Guest guest Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 Good points all. What most people don't realize is that the military has been operating on essentially a peace time budget. The percentage of military spending is only about 3% of GDP. This is nothing. Under Reagan it was closer to 4 or 5 percent. WWII it was over 10%. Military spending as compared to GDP has been declining over the past 10 years. Of course, what the Dems are trying to do is claim another "Peace Dividend." They did this after the Civil War, WWI, WWII and Korea. Each time all that happened was gutting the military, creating hollow units that were poorly organized, poorly equipped, badly trained, and had low morale. During these times we typically lagged behind most other leading nations in terms of military technology. For a long time we lagged well behind the Russians in terms of tanks and artillery, not just quantity but quality. If not for nukes, the Russians could have taken Europe any time after WWII. They could have done it as it was within a few months after peace was declared because by that time the politicians had already fatally weakened our forces in Europe. Each time all that has happened is that money from the military wasn't saved, but spent on project to buy votes in certain political districts. The politicians bought some votes, but the military was a hollow shell. After the Civil War, we at least had a strong navy and that kept most troublemakers away from our coasts. Later though it was different. After WWI, the way we gutted our military made us look weak on the international stage and we weren't taken seriously. This was one thing that lead the Japanese and the Nazis to think we would be a pushover and that brought on their aggression. After WWII, the Communists saw us repeat the process and tested us in Korea. Our initial showing was dismal and our later efforts not much better, in large part because of weak politicians. This lead to Vietnam and other less well known conflicts. Clinton tried what Obama is suggesting. Clinton cut the military by half, more or less. Later on, many of his people were saying they cut much too much. But the idea was, just like each of the other times, that the US would never fight another war. People were too much in awe of our power and loved us too much to want to fight us. Well, the awe part might have been true if we still had a 2 million an strong military and spent about 5% of GDP on the military, 4% absolute minimum. Clinton did this during peace time. Obama wants to gut the military in the middle of a war and at a time when the world needs a firm hand to keep it from coming apart. My prediction: Obama will cut the military and rush us out of Iraq, save for a force too small to do anything but get itself in trouble. Pakistan fall into civil war and Iraq erupts. Our handful of troops are trapped and we can't get them out, or perhaps we do but make a hasty retreat leaving all kinds of tanks and other advanced kit behind. Very, very bad for international prestige. The middle east will collapse and oil supplies will be cut, resulting in sky high oil price and gas prices. Domestically, oil companies will be accused of a kind of war profiteering by Congressional Demagogues, who will solve the problem by applying price controls and pushing for more ethanol. Price controls will, as they always do, lead to shortages, which will mean gas lines like happened in the 1970's. With people being so much less civil today than they used to be, this will mean much violence. At the same time, the push for more ethanol will lead to higher food prices as corn goes to ethanol rather than food. More price controls which will lead to more shortages. Domestic chaos ensues, very bad scene. In a message dated 2/22/2009 2:52:16 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, no_reply writes: Read the stuff in RED please. Administrator Need a job? Find an employment agency near you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2009 Report Share Posted February 23, 2009 " Domestic chaos ensues, very bad scene. " I think we will see it for reasons other than the gutting of the military. Once everyone figures out that these stimulus plans aren't going to do anything for them but make their lives more miserable, they will protest in earnest. Maybe even riot. Administrator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2009 Report Share Posted February 23, 2009 Gutting the military is only one possible avenue and then only after the Middle east collapses and oil prices shoot up. There is plenty to riot over in the US already, and more to come. Bank failures, inflation, increased energy prices because of environmental laws, the rationing of health care under the nationalized system, continuing job losses, etc. We might even see protests over how the money is being spent, particularly once a lot of tax dollars and mass-printed funny money is shoveled at the "poor" and the like. I wonder what people would think if they knew the plan for the collapse of Mexico and a mass migration of millions into the US was to do nothing but let them come? In a message dated 2/23/2009 1:38:02 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, no_reply writes: I think we will see it for reasons other than the gutting of the military. Once everyone figures out that these stimulus plans aren't going to do anything for them but make their lives more miserable, they will protest in earnest. Maybe even riot. Administrator Get a jump start on your taxes. Find a tax professional in your neighborhood today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2009 Report Share Posted February 23, 2009 " We might even see protests over how the money is being spent, particularly once a lot of tax dollars and mass-printed funny money is shoveled at the " poor " and the like. " I think the social unrest would happen when people saw what the poor did with the money. There are two kids of poor people: 1) Those who find themselves in hard times and thus really need the social assistance, and 2) Those that knew better but spent themselves into the poorhouse and are too lazy to dig themselves out. We all know the stories about families on welfare who spend their welfare checks like they are a bonanza. Wait till these people get even more money and waste it on booze, cigarettes, gambling, etc. THEN people will be upset. Administrator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.