Re: Russia to start a new arms race?

Message posted by Andre' M. Dall'au on April 24, 2011 at 9:50:12 PST:

Roger all except what constitutes a "phony" war. Which one of the three we are engaged are you referring? At the time of their initiation both 'Stan and Iraq were seen as justifiable in the post-9/11 environment. Of course now with hindsight and changing political fortunes people that supported both now don't. Even the ones that didn't (like our new President) had to get us in a third for even less reason. The slippery slope of clinical bombing - material support - local defense of Americans providing support - advisors (Special Operations)training the insurgents - advisors (Special Operations)covertly leading the insurgents - Special Operations openly leading the insurgents - Introduction of more conventional troops (like Marines) - and poof; mission creep until we are in Vietnam all over again. Ahhh... the disadvantage of having a Commander in Chief that never, ever spent a day in uniform so was never versed in lessons learned that it is easier to start a war than end one.

The DoD needs to feel the cuts as well as everyone else. That is not an option. What also needs to happen is the restructuring of entitlements so that we don't hurt our defense to just keep entitlements flowing. Why not just start a policy with Social Security is if you or your parents have not contributed to the SS for at least one year; you are not eligible to feed off the fund. Simple and fair. Then trim the fat and fraud from medicare and medicade - everybody says there is rampant waste there but nobody has taken up the task to clean it up!

We need to keep places like A51 going just to make sure we keep the edge we have won. There are just too many nations, religions and peoples that want to take what we have for a variety of reasons, mostly sheer hatred.

In Reply to: Re: Russia to start a new arms race? posted by Mark Lincoln on April 24, 2011 at 9:28:55 PST:


[ Discussion Forum Index ] [ FAQ ]