TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › One question I have about Obama...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

One question I have about Obama...  

post #1 of 8
10/30/08 at 10:22am
Thread Starter 
This is something that has really been bothering me. He wants to cut spending for the military, doesn't want to invest in any more nuclear weapons, etc. Ok, that is find and dandy if everyone else in the world would agree to the same thing. But they aren't going to.

Do I really think the US has a right to say who can and can't have these weapons? Honestly, no. But, I can understand why we DO try to regulate it along with other countries.

I'm not even talking about the war, I'm talking about protecting the US. The best defense is a good offense, right? Show power, and no one will mess with you. Show a weakness and you're a sitting duck. Most of the world already hates the US so why decrease spending for the military...this is when we need it most.

I would love a world where every country calls a stop to war, but that isn't going to happen. Can someone please explain to me where this is a good idea?
post #2 of 8
10/30/08 at 10:48am
Probably best if you want to know why it's a good idea to wait for someone who supports Obama to post.

But this is one of the things that Democrats run on. They generally want less funding for the military and more for welfare/social programs. Frankly, one of the biggest reasons why our military is stretched so thin is because of the massive cuts that Clinton made to the military during his 8 year term. They were refusing to re-enlist personnel who wanted to because of funding cuts. There were tons of cuts for equipment supplies. I'm not going to say if it was right or wrong because at the time the Cold War was over and we hadn't yet been attacked by terrorists on our home soil (unless you count Embassies and one of our ships...). You can decide that.

Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea right now since we are involved in 2 conflicts right now, regardless of how or why they began. We're there, and even Obama has said that we need to increase troops in Afghanistan. How can you do that and cut the military budget at the same time?
post #3 of 8
10/30/08 at 2:54pm
Remove the troops from Iraq:

Laurie
post #4 of 8
10/30/08 at 3:03pm
I think you could cut spending for the military by getting out of Iraq. That's a very expensive war.

Also the US outspends the rest of the world massively when it comes to the military. So you could cut spending a fair bit and still be well ahead of everyone else.

I.e the US spends more than the next 20 highest military spending countries taken together.

As for the nuclear weapon research. The US can already destroy the world many times over with its nuclear arsenal. I'm not sure more is needed to be honest.
post #5 of 8
10/30/08 at 3:30pm
Short answer; I don't know. History shows that time and time again the US has gone through periods of peace and complacency, and felt comfortable in cutting military spending. And time and time again, it has cost lives, money and time to catch up when we needed it.

Just use recent history as an example. In the first gulf war, American troops went in wearing Jungle camoflage, green deuce gear and black leather boots. They still carried M16A1's and M60's, even though the M4 and M249 were available, with all their neat attachments and scope/laser sighting.

As for nuclear weapons; they degrade. Shielding, electronics, core material, all degrade over time. When replacing them, why not use newer, more robust designs? Which, we won't have if we halt development.
post #6 of 8
10/30/08 at 4:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by calico2222 View Post
This is something that has really been bothering me. He wants to cut spending for the military, doesn't want to invest in any more nuclear weapons, etc. Ok, that is find and dandy if everyone else in the world would agree to the same thing. But they aren't going to.

Do I really think the US has a right to say who can and can't have these weapons? Honestly, no. But, I can understand why we DO try to regulate it along with other countries.

I'm not even talking about the war, I'm talking about protecting the US. The best defense is a good offense, right? Show power, and no one will mess with you. Show a weakness and you're a sitting duck. Most of the world already hates the US so why decrease spending for the military...this is when we need it most.

I would love a world where every country calls a stop to war, but that isn't going to happen. Can someone please explain to me where this is a good idea?
What it comes down to,is obama hates america, and white people.
his statements have proved that fact over and over and over.

clinton showed weakness when dealing with radical islam,and you see where that got us. OBama has a history of making friends with those types of people, so you see where that is going.
post #7 of 8
10/30/08 at 4:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siggav View Post
I think you could cut spending for the military by getting out of Iraq. That's a very expensive war.

Also the US outspends the rest of the world massively when it comes to the military. So you could cut spending a fair bit and still be well ahead of everyone else.

I.e the US spends more than the next 20 highest military spending countries taken together.

As for the nuclear weapon research. The US can already destroy the world many times over with its nuclear arsenal. I'm not sure more is needed to be honest.
And would get very more expensive if we pulled out. But they have been pulling troops out.

I agree the US should pull all troops out of europe(russia is a EU problem),and korea, and all support for the UN military.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
Short answer; I don't know. History shows that time and time again the US has gone through periods of peace and complacency, and felt comfortable in cutting military spending. And time and time again, it has cost lives, money and time to catch up when we needed it.

Just use recent history as an example. In the first gulf war, American troops went in wearing Jungle camoflage, green deuce gear and black leather boots. They still carried M16A1's and M60's, even though the M4 and M249 were available, with all their neat attachments and scope/laser sighting.

As for nuclear weapons; they degrade. Shielding, electronics, core material, all degrade over time. When replacing them, why not use newer, more robust designs? Which, we won't have if we halt development.
hmm yea, true for the most part

with the m249, i hear alot of people saying they want the m60 back.

and i hated the m16a1 it was junk. thanks to the kennedy's administration.
They are the ones that made the changes to the gun that made it hard to use in the field( just to save money), and it took them how long to fix the problems? 15 years or so.
post #8 of 8
10/30/08 at 4:36pm
"The Pig" is still in service, it's just that the SAW has taken it's place as the primary support weapon. I like both. The only drawback to the M60 is it's heavy weight but it makes up for it in knock you on your butt firepower. Both are good weapons.

I had an M16A2/203 when I was in the Army and during Desert Storm. BTW, we had desert camo but we were a line combat unit. There weren't enough of the uniforms to be issued to all of the troops being deployed.

Support the troops doesn't solely apply to wartime. As far as I'm concerned, and I admit I'm biased, it also means providing them with the funding for training and the tools to do the job in peacetime for when they are put in harm's way.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
This thread is locked  
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › One question I have about Obama...