John McCain
In a dangerous world, protecting America's national security requires a strong military. Today, America has the most capable, best-trained and best-led military force in the world. But much needs to be done to maintain our military leadership, retain our technological advantage, and ensure that America has a modern, agile military force able to meet the diverse security challenges of the 21st century.
As President, John McCain will strengthen the military, shore up our alliances, and ensure that the nation is capable of protecting the homeland, deterring potential military challenges, responding to any crisis that endangers American security, and prevailing in any conflict we are forced to fight.
McCain's web page didn't get very specific. Instead, it focused on smart spending practices, fighting pork-barrel spending, avoiding emergency supplementals outside the normal budget ... basically saying he will be different from Bush.
McCain has built a reputation over the years of treading very carefully when it comes to putting American lives in harm's way, no doubt because of his experiences as a Naval officer and Viet Nam POW. This is a good thing.
Barack Obama
Obama plans to increase military spending, expand the size of the military by at least 90,000 troops, modernize equipment, increase investment in airpower, electronic warfare, seapower, space power, missile defense, ... the rhetoric is impressive. He also was on the news today saying he wants peace without nuclear weapons.
The question is, how much of that is remotely realistic considering the current stance of the Democratic party.
Bob Barr
America should not be the world’s policeman. The American purpose is to provide a strong national defense, not to engage in nation building or to launch foreign crusades, no matter how seemingly well-intentioned.
It is time to reemphasize the word “defense” in national defense. By maintaining a military presence in more than 130 nations around the world in more than 700 installations, with hundreds of thousands of troops deployed overseas, the U.S. spends more to protect the soil of other nations than our own. Bringing these soldiers home would better protect America while saving lives and money. The U.S. requires a military strong enough to defend this nation, not to support and defend much of the rest of the world.
I am a US Air Force veteran of over 20 years. I greatly benefitted in a personal way from the US policy of establishing permanent bases in foreign lands. Nevertheless, that day is done. The Cold War is over. It is time our allies became our allies rather than our dependents. It is past time for our troops to pack up and come home.
For me: SCORE ONE FOR BARR
The Candidates on Military Defense
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
The Candidates on Military Defense
Accountable;940534 wrote: John McCain
In a dangerous world, protecting America's national security requires a strong military. Today, America has the most capable, best-trained and best-led military force in the world. But much needs to be done to maintain our military leadership, retain our technological advantage, and ensure that America has a modern, agile military force able to meet the diverse security challenges of the 21st century.
As President, John McCain will strengthen the military, shore up our alliances, and ensure that the nation is capable of protecting the homeland, deterring potential military challenges, responding to any crisis that endangers American security, and prevailing in any conflict we are forced to fight.
McCain's web page didn't get very specific. Instead, it focused on smart spending practices, fighting pork-barrel spending, avoiding emergency supplementals outside the normal budget ... basically saying he will be different from Bush. "McCain's web page didn't get very specific. Instead, it focused on smart spending practices,..." Because they'll be needed upon his plans to "remain overseas for 100 years"...:wah:...I have mixed feelings about this...All of me wants people to finish what they start and the least we could do is to stay and make sure Iraqs' future has at least a chance in hell...Apart of me wouldn't trust Bush on a leash...
Accountable;940534 wrote:
McCain has built a reputation over the years of treading very carefully when it comes to putting American lives in harm's way, no doubt because of his experiences as a Naval officer and Viet Nam POW. This is a good thing. I like McCain...He speaks from the heart...
Accountable;940534 wrote:
Barack Obama
Obama plans to increase military spending, expand the size of the military by at least 90,000 troops, modernize equipment, increase investment in airpower, electronic warfare, seapower, space power, missile defense, ... the rhetoric is impressive. He also was on the news today saying he wants peace without nuclear weapons.
The question is, how much of that is remotely realistic considering the current stance of the Democratic party. I agree it's important to keep up with military prestige but not at the expense of foreign relations...Armies are meant to repel not offend...
Accountable wrote:
Bob Barr
America should not be the world’s policeman. The American purpose is to provide a strong national defense, not to engage in nation building or to launch foreign crusades, no matter how seemingly well-intentioned.
It is time to reemphasize the word “defense” in national defense. By maintaining a military presence in more than 130 nations around the world in more than 700 installations, with hundreds of thousands of troops deployed overseas, the U.S. spends more to protect the soil of other nations than our own. Bringing these soldiers home would better protect America while saving lives and money. The U.S. requires a military strong enough to defend this nation, not to support and defend much of the rest of the world.
I am a US Air Force veteran of over 20 years. I greatly benefitted in a personal way from the US policy of establishing permanent bases in foreign lands. Nevertheless, that day is done. The Cold War is over. It is time our allies became our allies rather than our dependents. It is past time for our troops to pack up and come home.
For me: SCORE ONE FOR BARR :yh_sigh...Score one for Barr...:yh_sigh...:wah:...
Only joking...
In a dangerous world, protecting America's national security requires a strong military. Today, America has the most capable, best-trained and best-led military force in the world. But much needs to be done to maintain our military leadership, retain our technological advantage, and ensure that America has a modern, agile military force able to meet the diverse security challenges of the 21st century.
As President, John McCain will strengthen the military, shore up our alliances, and ensure that the nation is capable of protecting the homeland, deterring potential military challenges, responding to any crisis that endangers American security, and prevailing in any conflict we are forced to fight.
McCain's web page didn't get very specific. Instead, it focused on smart spending practices, fighting pork-barrel spending, avoiding emergency supplementals outside the normal budget ... basically saying he will be different from Bush. "McCain's web page didn't get very specific. Instead, it focused on smart spending practices,..." Because they'll be needed upon his plans to "remain overseas for 100 years"...:wah:...I have mixed feelings about this...All of me wants people to finish what they start and the least we could do is to stay and make sure Iraqs' future has at least a chance in hell...Apart of me wouldn't trust Bush on a leash...
Accountable;940534 wrote:
McCain has built a reputation over the years of treading very carefully when it comes to putting American lives in harm's way, no doubt because of his experiences as a Naval officer and Viet Nam POW. This is a good thing. I like McCain...He speaks from the heart...
Accountable;940534 wrote:
Barack Obama
Obama plans to increase military spending, expand the size of the military by at least 90,000 troops, modernize equipment, increase investment in airpower, electronic warfare, seapower, space power, missile defense, ... the rhetoric is impressive. He also was on the news today saying he wants peace without nuclear weapons.
The question is, how much of that is remotely realistic considering the current stance of the Democratic party. I agree it's important to keep up with military prestige but not at the expense of foreign relations...Armies are meant to repel not offend...
Accountable wrote:
Bob Barr
America should not be the world’s policeman. The American purpose is to provide a strong national defense, not to engage in nation building or to launch foreign crusades, no matter how seemingly well-intentioned.
It is time to reemphasize the word “defense” in national defense. By maintaining a military presence in more than 130 nations around the world in more than 700 installations, with hundreds of thousands of troops deployed overseas, the U.S. spends more to protect the soil of other nations than our own. Bringing these soldiers home would better protect America while saving lives and money. The U.S. requires a military strong enough to defend this nation, not to support and defend much of the rest of the world.
I am a US Air Force veteran of over 20 years. I greatly benefitted in a personal way from the US policy of establishing permanent bases in foreign lands. Nevertheless, that day is done. The Cold War is over. It is time our allies became our allies rather than our dependents. It is past time for our troops to pack up and come home.
For me: SCORE ONE FOR BARR :yh_sigh...Score one for Barr...:yh_sigh...:wah:...
Only joking...
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
The Candidates on Military Defense
K.Snyder;940593 wrote: "McCain's web page didn't get very specific. Instead, it focused on smart spending practices,..." Because they'll be needed upon his plans to "remain overseas for 100 years"...:wah:...I have mixed feelings about this...All of me wants people to finish what they start and the least we could do is to stay and make sure Iraqs' future has at least a chance in hell...Apart of me wouldn't trust Bush on a leash...
I like McCain...He speaks from the heart...
I agree it's important to keep up with military prestige but not at the expense of foreign relations...Armies are meant to repel not offend...
:yh_sigh...Score one for Barr...:yh_sigh...:wah:...
Only joking...
'kay. So who gets the score from you here?
I like McCain...He speaks from the heart...
I agree it's important to keep up with military prestige but not at the expense of foreign relations...Armies are meant to repel not offend...
:yh_sigh...Score one for Barr...:yh_sigh...:wah:...
Only joking...
'kay. So who gets the score from you here?
The Candidates on Military Defense
Accountable;940534[/INDENT wrote:
Bob Barr
America should not be the world’s policeman. The American purpose is to provide a strong national defense, not to engage in nation building or to launch foreign crusades, no matter how seemingly well-intentioned.
It is time to reemphasize the word “defense†in national defense. By maintaining a military presence in more than 130 nations around the world in more than 700 installations, with hundreds of thousands of troops deployed overseas, the U.S. spends more to protect the soil of other nations than our own. Bringing these soldiers home would better protect America while saving lives and money. The U.S. requires a military strong enough to defend this nation, not to support and defend much of the rest of the world.
I am a US Air Force veteran of over 20 years. I greatly benefitted in a personal way from the US policy of establishing permanent bases in foreign lands. Nevertheless, that day is done. The Cold War is over. It is time our allies became our allies rather than our dependents. It is past time for our troops to pack up and come home.
For me: SCORE ONE FOR BARR
I would love to see us pull back and just defend our own soil but this is a very complex world we are living in. How does Barr propose to accomplish the task without leaving behind blood baths all over the world? Do we just pull out and let millions die?
Bob Barr
America should not be the world’s policeman. The American purpose is to provide a strong national defense, not to engage in nation building or to launch foreign crusades, no matter how seemingly well-intentioned.
It is time to reemphasize the word “defense†in national defense. By maintaining a military presence in more than 130 nations around the world in more than 700 installations, with hundreds of thousands of troops deployed overseas, the U.S. spends more to protect the soil of other nations than our own. Bringing these soldiers home would better protect America while saving lives and money. The U.S. requires a military strong enough to defend this nation, not to support and defend much of the rest of the world.
I am a US Air Force veteran of over 20 years. I greatly benefitted in a personal way from the US policy of establishing permanent bases in foreign lands. Nevertheless, that day is done. The Cold War is over. It is time our allies became our allies rather than our dependents. It is past time for our troops to pack up and come home.
For me: SCORE ONE FOR BARR
I would love to see us pull back and just defend our own soil but this is a very complex world we are living in. How does Barr propose to accomplish the task without leaving behind blood baths all over the world? Do we just pull out and let millions die?
Schooling results in matriculation. Education is a process that changes the learner.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
The Candidates on Military Defense
Clint;940651 wrote: I would love to see us pull back and just defend our own soil but this is a very complex world we are living in. How does Barr propose to accomplish the task without leaving behind blood baths all over the world? Do we just pull out and let millions die?
Blood baths in England? Japan? Germany? Kuwait? Saudi Arabia? The Philippines? Panama? Ecuador? Italy? The Netherlands? Portugal? Spain? Cuba?
South Korea is questionable. There and all the rest except for Iraq can be equally shared by/with the rest of the UN nations, since we're ostensibly there as agents of the UN.
Blood baths in England? Japan? Germany? Kuwait? Saudi Arabia? The Philippines? Panama? Ecuador? Italy? The Netherlands? Portugal? Spain? Cuba?
South Korea is questionable. There and all the rest except for Iraq can be equally shared by/with the rest of the UN nations, since we're ostensibly there as agents of the UN.
The Candidates on Military Defense
Accountable;940672 wrote: Blood baths in England? Japan? Germany? Kuwait? Saudi Arabia? The Philippines? Panama? Ecuador? Italy? The Netherlands? Portugal? Spain? Cuba?
South Korea is questionable. There and all the rest except for Iraq can be equally shared by/with the rest of the UN nations, since we're ostensibly there as agents of the UN.
I suppose it's possible South Korea would survive but I doubt it. I think England, Japan, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal and Spain would suffer economic loss when we quit dumping money there but they would be just fine.
Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Afganastan and Iraq would experience more destabilization and who knows how many would die. Probably hundreds of thousands. And what happens to Israel?
It's hard to know how much or what we are doing in places like the Philippines, Panama nad Equador and whether or not lives would be lost.
What would happen to trade? Would we quit importing? If we do how do we supply the goods we've been importing? What happens if a third party starts messing with our ships or planes when we attempt to export or do we stop that too. If we don't stop how do we protect our merchant fleet without bases abroad?
Do you think we could continue tourism internationally without fear.
How will people here like the fact that battles to protect our borders will take place on our borders.
If another country is persistant in trying to invade us do we ever chase them to their homeland? If we do, do we wipe them off the map or do we establish a force where they live to keep them under control?
Does Barr have answers? I'd love to hear that he does.
South Korea is questionable. There and all the rest except for Iraq can be equally shared by/with the rest of the UN nations, since we're ostensibly there as agents of the UN.
I suppose it's possible South Korea would survive but I doubt it. I think England, Japan, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal and Spain would suffer economic loss when we quit dumping money there but they would be just fine.
Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Afganastan and Iraq would experience more destabilization and who knows how many would die. Probably hundreds of thousands. And what happens to Israel?
It's hard to know how much or what we are doing in places like the Philippines, Panama nad Equador and whether or not lives would be lost.
What would happen to trade? Would we quit importing? If we do how do we supply the goods we've been importing? What happens if a third party starts messing with our ships or planes when we attempt to export or do we stop that too. If we don't stop how do we protect our merchant fleet without bases abroad?
Do you think we could continue tourism internationally without fear.
How will people here like the fact that battles to protect our borders will take place on our borders.
If another country is persistant in trying to invade us do we ever chase them to their homeland? If we do, do we wipe them off the map or do we establish a force where they live to keep them under control?
Does Barr have answers? I'd love to hear that he does.
Schooling results in matriculation. Education is a process that changes the learner.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
The Candidates on Military Defense
Clint;940685 wrote: I suppose it's possible South Korea would survive but I doubt it. I think England, Japan, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal and Spain would suffer economic loss when we quit dumping money there but they would be just fine.
Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Afganastan and Iraq would experience more destabilization and who knows how many would die. Probably hundreds of thousands. And what happens to Israel?
It's hard to know how much or what we are doing in places like the Philippines, Panama nad Equador and whether or not lives would be lost.
How will people here like the fact that battles to protect our borders will take place on our borders.
If another country is persistant in trying to invade us do we ever chase them to their homeland? If we do, do we wipe them off the map or do we establish a force where they live to keep them under control?
Does Barr have answers? I'd love to hear that he does.
We can hit anywhere in the world from Shreveport, Louisiana. Did it during Desert Storm. The aircrews left, dropped their payload, and returned to sleep in their own beds. I think we'll be fine except for the crazies, and outposts only make it easier for the crazies.
Kuwait and Saudi Arabia never had stability problems. We moved in there in the first Gulf War. Moving out will not destabilize them. As for Iraq, hell, everybody has exit strategies & time tables now.
Why is Israel our responsibility alone?
Clint wrote: What would happen to trade? Would we quit importing? If we do how do we supply the goods we've been importing? What happens if a third party starts messing with our ships or planes when we attempt to export or do we stop that too. If we don't stop how do we protect our merchant fleet without bases abroad?
Do you think we could continue tourism internationally without fear.Are you serious? Why on earth would we stop importing? What's trade got to do with our military on another sovreign nation's soil? Honestly, I don't get this whole line of questions.
Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Afganastan and Iraq would experience more destabilization and who knows how many would die. Probably hundreds of thousands. And what happens to Israel?
It's hard to know how much or what we are doing in places like the Philippines, Panama nad Equador and whether or not lives would be lost.
How will people here like the fact that battles to protect our borders will take place on our borders.
If another country is persistant in trying to invade us do we ever chase them to their homeland? If we do, do we wipe them off the map or do we establish a force where they live to keep them under control?
Does Barr have answers? I'd love to hear that he does.
We can hit anywhere in the world from Shreveport, Louisiana. Did it during Desert Storm. The aircrews left, dropped their payload, and returned to sleep in their own beds. I think we'll be fine except for the crazies, and outposts only make it easier for the crazies.
Kuwait and Saudi Arabia never had stability problems. We moved in there in the first Gulf War. Moving out will not destabilize them. As for Iraq, hell, everybody has exit strategies & time tables now.
Why is Israel our responsibility alone?
Clint wrote: What would happen to trade? Would we quit importing? If we do how do we supply the goods we've been importing? What happens if a third party starts messing with our ships or planes when we attempt to export or do we stop that too. If we don't stop how do we protect our merchant fleet without bases abroad?
Do you think we could continue tourism internationally without fear.Are you serious? Why on earth would we stop importing? What's trade got to do with our military on another sovreign nation's soil? Honestly, I don't get this whole line of questions.
The Candidates on Military Defense
Accountable;940631 wrote: 'kay. So who gets the score from you here?
I'm a bit undecided...
I'm completely against waging war upon a country only to leave leaving that very same country in the same shape it was in and worse case scenario being it being left in worse shape than from which we began...
I was completely for Hussein being ousted and would sincerely hope others were as well...Are we forgetting about that part, or did people like Hussein?...
I myself would have rather seen it go about differently but obviously a high school drop out from Ohio doesn't have much influence when it comes to who the United States of America and it's accomplices wage war on...
I feel war should be the last resort and that in this day in age we're at a relatively acceptable state of contention...Therefore the only reasonable military spending, within my own view, is for and only for the defense of this country, while at the same time I feel policing the world is absolutely wanted and needed but should be done so without any discrepancy...That's to say it should be implemented upon events that are undeniable to the world in being inhuman...
As for technically I would like to read up more on what Barr has to offer...
I'm a bit undecided...
I'm completely against waging war upon a country only to leave leaving that very same country in the same shape it was in and worse case scenario being it being left in worse shape than from which we began...
I was completely for Hussein being ousted and would sincerely hope others were as well...Are we forgetting about that part, or did people like Hussein?...
I myself would have rather seen it go about differently but obviously a high school drop out from Ohio doesn't have much influence when it comes to who the United States of America and it's accomplices wage war on...
I feel war should be the last resort and that in this day in age we're at a relatively acceptable state of contention...Therefore the only reasonable military spending, within my own view, is for and only for the defense of this country, while at the same time I feel policing the world is absolutely wanted and needed but should be done so without any discrepancy...That's to say it should be implemented upon events that are undeniable to the world in being inhuman...
As for technically I would like to read up more on what Barr has to offer...
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
The Candidates on Military Defense
K.Snyder;940818 wrote: As for technically I would like to read up more on what Barr has to offer...
http://www.bobbarr2008.com/
http://www.ontheissues.org/Bob_Barr.htm
http://www.bobbarr2008.com/
http://www.ontheissues.org/Bob_Barr.htm
The Candidates on Military Defense
Clint;940651 wrote: I would love to see us pull back and just defend our own soil but this is a very complex world we are living in. How does Barr propose to accomplish the task without leaving behind blood baths all over the world? Do we just pull out and let millions die?
Speaking as one of the occupied, fewer will die if you leave than if you stay. It is past time for your troops to pack up and go home.
Speaking as one of the occupied, fewer will die if you leave than if you stay. It is past time for your troops to pack up and go home.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Candidates on Military Defense
posted by clint
I suppose it's possible South Korea would survive but I doubt it. I think England, Japan, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal and Spain would suffer economic loss when we quit dumping money there but they would be just fine.
That has got to be one of the most unintentionally funny posts I've seen on this forum. You really do believe America holds the world together don't you?
I suppose it's possible South Korea would survive but I doubt it. I think England, Japan, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal and Spain would suffer economic loss when we quit dumping money there but they would be just fine.
That has got to be one of the most unintentionally funny posts I've seen on this forum. You really do believe America holds the world together don't you?
The Candidates on Military Defense
Without wanting to break the flow of the thread, we had a ruler of England once who gave the appropriate words for the times. They fit this context perfectly.It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice; ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.
Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess? Ye have no more religion than my horse; gold is your God; which of you have not barter'd your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?
Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defil'd this sacred place, and turn'd the Lord's temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices? Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redress'd, are yourselves gone! So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors. In the name of God, go!The shining bauble is the mace which denoted a living parliament. The speaker was Oliver Cromwell. The year was 1653.
Anyway - enough of where your armed forces are based. back to "The Candidates on Military Defense".
Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess? Ye have no more religion than my horse; gold is your God; which of you have not barter'd your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?
Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defil'd this sacred place, and turn'd the Lord's temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices? Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redress'd, are yourselves gone! So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors. In the name of God, go!The shining bauble is the mace which denoted a living parliament. The speaker was Oliver Cromwell. The year was 1653.
Anyway - enough of where your armed forces are based. back to "The Candidates on Military Defense".
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Candidates on Military Defense
spot;940848 wrote: Without wanting to break the flow of the thread, we had a ruler of England once who gave the appropriate words for the times. They fit this context perfectly.It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice; ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.
Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess? Ye have no more religion than my horse; gold is your God; which of you have not barter'd your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?
Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defil'd this sacred place, and turn'd the Lord's temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices? Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redress'd, are yourselves gone! So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors. In the name of God, go!The shining bauble is the mace which denoted a living parliament. The speaker was Oliver Cromwell. The year was 1653.
Anyway - enough of where your armed forces are based. back to "The Candidates on Military Defense".
"You" in this context has various implications...
It's not as if governments can't change, nor for the betterment of all peoples let alone themselves for that matter...
Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess? Ye have no more religion than my horse; gold is your God; which of you have not barter'd your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?
Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defil'd this sacred place, and turn'd the Lord's temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices? Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redress'd, are yourselves gone! So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors. In the name of God, go!The shining bauble is the mace which denoted a living parliament. The speaker was Oliver Cromwell. The year was 1653.
Anyway - enough of where your armed forces are based. back to "The Candidates on Military Defense".
"You" in this context has various implications...
It's not as if governments can't change, nor for the betterment of all peoples let alone themselves for that matter...
The Candidates on Military Defense
K.Snyder;940851 wrote: It's not as if governments can't change, nor for the betterment of all peoples let alone themselves for that matter...Take your armed forces home, practice until you work out what they're really for and then ask permission for them to come back out again, how's that?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Candidates on Military Defense
spot;940854 wrote: Take your armed forces home, practice until you work out what they're really for and then ask permission for them to come back out again, how's that?
Since we're talking about me in the context of "your" I would have deployed my armed forces into countries that needed my assistance without any question as to whether or not it was morally obligatory to begin with, rendering "Take your armed forces home" scarce of pragmatism...
Since we're talking about me in the context of "your" I would have deployed my armed forces into countries that needed my assistance without any question as to whether or not it was morally obligatory to begin with, rendering "Take your armed forces home" scarce of pragmatism...
The Candidates on Military Defense
K.Snyder;940857 wrote: Since we're talking about me in the context of "your" I would have deployed my armed forces into countries that needed my assistance without any question as to whether or not it was morally obligatory to begin with, rendering "Take your armed forces home" scarce of pragmatism...
You do pay their salaries, don't you?
You do pay their salaries, don't you?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Candidates on Military Defense
spot;940860 wrote: You do pay their salaries, don't you?
I pay enough for them to take a bite of a potato now and again...
I pay enough for them to take a bite of a potato now and again...
The Candidates on Military Defense
K.Snyder;940877 wrote: I pay enough for them to take a bite of a potato now and again...
I hold you personally responsible for their deployment then, along with all the other taxpayers who refuse to withhold their contributions.
I hold you personally responsible for their deployment then, along with all the other taxpayers who refuse to withhold their contributions.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Candidates on Military Defense
spot;940880 wrote: I hold you personally responsible for their deployment then, along with all the other taxpayers who refuse to withhold their contributions.
That's your prerogative.
That's your prerogative.
The Candidates on Military Defense
spot;940880 wrote: I hold you personally responsible for their deployment then, along with all the other taxpayers who refuse to withhold their contributions.
By this logic you've helped deploy my troops as well in the purchasing of any materials or products from which had been imported to the UK by the United States of America...
By this logic you've helped deploy my troops as well in the purchasing of any materials or products from which had been imported to the UK by the United States of America...
The Candidates on Military Defense
K.Snyder;940896 wrote: By this logic you've helped deploy my troops as well in the purchasing of any materials or products from which had been imported to the UK by the United States of America...
Gosh no - the last year the UK imported more from the US than it sold to the US was 1998. On balance, you pay us. We drain potential cash from your armed forces.
http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c4120.html
Gosh no - the last year the UK imported more from the US than it sold to the US was 1998. On balance, you pay us. We drain potential cash from your armed forces.
http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c4120.html
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Candidates on Military Defense
spot;940918 wrote: Gosh no - the last year the UK imported more from the US than it sold to the US was 1998. On balance, you pay us. We drain potential cash from your armed forces.
http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c4120.html
You hadn't purchased any precious metals within products in the year 1998?...
No matter,..you've bought an account on an indigenously American website from which payed taxes to that very same American government to whom deploys American troops into foreign countries by virtue of will...That website being the one enabling us to interact as we are now...
Besides,..paying taxes is in my best interests in terms of health and prosperity as well as others'...It's not up to me to whom steal the taxes I pay intended to go to the prosperity of society to use my army not to my liking...
http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c4120.html
You hadn't purchased any precious metals within products in the year 1998?...
No matter,..you've bought an account on an indigenously American website from which payed taxes to that very same American government to whom deploys American troops into foreign countries by virtue of will...That website being the one enabling us to interact as we are now...
Besides,..paying taxes is in my best interests in terms of health and prosperity as well as others'...It's not up to me to whom steal the taxes I pay intended to go to the prosperity of society to use my army not to my liking...
The Candidates on Military Defense
Accountable;940768 wrote:
Why is Israel our responsibility alone?
Are you serious? Why on earth would we stop importing? What's trade got to do with our military on another sovreign nation's soil? Honestly, I don't get this whole line of questions.
I don't know that Israel is our responsibiity alone but we sure have a significant role.
Isn't Barr an isolationist? That's where the line of questions came from.
Why is Israel our responsibility alone?
Are you serious? Why on earth would we stop importing? What's trade got to do with our military on another sovreign nation's soil? Honestly, I don't get this whole line of questions.
I don't know that Israel is our responsibiity alone but we sure have a significant role.
Isn't Barr an isolationist? That's where the line of questions came from.
Schooling results in matriculation. Education is a process that changes the learner.
The Candidates on Military Defense
Why, Clint? Why does the US have a "significant role" in Israel? It's not one of your states. Its citizens aren't citizens of the US. Where does this responsibility come from?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
The Candidates on Military Defense
Clint;940943 wrote: I don't know that Israel is our responsibiity alone but we sure have a significant role.
Isn't Barr an isolationist? That's where the line of questions came from.
Not so far as anything I read indicates.
http://www.bobbarr2008.com/issues/spending-economy/
The second paragraph here says he wants to stay competitive in the global market.
Isn't Barr an isolationist? That's where the line of questions came from.
Not so far as anything I read indicates.
http://www.bobbarr2008.com/issues/spending-economy/
The second paragraph here says he wants to stay competitive in the global market.
The Candidates on Military Defense
gmc;940845 wrote: posted by clint
That has got to be one of the most unintentionally funny posts I've seen on this forum. You really do believe America holds the world together don't you?
No, I don't. I acknowledged the fact that we spend money in places we have troops. I also said that if we brought them home those places would not have that money but would do just fine. What is there to argue about?
We find ourselves committed all over the world because of actions taken with good intentions. Many of the places we have military have long since stabilized. How we would go about bringing them home with minimum impact is of interest to me. How we prevent future obligations of the same nature is also something we should be working on. It isn't as easy as just deciding not to do it.
That has got to be one of the most unintentionally funny posts I've seen on this forum. You really do believe America holds the world together don't you?
No, I don't. I acknowledged the fact that we spend money in places we have troops. I also said that if we brought them home those places would not have that money but would do just fine. What is there to argue about?
We find ourselves committed all over the world because of actions taken with good intentions. Many of the places we have military have long since stabilized. How we would go about bringing them home with minimum impact is of interest to me. How we prevent future obligations of the same nature is also something we should be working on. It isn't as easy as just deciding not to do it.
Schooling results in matriculation. Education is a process that changes the learner.
The Candidates on Military Defense
spot;940944 wrote: Why, Clint? Why does the US have a "significant role" in Israel? It's not one of your states. Its citizens aren't citizens of the US. Where does this responsibility come from?
They expect our support because we have openly and enthusiastically promised to provided it for the past 60 years.
They expect our support because we have openly and enthusiastically promised to provided it for the past 60 years.
Schooling results in matriculation. Education is a process that changes the learner.
The Candidates on Military Defense
Clint;940966 wrote: They expect our support because we have openly and enthusiastically promised to provided it for the past 60 years.
Would you like a history lesson? The USA has done no such thing.
Would you like a history lesson? The USA has done no such thing.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Candidates on Military Defense
Clint;940966 wrote: They expect our support because we have openly and enthusiastically promised to provided it for the past 60 years.
Do they want it?...
Do they want it?...
The Candidates on Military Defense
spot;940967 wrote: Would you like a history lesson? The USA has done no such thing.
Maybe not as many times this year as in the past.
Maybe not as many times this year as in the past.
Schooling results in matriculation. Education is a process that changes the learner.
The Candidates on Military Defense
K.Snyder;940968 wrote: Do they want it?...
I don't know. They sure like our equipment. Patriot missles weren't made in Syria.
I don't know. They sure like our equipment. Patriot missles weren't made in Syria.
Schooling results in matriculation. Education is a process that changes the learner.
The Candidates on Military Defense
Here's a link that may help. The U.S. definately supports Israel.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/ju ... estinians1
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/ju ... estinians1
Schooling results in matriculation. Education is a process that changes the learner.
The Candidates on Military Defense
Here's another link relevant to the topic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mili ... of_GDP.svg
Three areas of crippling antisocial waste there: Saudi Arabia, China and the USA. By all means pour the money down the drain but at least get some social return from it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mili ... of_GDP.svg
Three areas of crippling antisocial waste there: Saudi Arabia, China and the USA. By all means pour the money down the drain but at least get some social return from it.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Candidates on Military Defense
Accountable;940534 wrote: John McCain
In a dangerous world, protecting America's national security requires a strong military. Today, America has the most capable, best-trained and best-led military force in the world. But much needs to be done to maintain our military leadership, retain our technological advantage, and ensure that America has a modern, agile military force able to meet the diverse security challenges of the 21st century.
As President, John McCain will strengthen the military, shore up our alliances, and ensure that the nation is capable of protecting the homeland, deterring potential military challenges, responding to any crisis that endangers American security, and prevailing in any conflict we are forced to fight.
McCain's web page didn't get very specific. Instead, it focused on smart spending practices, fighting pork-barrel spending, avoiding emergency supplementals outside the normal budget ... basically saying he will be different from Bush.
McCain has built a reputation over the years of treading very carefully when it comes to putting American lives in harm's way, no doubt because of his experiences as a Naval officer and Viet Nam POW. This is a good thing.
Barack Obama
Obama plans to increase military spending, expand the size of the military by at least 90,000 troops, modernize equipment, increase investment in airpower, electronic warfare, seapower, space power, missile defense, ... the rhetoric is impressive. He also was on the news today saying he wants peace without nuclear weapons.
The question is, how much of that is remotely realistic considering the current stance of the Democratic party.
Bob Barr
America should not be the world’s policeman. The American purpose is to provide a strong national defense, not to engage in nation building or to launch foreign crusades, no matter how seemingly well-intentioned.
It is time to reemphasize the word “defense†in national defense. By maintaining a military presence in more than 130 nations around the world in more than 700 installations, with hundreds of thousands of troops deployed overseas, the U.S. spends more to protect the soil of other nations than our own. Bringing these soldiers home would better protect America while saving lives and money. The U.S. requires a military strong enough to defend this nation, not to support and defend much of the rest of the world.
I am a US Air Force veteran of over 20 years. I greatly benefitted in a personal way from the US policy of establishing permanent bases in foreign lands. Nevertheless, that day is done. The Cold War is over. It is time our allies became our allies rather than our dependents. It is past time for our troops to pack up and come home.
For me: SCORE ONE FOR BARR
Score one? For me it's game set and match.
In a dangerous world, protecting America's national security requires a strong military. Today, America has the most capable, best-trained and best-led military force in the world. But much needs to be done to maintain our military leadership, retain our technological advantage, and ensure that America has a modern, agile military force able to meet the diverse security challenges of the 21st century.
As President, John McCain will strengthen the military, shore up our alliances, and ensure that the nation is capable of protecting the homeland, deterring potential military challenges, responding to any crisis that endangers American security, and prevailing in any conflict we are forced to fight.
McCain's web page didn't get very specific. Instead, it focused on smart spending practices, fighting pork-barrel spending, avoiding emergency supplementals outside the normal budget ... basically saying he will be different from Bush.
McCain has built a reputation over the years of treading very carefully when it comes to putting American lives in harm's way, no doubt because of his experiences as a Naval officer and Viet Nam POW. This is a good thing.
Barack Obama
Obama plans to increase military spending, expand the size of the military by at least 90,000 troops, modernize equipment, increase investment in airpower, electronic warfare, seapower, space power, missile defense, ... the rhetoric is impressive. He also was on the news today saying he wants peace without nuclear weapons.
The question is, how much of that is remotely realistic considering the current stance of the Democratic party.
Bob Barr
America should not be the world’s policeman. The American purpose is to provide a strong national defense, not to engage in nation building or to launch foreign crusades, no matter how seemingly well-intentioned.
It is time to reemphasize the word “defense†in national defense. By maintaining a military presence in more than 130 nations around the world in more than 700 installations, with hundreds of thousands of troops deployed overseas, the U.S. spends more to protect the soil of other nations than our own. Bringing these soldiers home would better protect America while saving lives and money. The U.S. requires a military strong enough to defend this nation, not to support and defend much of the rest of the world.
I am a US Air Force veteran of over 20 years. I greatly benefitted in a personal way from the US policy of establishing permanent bases in foreign lands. Nevertheless, that day is done. The Cold War is over. It is time our allies became our allies rather than our dependents. It is past time for our troops to pack up and come home.
For me: SCORE ONE FOR BARR
Score one? For me it's game set and match.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
The Candidates on Military Defense
spot;941235 wrote: Here's another link relevant to the topic.
Which topic?
Which topic?
The Candidates on Military Defense
Accountable;941250 wrote: Which topic?
Presidential Elections & Campaigns: The Candidates on Military Defense
Presidential Elections & Campaigns: The Candidates on Military Defense
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
The Candidates on Military Defense
spot;941255 wrote: Presidential Elections & Campaigns: The Candidates on Military Defense
Didn't find a word about the candidates stance on military defense, but it does bolster my assertion that our allies are our dependents militarily.
Didn't find a word about the candidates stance on military defense, but it does bolster my assertion that our allies are our dependents militarily.
The Candidates on Military Defense
Accountable;941281 wrote: Didn't find a word about the candidates stance on military defense, but it does bolster my assertion that our allies are our dependents militarily.
It's the common background to the discussion about the candidates stance on military defense. Nobody outside of the US wants anything to do with the military fantasies or the invented enemies of the USA, it's nothing but an excuse to make profits from building weapons systems. Weapons systems are boring, do something useful instead.
It's the common background to the discussion about the candidates stance on military defense. Nobody outside of the US wants anything to do with the military fantasies or the invented enemies of the USA, it's nothing but an excuse to make profits from building weapons systems. Weapons systems are boring, do something useful instead.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
The Candidates on Military Defense
Why does not having military stationed in a country automatically mean isolation, stopping trade, and staying ignorant of the rest of the world???? When I was military, nobody asked me what was happening around me, yet somehow everybody knew. There are no European bases in the US, yet strangely they know what goes on here.
The conclusions don't match the arguments.
The conclusions don't match the arguments.
The Candidates on Military Defense
K.Snyder;940888 wrote: That's your prerogative.
Well said KS!:wah:
Well said KS!:wah:
I expressly forbid the use of any of my posts anywhere outside of FG (with the exception of the incredibly witty 'get a room already' )posted recently.
Folks who'd like to copy my intellectual work should expect to pay me for it.:-6
Folks who'd like to copy my intellectual work should expect to pay me for it.:-6
The Candidates on Military Defense
Accountable;941806 wrote: Why does not having military stationed in a country automatically mean isolation, stopping trade, and staying ignorant of the rest of the world???? When I was military, nobody asked me what was happening around me, yet somehow everybody knew. There are no European bases in the US, yet strangely they know what goes on here.
The conclusions don't match the arguments.
I'm not trying to justify anything rather playing Devils Advocate...
I don't think defining isolationism to be limited to non-interventionism...I mean isn't it a concern of anyones as to the free trade of countries to whom have displayed they're immorality?...
North Korea comes to mind...
The conclusions don't match the arguments.
I'm not trying to justify anything rather playing Devils Advocate...
I don't think defining isolationism to be limited to non-interventionism...I mean isn't it a concern of anyones as to the free trade of countries to whom have displayed they're immorality?...
North Korea comes to mind...
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
The Candidates on Military Defense
Jester;942455 wrote: I dont think it does mean all those things stop, I just noted that the economy around those bases will take a hit. But I think they will recover. I think we need to strategically readjust our armies to locations that make sense for the 21st century.
I agree, though I'm sure we would define that differently. But you also said we learn so much by being out there rather than stuck on line looking out having no idea how the world works, and Clint seems to think that closing our military bases would put an end to tourism. :-2:-2:-2
I agree, though I'm sure we would define that differently. But you also said we learn so much by being out there rather than stuck on line looking out having no idea how the world works, and Clint seems to think that closing our military bases would put an end to tourism. :-2:-2:-2
The Candidates on Military Defense
Accountable;942676 wrote: I agree, though I'm sure we would define that differently. But you also said we learn so much by being out there rather than stuck on line looking out having no idea how the world works, and Clint seems to think that closing our military bases would put an end to tourism. :-2:-2:-2
Yes, and don't forget whale migration.
Yes, and don't forget whale migration.
Schooling results in matriculation. Education is a process that changes the learner.
The Candidates on Military Defense
Accountable;942676 wrote: I agree, though I'm sure we would define that differently. But you also said we learn so much by being out there rather than stuck on line looking out having no idea how the world works, and Clint seems to think that closing our military bases would put an end to tourism. :-2:-2:-2
Look how much you have learned from being out there, things like how to make jet engines, radar, fly planes off carriers build rockets to launch satellites, television, telephones, computers, electricity, how to refine oil, make internal combustion engines, rubber tyres, bicycles, penicillin, antibiotics anaesthetics etc etc. America can't afford to shut itself away from the rest of the world. :sneaky:
It wouldn't end tourism though-with the way the dollar is going american holidays are looking really cheap.
Look how much you have learned from being out there, things like how to make jet engines, radar, fly planes off carriers build rockets to launch satellites, television, telephones, computers, electricity, how to refine oil, make internal combustion engines, rubber tyres, bicycles, penicillin, antibiotics anaesthetics etc etc. America can't afford to shut itself away from the rest of the world. :sneaky:
It wouldn't end tourism though-with the way the dollar is going american holidays are looking really cheap.