U.S. president announces major defense cuts

Bush and Israel tend to get criticized because of their bullying tactics and lousy foreign politics, and it wasn't just many liberals who were critical of such, nor are all liberals critical of the same issues. The world is not so black and white, having many shades of gray, and it doesn't hurt to be self-critical.

 

Obama would bankrupt us even if we got rid of the military.

 

That's what some whites claim about the black man, since the days of slavery, and it is still false. Obama is just a human being who is as capabable of anything as anyone, meaning that the nation may prosper or crumble under his or anyone's leadership. It is incorrect to argue that failure is based on skin color.

 

That doesn't answer the question. How is it in the interests of the American people to be able to project military power on a global scale? How is the cost of such military capacity justified? How is it necessary?

 

That may or may not be so, but that is a lose poor argument for continuing financing a military capacity that overwhelmingly benefits a small concentration of private interests far more than it benefits the public interest.

 

Obama is more white than black so stop your false racism claims. I never said anything about skin color. When the left has to use race it means they have no argument to the topic

 

So we should just let terrorists kill everyone and not care?

 

Except for the fact that Obamas policies have decreased the deficit long term.
These polcies include but dont exclude
ObamaCare
CHIP
the FOOD safety act
The weapon reauthization and accouability act

 

Obama has increased the debt 4 trillion so you make no sense

Obamacare will increase national debt

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...ional-debt-spend-medicare-savings_536716.html

 

The U.S. spends more than China, Japan, Germany and Iran combined so defense spending cuts is the least of our worries.

 

Because we now live in a world where no place on this planet is more than 45 minutes away from any other place on this planet.

 

Of course it is every bodies fault but not Obama's. I just showed you Obamacare will increase the debt. You continue to believe the lies of Obama

 

How does maintaining the capacity to invade and occupy nations on two fronts, maintenance of a bloated foreign military presence, and proliferating no bid military support contracts to big business prevent terrorists from killing everyone?

Your argument is a failure. The threat of terrorism does not warrant the same military expense as the counter balance to the Soviet Union. In fact, we don't even counter balance anything. We spend more the the rest of the world combined on our military. That is absurd. It makes no economic sense except from the stand point of the big businesses receiving the bulk of transfer of wealth from the tax payers to their coffers.

 

And how is that necessary? How does that benefit the majority of the American people? What of that "capability" justifies the cost?

 

One of these days everybody will realise that terrorists will always exist as long as people have axes to grind, and no other method of sharpening them.

The only way to remove terrorism is not to give them anything to get up in arms about......so if we were all nicer people, and less aggressive........maybe others would reciprocate.

 

Even then, there is no legitimacy to the argument that the US needs to maintain such a globally militarized presence as a counter balance to terrorism. We had the largest global military presence prior to 9/11 and it prevented nothing. It's like thinking if you only stash enough hand guns at different places around your house and your neighborhood, it'll prevent mice from eating the cheese out on the counter.

 

I agree......but bear in mind......the handguns can always be used to kill all those neighbourhood cats who didn't stop the mice coming in for the cheese on the counter. Bullets are, after all made to be used........and it appears some Americans like to use them!

 

Dammm right. I wait outside airports looking for British tourists. As soon as I hear the accent I let 'em have it right on the spot. No nonsense from the toothless Limeys.

 

Yes we see that with Iran

 

That is a lie. Terrorist will always kill infidels for no reason

 

Does this mean cut money for troops and their services, or does the cuts mean less payment to the defense contractors and their corporate moguels?

 

That is a very good question. I'd like to know the answer myself. If it is a cut in monwy for troops and their services, i am opposed. In fact, such a cut will likely end up being far more costly in the form of contract mercenaries ala blackwater/xe in the future.

 

So far the cuts are to weapons systems and weapon procurement and also bringing troops home from Europe

 

Bringing troops home and reducing force capacity, or bringing them home and reducing the cost to maintain them?

 

We need to cut funding across the board, but we can just say, "lets cut funding by X percent today." We need to find out how much and where we can make cuts while maintaining efficiency by reducing waste, and then we need to go through with it. Obama cannot expect to be able to just keep cutting the budget without having major issues.