American military reduced 25% under Obama?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 457759
  • Start date
Statements like this make it seem like we have two options. A world with American influence and world without any influence.

I'm not sure they are the only 2 options.

So in your POV a world in which America doesn't maintain a military presence in many sovereign nations is "a world without any American influence"?
 

I think some ignorant people are under the impression that, like, Obama calls up Xi Jinping and says, "hey bro, can you float me $2B this month? I'm totally good for it," rather than the reality that we auction off bonds, and China used to buy some of it (they've been reducing their holdings for the past few years--that is becoming net sellers).
 
It's far from incorrect, but thanks, Jack.

It is incorrect. For one thing, it's a separate budget item so any change in VA spending or pensions has no impact on military spending. For another thing, spending in those areas has been increasing. And you're welcome. I'm sure that learning that you were wrong will cause you to change your mind, which is always a good thing.
 
Yes it is right, actually. Everything I said is right.

Yes, the reason we wound up fully embroiled in the Middle East is because of all those bases we have. Got it. The "if we just take our ball and go home, everyone will love us" narrative is a little absurd.
 
It is incorrect. For one thing, it's a separate budget item so any change in VA spending or pensions has no impact on military spending. For another thing, spending in those areas has been increasing. And you're welcome. I'm sure that learning that you were wrong will cause you to change your mind, which is always a good thing.

Wrong again, Jack. Pensions, salaries and compensation all come out of the defense budget.
 
So it's working...

Actually much of this technology has little if any use in many new military situation. Much like building aircraft carriers in many situations where we faced war in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan we have had little use for aircraft carriers.

Most of the needs have been in mobile military and large scale transport warships. Of course having a an aircraft carrier is very important but the question is does it need to costs 18 billion dollars or could we build one that is more effective for military situations.

Another popular example is the F-22 fighter jet look at the cost for each plane yet it lacks many functions that the F-35 added and remember the problems that the F-35 had. The total costs of the F-35 program is slated to be over a trillion dollars spent building them over their 30 year life span.
 
Wrong again, Jack. Pensions, salaries and compensation all come out of the defense budget.

Veteran's health benefits and military pensions are separate items on the budget from defense. Salaries are on the defense budget (and they've been rising, of course). And, as I said, you're wrong for two reasons: you claimed that the decline in the defense budget was due to factors that don't affect the defense budget either way, and the factors you mentioned rose. A third thing is that they are very small in comparison to the defense budget.
 
Actually much of this technology has little if any use in many new military situation. Much like building aircraft carriers in many situations where we faced war in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan we have had little use for aircraft carriers.

Most of the needs have been in mobile military and large scale transport warships. Of course having a an aircraft carrier is very important but the question is does it need to costs 18 billion dollars or could we build one that is more effective for military situations.

Another popular example is the F-22 fighter jet look at the cost for each plane yet it lacks many functions that the F-35 added and remember the problems that the F-35 had. The total costs of the F-35 program is slated to be over a trillion dollars spent building them over their 30 year life span.

Stopped reading there
 
The United States has no right fighting wars that have no impact on defense of the homeland. The amount of money spent on the military is absurd and criminal.
 
Mike, why don't you do the economy a favor and pay back the money they wasted on you then?
 
The United States has no right fighting wars that have no impact on defense of the homeland. The amount of money spent on the military is absurd and criminal.

Then you are really going to shit yourself when you realize the future of fighting wars is with drones and robots and the U.S. has probably been dumping billions into that tech for a long time now. Send boots on the ground will mean sending 20,000 drones and another 20,000 human sized mechs into an area to clear it out.
 
Mike, why don't you do the economy a favor and pay back the money they wasted on you then?

I would have paid with interest if they let me go right away and even stated as such. They kept me there for like 2 months as a prisoner. My freedom is worth more than the pittance they paid. And if you believe the bs high costs of training, you don't know the difference between variable and fixed costs.
 
Veteran's health benefits and military pensions are separate items on the budget from defense.

It's still part of the defense budget. Nice try though.

you claimed that the decline in the defense budget was due to factors that don't affect the defense budget either way

And I did that where, exactly?


A third thing is that they are very small in comparison to the defense budget.


Cool? I never said it wasn't.
 
I would have paid with interest if they let me go right away and even stated as such. They kept me there for like 2 months as a prisoner. My freedom is worth more than the pittance they paid. And if you believe the bs high costs of training, you don't know the difference between variable and fixed costs.

As if you could afford anything let alone interest

LOL at "like 2 months"

Super lulzers at you having any idea on the cost of training
 
Back
Top