Larger or smaller military?

Peregrinator

Hooded On A Hill
Joined
May 27, 2004
Posts
89,482
This appears to be one of the few actual differences.

Romney wants more planes and ships and a lot more troops.

Obama wants to ditch old ships, delay buying new ones, and cut personnel.


Make the case. Pick one and tell me why it's the proper direction to take.
 
Last edited:
A larger miliatary means that we need places to send it to justify the expenditures.

I'm for a smaller military, smaller authoritarian government (no TSA, lose the Patriot act, close Guantanamo), and more civil liberties.
 
A larger miliatary means that we need places to send it to justify the expenditures.

I'm for a smaller military, smaller authoritarian government (no TSA, lose the Patriot act, close Guantanamo), and more civil liberties.

That's a good question for Willard supporters; why do we need a larger military?
 
It's kinda funny. I'm in the neither camp. I see what unemployment is at and what it's been at for decades. I'd rather a better jobs program but even if the military is just paying kids to sweat and run at least they are "employed" while we attempt to grow up and find a solution to this.
 
Time to heed Ike's advice. Buy what we need to defend ourselves but stop the welfare program for defense contractors.
 
Sidestepping the question right now, but noting that the squadron of F-22's based here is now deployed to Guam.
 
It's kinda funny. I'm in the neither camp. I see what unemployment is at and what it's been at for decades. I'd rather a better jobs program but even if the military is just paying kids to sweat and run at least they are "employed" while we attempt to grow up and find a solution to this.
Good point. How do we fund the expansion?
Sidestepping the question right now, but noting that the squadron of F-22's based here is now deployed to Guam.

Hmm. I need to go look at a map. Any indication of why? "Training mission?"
 
Smaller but more lethal. Scrap the Marines entirely, scrap almost all armour. Train Infantry to replace marines/rangers with one force of lavishly equipped and exquisitely trained soldiers.

Keep navy as world's preeminent navy. Upgrade AirForce to Stealth/F22/F35 and scrap everything older.

Scrap all but a few Submarine and Air delivered Nuclear weapons. ($300 billion saved almost immediately).

Scrap any ship older than 40 years and with less than an AEGIS type system.

Cut to 8 Carrier groups.

More Drones, More Drones, More Drones.
 
Smaller but more lethal. Scrap the Marines entirely, scrap almost all armour. Train Infantry to replace marines/rangers with one force of lavishly equipped and exquisitely trained soldiers.

Keep navy as world's preeminent navy. Upgrade AirForce to Stealth/F22/F35 and scrap everything older.

Scrap all but a few Submarine and Air delivered Nuclear weapons. ($300 billion saved almost immediately).

Scrap any ship older than 40 years and with less than an AEGIS type system.

Cut to 8 Carrier groups.

More Drones, More Drones, More Drones.

Why don't we have drone missile frigates yet?
 
A larger miliatary means that we need places to send it to justify the expenditures.

I'm for a smaller military, smaller authoritarian government (no TSA, lose the Patriot act, close Guantanamo), and more civil liberties.

^^ this....we also need to cut welfare to prison owners and quit throwing Americans in boxes for victimless crimes.

Time to heed Ike's advice. Buy what we need to defend ourselves but stop the welfare program for defense contractors.

^ yup....there isn't a nation on earth that could come close to whipping our ass.....

Time to spend on other things, like paying bills.
 
Hmm. I need to go look at a map. Any indication of why? "Training mission?"

Tensions between China and Japan.......




There's been some huge "training missions" up this way. When I can look off my deck and see the top of the wing of a C-17 flying low and level up the arm, shit must be important.
 
Because repairs on a plane can be done in a barn, repairs on a ship would require flying a crew out to do it.

Drone ships would be much smaller, much cheaper, and much more complex and less likely to require repairs though.
 
Smaller but more lethal. Scrap the Marines entirely, scrap almost all armour. Train Infantry to replace marines/rangers with one force of lavishly equipped and exquisitely trained soldiers.

Keep navy as world's preeminent navy. Upgrade AirForce to Stealth/F22/F35 and scrap everything older.

Scrap all but a few Submarine and Air delivered Nuclear weapons. ($300 billion saved almost immediately).

Scrap any ship older than 40 years and with less than an AEGIS type system.

Cut to 8 Carrier groups.

More Drones, More Drones, More Drones.

I agree with all of this, except the spelling of "armor".
 
how bout a MILITARY that FIGHTS wars to WIN

and isnt a SOCIAL ENGINEERING EXPERIMENT?
 
Drone ships would be much smaller, much cheaper, and much more complex and less likely to require repairs though.

Ships, even small ships large enough to carry enough missiles to be worth building are huge and expensive objects.

The more complex, the more likely to require repairs, you've got that backwards.

The idea is impractical as a replacement for manned ships, while drone aircraft have already proven effective replacements for scout craft, recon craft and even light attack aircraft.
 
I see "Marines" with no bullets

I see ads for the "Navy" saying they are a GLOBAL FORCE FOR GOOD

I see our guys being KILLED by Afghan "allies" and they cant even voice their anger or fears

I see the "Gen" of teh Army calling pvt citizens and telling em what they can or cant do

WIN WARS

STOP WITH THE PC SHIT

AND ROE THAT KILLS OUR GUYS

OR CLOSE SHOP
 
Yeah, that country would last about 10 minutes before collapsing.

It's a good thing that people like you and BB are too lazy to ever actually get into positions of power.

I would slit your throat on LIVE tv and have PIGS eat your remains:mad:
 
Back
Top