Defense Budget Cuts and "Transforming America"

[Humble2drive]

We're talking about opinions here - and yours is obviously oriented from an Obama perspective, not only based on ignorance but also naivete.

Are you serious? Did you forget the smiley face?

You start with a post: "Behold, Barack Hussein Obama's vision for the US Military:"

Then you present an opinion piece on a CSBA report that is clearly unrelated to Obama's actual
"vision for the U.S. military". Did you think no one would notice.

Now your conclusion regarding my comment on your mistake is that I have an Obama perspective?
That is not only false but it is irrelevant here.
My perspective is from simple common sense that expects that if you are criticizing Obama's vision for the military you should actually reference something that IS his vision of the military.

Obviously, Obama didn't directly say he was going to intentionally reduce our military capabilities . . .

Thank you for clearing that up because your original statement was:

Had you been paying attention to Obama's campaign promises prior to his first term, you would have been aware of his pledges to cut back our military capabilities.

I mistakingly thought you meant he pledged to cut back our military capabilities.
I don't know why I thought that.

You can dwell in a world of your own facts if you choose - it's not connected to reality.

So, suggesting that you post the actual report instead of an opinion on that report or something that actually gives Obama's vision disconnects me from reality? Your reality perhaps.

 

[RLENT]

You can dwell in a world of your own facts if you choose - it's not connected to reality.

This ... from someone who was found to be utterly incapable of simply acknowledging that the USG had ever "meddled" in the internal affairs of other sovereign nations ...

What a crackup ....

 

[jaminjim]

A somewhat more entertaining read on the matter of cutting defense spending:

Meanwhile, the U.S. has 20 carriers—all of which come with actual planes.

The 'Red Dawn' Case For Cutting U.S. Defense Spending - Businessweek

Not to put to fine of a point on it but the U.S. has half as many carriers as your article claims. That is a very large error to make, and I think that is part of the problem. Too many experts that either don't know, or have a agenda that they want to push.

Do we need to cut U.S. spending? yes. Should that include the Military? yes. How the governments spending is cut is the most important question that we as a Nation face.

 

[RLENT]

Not to put to fine of a point on it but the U.S. has half as many carriers as your article claims. That is a very large error to make, and I think that is part of the problem.

Depends on how you classify and count - your number uses only those ships specifically designated "aircraft carrier" ... perhaps a fair assumption, given the article referred to China's one "aircraft carrier" ...

Perhaps the author, in coming up with his number of US "carriers" was counting these as well (of which there are currently 9 in the US fleet):

The ship above, which is considered/called an "amphibious_assault_ship" is an evolution of a type of ship that was formerly known as a "helicopter carrier" ...

I would say that one could fairly call the above ship a type of "aircraft carrier" ... given that helicopters generally fly through the air when being operated, rather than being sailed on the sea, or driven on the ground ...​

Too many experts that either don't know, or have a agenda that they want to push.

Undoubtedly ... but maybe not in this particular case, with respect to this particular author ...

Do we need to cut U.S. spending? yes. Should that include the Military? yes. How the governments spending is cut is the most important question that we as a Nation face.

Agreed.

 

[davekc]

Also have to count some (I do mean some) of the Coast Guard) ships. Or at least the few that are somewhat armed. But that aside, a place I did agree with Ron Paul is knocking off being the world's police dept everywhere. Ton of savings there regardless of who writes about it.
We do have interests to protect overseas, but no where near the scope of what we are currently doing.

 

[RLENT]

Also have to count some (I do mean some) of the Coast Guard) ships. Or at least the few that are somewhat armed. But that aside, a place I did agree with Ron Paul is knocking off being the world's police dept everywhere. Ton of savings there regardless of who writes about it.

Yup ... leaving aside the morality or wisdom of playing policeman worldwide for a moment, the fact is: we simply can't afford it.

We must get our economic house in order - and that should include everything - entitlements, defense, and anything else the Feds have managed to get their hooks into.

We do have interests to protect overseas, but no where near the scope of what we are currently doing.

What we are doing overseas is so big that it is probably difficult for the average American to wrap their head around it ... it's vast ...

Which is an aspect that makes it very dangerous - simply because the American people are really the only driver that can alter that equation.

In this case, ignorance is not bliss ... it's an assurance of financial ruin.

 

[jaminjim]

I would say that one could fairly call the above ship a type of "aircraft carrier" ... given that helicopters generally fly through the air when being operated, rather than being sailed on the sea, or driven on the ground ...

You are probably correct...... Oh wait!

Originally Posted by RLENT
A somewhat more entertaining read on the matter of cutting defense spending:

Meanwhile, the U.S. has 20 carriers—all of which come with actual planes.

The 'Red Dawn' Case For Cutting U.S. Defense Spending - Businessweek


all of which come with actual planes

Might indicate that he was talking Air Planes. But that really isn't the topic. (just something that I had read about recently)I'll try and rebut some of the reports incorrect assumptions as I get time.

 

[davekc]

Another item to be coupled with defense spending is foreign aid. Quite a bit of savings can be found in what we basically give away with little reason. Can start with Japan and why we spend defense dollars defending them. If there is a good reason, mighty fine. Just start sending them the bill.
So many others but just a place to start.

 

[RLENT]

You are probably correct...... Oh wait!

Meanwhile, the U.S. has 20 carriers—all of which come with actual planes.

Might indicate that he was talking Air Planes.

Could be ...

In any event, you might wanna do a little deeper diggin' in the link I posted for the amphibious_assault_ship ... and in the links contained within it ...

You probably see some talk of things like this:

Seems like between the jar heads and the swabbies, we have about 160 of 'em currently ...

In meantime, to save a little time, just train your eyes real carefully on the first pic I inserted and have a peek of what's sitting on the deck at the stern ...

I'm thinkin' it sure looks like a Harrier ...

Beyond that, here's another type of ship that could be termed an "aircraft carrier" ... if those words mean a ship that carries aircraft ... scope out it's complement of flying mo-chines:

USS New York (LPD-21) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Given that this ain't Pappy's Navy anymore, could just be his "20" number was low ...

But that really isn't the topic. (just something that I had read about recently)I'll try and rebut some of the reports incorrect assumptions as I get time.

Which report - the one the Turkey Choker originally referenced ... but didn't post ?

Or the article I posted from Bloomberg ?

 

[davekc]

While not talked about much, more and more drones are being deployed off of ships which to some degree changes their capabilities.

 

[Ragman]

Given that this ain't Pappy's Navy anymore, , ,

 

[jaminjim]

Didn't see the one from Bloomberg, or did you mean Businessweek? But I was talking about the CSBA study.

 

[RLENT]

Didn't see the one from Bloomberg, or did you mean Businessweek?

Yup (it's Bloomberg Businessweek )

But I was talking about the CSBA study.

Ah - got it.