for the abortive Iranian rescue mission (a friend of mine was actually there). Instead of sending in a small commando group he should have sent in the Marine Corps and the 5th Fleet. The hostages would have been killed but it would have sent a strong message. But then again who knows, maybe Jimmy the humanitarian had it right.
Obama is all for pressing the war in Afghanistan while drawing down Iraq.
The US military and government buying foreign helicopters, planes and for that matter anything else is just out and out wrong.[/QUOTE]
Take what you want from this but the Pentagon says "You need to cut Military Spending"
I also said (you must have glossed over it) that Afghanistan has gotten worst and even with troop draw down in Iraq, you start sending them back into battle, your going to get a large "Hell No We Won't Go" and to prevent that from reaching the media, he'll instead go to the UN and ask for help.
The EU will say, we like you Obama, but NO.
Who else is going to step forward with the equipment, technology and troops to continue the War in Afghanistan? Nobody and Russia even wouldn't be interested, they tried that already.
The French won't do it, the Germans already want out of Iraq and growing impatience will prevent them from committing to it, so basically its dead in the water.
This is hope, pie in the sky, dreams (and all that other BS) that we would really rethink policies like this, but there's no boogieman out there anymore per say and we can find Osama just fine with the CIA, NSA and other world intelligent agencies. In fact umm I'm pretty sure we already know where he is...
We don't need wars to fight terrorism, duh after all the Brits didn't send planes to bomb Ireland....
[QUOTE=DJ FourMoney] Who else is going to step forward with the equipment, technology and troops to continue the War in Afghanistan? Nobody and Russia even wouldn't be interested, they tried that already.
[/QUOTE]Nobody else on the planet has the logistical capability to fight an overseas war. Fact. Without US airlift capabilities, the EU can only transport and sustain a battalion or two. Russia can airlift, but can't keep logistics up for more than a couple weeks. China has zero power projection beyond it's borders and is 2 decades away from being a world military power.
Besides, I don't think anyone besides the US really thinks it is worth the effort. No fault of foreign troops though, UK, Canada, Aussies, Danes, Norwegians, French, Dutch all fulfilling combat roles..... well.[QUOTE=DJ FourMoney]the Germans already want out of Iraq[/QUOTE]I think you meant A-stan, the Germans aren't in Iraq.[QUOTE=DJ FourMoney] We don't need wars to fight terrorism, duh after all the Brits didn't send planes to bomb Ireland....[/QUOTE]I understand your point, but that is a poor comparison.
I actually did the ROTC thing in college and had to do my obligatory period of service afterwards in the Navy, this was during the 1990s, the military was in horrific shape during the Clinton era. The one thing I will concede to Bush is that
he has actually supported the military better than his predecessor. I actually thought that time was one of the most interesting times in my life and initially exposed me to the world outside of America, that's how I initially got to see Australia.
McCain by far has superior military credentials to Obama, whatever Powell said was purely political. McCain was a career military man. Still I don't think this is a good time in history to be starting more wars.
Have you actually talked to anyone who serves in the US active military? Their professionalism and high morale always amazes me. Most of them realized when they signed up it wouldn't always be a Stateside or Western Europe posting. One doesn't sign up to be a trash truck driver and then gets amazed he has to drive trash around. It's the Reserves and the NG that got the real raw deal.
Bin Laden and his organization are a world problem - the bombings in W Europe and SE Asia. Afghanistan is a more true coalition operation and I don’t think support for it will be wavering anytime soon. Iraq was W's own personal deal, him fronting for the Saudi’s and big Oil. The only way we got anyone to support us in Iraq is by W squandering our good will capital in W Europe and bribing E Europe.
If the British had sent planes to bomb Ireland the US and the UN would have been there within a few days, probably not a good idea. I don't think there were any planes involved in the Easter Rebellion but there was plenty of artillery and a naval gunboat.
[QUOTE=DJ FourMoney] I also said (you must have glossed over it) that Afghanistan has gotten worst and even with troop draw down in Iraq, you start sending them back into battle, your going to get a large "Hell No We Won't Go" and to prevent that from reaching the media, he'll instead go to the UN and ask for help.
The EU will say, we like you Obama, but NO. [/QUOTE]
Just a general btw to all of you that have been following my political and economic postings in general. The line forms to the right for all the naysayers who said oil would never go under $50/barrel to kiss my ring. Anyone want to try for $30? Ding dong, the petro president will be no more in a couple of long months. Anyone willing to bet that 700+ billion will be long gone by then and the economy will be in just as bad shape if not worse when the corporate welfare hand outs started?
[QUOTE=Cruiser D]Anyone want to try for $30?[/QUOTE]
The growth rates of China and India, while they have slowed down, they are both moving along at a brisk pace. The Chinese economy is projected to grow at 8.5% next year; India at 6.3%. Together that's half the global population, right? China and India are the two 800-lbs gorillas in the room of oil consumption. This could keep oil prices from returning to the range they ran in during the last US recession.
[QUOTE=Doctor_Skank]Nobody else on the planet has the logistical capability to fight an overseas war. Fact.[/QUOTE]
The United Kingdom has the military means to fight some specific overseas wars, say, recapturing the Islas Malvinas. Likewise, the French maintain a respectable amphibious force. I strongly suspect they are going to put up a fight after I sieze Tahiti.
JD, being difficult.
I don't mind waiting a few months to gloat. USA, Western Europe, Eastern Europe and then China and India, look for the Chinese market to flatline next. Domino's. The US sets the market, the rest can only follow. China's projected growth rate has already been havled by what you stated. I think it's going to be zero or on the other side of zero. What we have going on is a global economic game of musical chairs, and we still have a few more rounds to play.
The British came fairly close to being severally bloodied in the Falkland Islands. Could the British or French deploy and support a force the same size or larger then a division? Doubtful. The US military bases in Iraq have Starbucks, Pizza Huts, Subways, Burger Kings and Baskin Robins. I doubt the Tommies were living like that in Basra. The US stopped using local sourced foodstuff in Iraq about two years ago due to quality issues. Everything now is being flown in from the US. What other nation in the world has the resources to do something as insane as that? The Russian Army just started issuing socks as standard kit last year.
[QUOTE=Jelly Donut]The growth rates of China and India, while they have slowed down, they are both moving along at a brisk pace. The Chinese economy is projected to grow at 8.5% next year; India at 6.3%. Together that's half the global population, right? China and India are the two 800-lbs gorillas in the room of oil consumption. This could keep oil prices from returning to the range they ran in during the last US recession.
The United Kingdom has the military means to fight some specific overseas wars, say, recapturing the Islas Malvinas. Likewise, the French maintain a respectable amphibious force. I strongly suspect they are going to put up a fight after I sieze Tahiti.
JD, being difficult.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Cruiser D]I don't mind waiting a few months to gloat. USA, Western Europe, Eastern Europe and then China and India, look for the Chinese market to flatline next. Domino's. The US sets the market, the rest can only follow. China's projected growth rate has already been havled by what you stated. I think it's going to be zero or on the other side of zero. What we have going on is a global econmic game of musical chairs, and we still have a few more rounds to play.
[/QUOTE]A slowing US economy affects China first among the "new global players". They'll take a hit, their own economic boom slowing anyway after the construction boom slowed post-Olympics. Need some office space in Guangdong? They're giving it away right now. Undercapacity.
Russian economic minister Kudrin:
"Growth planned at $95 oil"
"Budget can be kept at $60 oil"
11/08 "We plan on $50 oil in 2009 and crisis to hit first 6 months of 2009"
I'll give the Russians one thing, they're government is clever, young and forward-thinking, not to mention pragmatic. They might just have to put back those plans for aircraft carriers, moon bases and fleets of PAK-FA fighters for now.
Still, both the Chinese and Russian budgets are in SURPLUS. Can the US say that? Main Russian problem is getting credit for their projects now. It's gotten expensive.[QUOTE=Jelly Donut]The United Kingdom has the military means to fight some specific overseas wars, say, recapturing the Islas Malvinas. Likewise, the French maintain a respectable amphibious force. I strongly suspect they are going to put up a fight after I sieze Tahiti.
[/QUOTE]Personally I am a big fan of the UK military, their soldiers are among the world's best. But they do lack logistical capabilities, air strength, airlifting capabilties etc.
Even the FALKLANDS would be a challenge for them now. The Falklands. Could they take on Pakistan or even Yemen? By all respect for the Royal Marines, the Parachute Regiment and all that... I doubt it.
The British do indeed field a well trained, highly disciplined soldier with a lot of tradition behind him. Call me a nationalist but I'll stay with the common US soldier. No other country has the night fighting capabilities of the US soldier or the overwhelming support of highly sophisticated combined arms. Then of course there is the logistics and the digital command and control structure.
We've all be through the Soviet PR machine during the Cold War and those of us who have been over there can only scratch our heads and say what were they talking about. How much of those military plans are propaganda, I'm guessing about 90%. Moon base? I'm sure NASA has several back up plans for when the shuttle fleet is retired and it's up to the Russians to supply the ISS and they fail or can't do it to US standards. Look for oil to keep going down down down as the US runs down the path of being fossil fuel free.
It's easy for the Russian government to be pragmatic, they are insulated from the public. None of those guys are thinking wow, 'we' are screwed. They are thinking hmm, too bad the average Russian citizen is screwed. At least in the US when a government official screws up he finds himself voted (or fired) out of office and a social pariah.
[QUOTE=Cruiser D]I don't mind waiting a few months to gloat.[/QUOTE]
You might be right, but I think the odds are long on 30 dollar oil. It's best in these cases to take a short position on oil, that way you can bank money on your insight. Gloating is great, but money - well, it speaks for itself. Good luck.
[QUOTE]
The US military bases in Iraq have Starbucks, Pizza Huts, Subways, Burger Kings and Baskin Robins.[/QUOTE]
Indeed. It's amazing Alexander the Great got anywhere in his endeavors across Iraq and Afganistan without access to any significant sources of caffine, fat or sugar.
I find it very surreal that somebody could refer to the US food supply in ANY sort of a positive light. One of the reasons I moved OUT of the US was the shit fucking food.
[QUOTE=Bango Cheito]I find it very surreal that somebody could refer to the US food supply in ANY sort of a positive light. One of the reasons I moved OUT of the US was the shit fucking food.[/QUOTE]
Well food has to travel great distances, nobody's fault the people that kept buying up farmland to put suburbs up. Its happening in Central California now, they say by 2020 or slightly later all the rich Central California farmland will be covered in sub-divisions.
I hope it doesn't happen or that will be the next crisis in America, were do we grow the food!
Food is fine in America man, go to a Farmer's Market, Trader Joe's or Whole Foods Markets you'll be just fine....
I still eat "junk" gained a grand total of 20 lbs since high school some 20 years ago. I don't overeat and could lose this 20lbs whenever I feel like it, which might be soon, I lost 12lbs just walking around Europe....
[QUOTE=Cruiser D]Have you actually talked to anyone who serves in the US active military? Their professionalism and high morale always amazes me. Most of them realized when they signed up it wouldn't always be a Stateside or Western Europe posting. One doesn't sign up to be a trash truck driver and then gets amazed he has to drive trash around. It's the Reserves and the NG that got the real raw deal.
Bin Laden and his organization are a world problem - the bombings in W Europe and SE Asia. Afghanistan is a more true coalition operation and I don’t think support for it will be wavering anytime soon. Iraq was W's own personal deal, him fronting for the Saudi’s and big Oil. The only way we got anyone to support us in Iraq is by W squandering our good will capital in W Europe and bribing E Europe.
If the British had sent planes to bomb Ireland the US and the UN would have been there within a few days, probably not a good idea. I don't think there were any planes involved in the Easter Rebellion but there was plenty of artillery and a naval gunboat.[/QUOTE]
Some, of course they are proud to serve but only crazy wanna-be butchers that play too much Halo and Call of Duty in their free time actually WANT to be there.
In fact all the people that love playing FPS' so much should find there way to the local recruiting office, put your "skills" to use, most of them are slackers.
That has nothing to do with supporting an illegal war, which many of them don't and the way they CHEERED loudly when it was final that Obama was President-Elect...
They are thinking about COMING HOME finally!
I hope this is the last time the MIC or Congress give the go-ahead for any war. We have NOT needed to fight any war since WW2 and should have left it at that.
Cheney learning from 'Nam didn't want any public involvement in wars and wanted to ban pictures of coffins coming back on planes because they wanted to insulate the public from the war. If they saw the death and most of the destruction, they would march in the street. Eventually did they march in the streets but the mainstream media didn't cover it.
Now the Occupation is issue number #4 after the Economy, National Health Care and other issues.
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lTUB5_l0Mg[/url]
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7abu9a0xtNI[/url]
LIES, all of them
Makes jokes about WMD's now in front of Republican Fund Raisers
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VD1gOhpRSU&feature=related[/url]
Don't give me that crap about US Soliders are prideful and want to fight this war.
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_cjkWevHNM&feature=related[/url]
D I like you man but c'mon...