U.S. president announces major defense cuts

President Obama recently announced new defense cuts that would make it to where the United States could no longer fight two ground wars at once. The pentagon promises the military will not be weaker, just relying more heavily on technology, drones, the navy and the airforce. Some politicians are complaining that with the recent activity in Iran, cutting defense funds is the last thing we need to do.

 

The military budget has to be cut so that all the losers in the population can be taken care of from cradle to grave. Losers need govt. to take care of them. Losers...losers...losers. Any questions?

America will lose air superiority and naval superiority in some theaters. American soldiers, sailors and airmen will die so that unskilled and ignorant losers can feed at the federal trough.

The real war is at home not overseas...it's between left and right and it's a fight to the finish.

 

That's one down, and two to go.....(medicare and social security)

Everybody wants spending cuts...well....there ya go!

 

Just incase anyone wants to read about further from a source:

http://www.smh.com.au/world/us-army-to-get-much-smaller-20120105-1pmuu.html#ixzz1iadEzpPI

 

America needs to modernize its offensive nuclear weapons and to build layered ballistic missile defenses as soon as possible.

 

I would have thought you could cut the military budget without trimming the muscle (ground troops). There is the bloated bureaucracy at the Pentagon, an insane number of military bases both at home and abroad, and too many classes of aircraft in operation. But of course trimming the fat would involve taking on a lot of vested interests and who wants that?

 

we need to cut corporate welfare first then regular welfare !!

 

We could cut the military budget by 60% and still maintain superiority.

The "cut" doesn't represent an actual cut, it represents a slow-down in the growth.

 

Where have heard that before?...only in reverse.

 

Standard poli-speak. If the increase doesn't beat inflation then it is considered a "cut".

 

Big Business, Wall Street and Big Govt. all need to be destroyed. They are fused as one giant malignancy.

 

One cannot have what one cannot pay for. The real enemy is not overseas. The real enemy is the federal govt.

 

What would be cheaper is a militia that includes every man between 18 and 50. They could train two weeks a year and own their own uniforms and rifle and be ready on a moment's notice. I believe the Swiss do that and they haven't had a war in centuries.

 

(*)(*)(*)(*) right. A bullet should do it.

Oh and what about the people who joined just for benefits? You know the ones who ran up a debt they can not pay; you know loans. The ones who want to use the GI bill and all that other stuff while they get out after a few month and draw disability. Put them on the front lines.

 

I like those military bases abroad. It's the cheapest and most efficient way to have a worldwide ability to project power. It sure beats colonialism.

 

The term is interesting....colonialism...

Some colonies are good, except from the standpoint of the colonized, but the English didn't really colonize India, they conquered it. We didn't colonize Iraq, we conquered it.

So what difference is there between conquering a country, and projecting power over it?...or, to it?..., not sure how to put that.....and should we want to project power/conquer more countries?.....so many questions

 

It IS colonialism! Take it from one who lives in and knows the history of the most successful (I think) colonialist Government since the Roman Empire.

 

Its what Dems do, create 9/11's then blame it on fresh incumbants. The draw down in defence and intel funds post Cold War were transferred from military restructure to political razors by Clinton which left the US too busy 'transforming' to its newly unworkable downsizing which created the conditions for 9/11 to occur. Obama is just doing the same thing because he clearly has no clue what he is doing and hasnt enough experience to have learnt from the past. You get what you pay for.

 

Something for which AIPAC is much relieved I should think!

 

NATO could barely cope with Gaddaffi in Libya and were arguing about the cost of it.

Do you really think that the US and NATO are ready to take on Iran

 

Too little, too late.

This is an election-year ploy to make Obama look sensible even though these aren't even real cuts.

 

Tell that story to Military Family's

 

destroyed is a harsh word , I would rather defund them and stop protecting the asses with special interest laws

 

Who is America defending itself against that it needs such a bloated military?

 

Not real cuts ? hmm. -ignorance is no excuse - read and learn - the facts :




...