Fiscal Cliff Prediction

[(SWGO)SirPepsi]

if you reduce the defense budget too much, other countries like Iran, Venezuela, Russia, China and all of those that belong to that group .... will start partying and doing whatever they want with the world. You reduce spending too much and north Korea will continue to look for trouble too. If the U.S stays as it is, at least there will be a reason for maniacs in power to think twice about doing something stupid.

And this is why the idiots in Congress have not been held accountable for their out of control military defense spending. What you say is undeniably false. Firstly, Venezuela's military (government sponsored, not terrorist or drug cartel groups) is not a threat to national security. Iran has maintained peace with the US for the past 40 years...after the Iranian Hostage Crisis that our greed and puppet-leader caused.

Did you seriously mention Russia? That nation is swirling in economic troubles, any military action originating there would most likely be a result of the ongoing Chechnyan conflict - not by the government, which is having trouble solving its depopulation and low life expectancy problems, not to mention lack of national patriotism.

China? The Chinese are anything but militarily hostile to the US. W/out the US, the Chinese economy falls to shambles - we are, by far, their largest consumer, and they would do anything to protect that - not harm it.

I do not hold an opinion on what you said about N. Korea.

The key is not to spend more, but to spend more efficiently.

[Darth Crater]

We literally spend as much money on defense as the next 14 highest countries combined. And at least half the others on that list, including numbers 4-6, are allies. We could cut the budget in half and nobody would notice but the defense contractors.

[kjeopardy]

We literally spend as much money on defense as the next 14 highest countries combined. And at least half the others on that list, including numbers 4-6, are allies. We could cut the budget in half and nobody would notice but the defense contractors.

One word: lobbyists, my friend...

(I don't know for a fact that they have a strong lobby, by I am supposing so)

[CommanderOtto]

if you reduce the defense budget too much, other countries like Iran, Venezuela, Russia, China and all of those that belong to that group .... will start partying and doing whatever they want with the world. You reduce spending too much and north Korea will continue to look for trouble too. If the U.S stays as it is, at least there will be a reason for maniacs in power to think twice about doing something stupid.

And this is why the idiots in Congress have not been held accountable for their out of control military defense spending. What you say is undeniably false. Firstly, Venezuela's military (government sponsored, not terrorist or drug cartel groups) is not a threat to national security. Iran has maintained peace with the US for the past 40 years...after the Iranian Hostage Crisis that our greed and puppet-leader caused.

Did you seriously mention Russia? That nation is swirling in economic troubles, any military action originating there would most likely be a result of the ongoing Chechnyan conflict - not by the government, which is having trouble solving its depopulation and low life expectancy problems, not to mention lack of national patriotism.

China? The Chinese are anything but militarily hostile to the US. W/out the US, the Chinese economy falls to shambles - we are, by far, their largest consumer, and they would do anything to protect that - not harm it.

I do not hold an opinion on what you said about N. Korea.

The key is not to spend more, but to spend more efficiently.

not everything is about national security. Sometimes it's about exercising power in the interest of your country. And yeah, spend more efficiently is what I mean.

if the u.s had no military power, believe me, chavez would have stopped sending you oil decades ago, or China would have invaded Taiwan a long time ago, or North Korea would have invaded the south a long time ago, which is obviously bad for everyone. what I mean is, just having enough for national security is not the idea. Every country wants to have power to protect it's interests... the more of it, the better (doesn't need to be military power though). That's why americans enjoy such a good lifestyle compared to other countries. you guys have had presidents that understand that a better lifestyle for americans is closely related to excercising power abroad. That's why countries with no army are doomed to be controlled by everyone. That's why Brazil, for example, was never able to exercise enough economic and political control over south america... they have a crappy army.

so... don't reduce the defense budget too much!!

EDIT:

Iran has maintained peace with the US for the past 40 years...after the Iranian Hostage Crisis that our greed and puppet-leader caused.

oh so Iran is not a threat to the american interests???

Did you seriously mention Russia? That nation is swirling in economic troubles, any military action originating there would most likely be a result of the ongoing Chechnyan conflict - not by the government, which is having trouble solving its depopulation and low life expectancy problems, not to mention lack of national patriotism

the russians have had social problems throughout its history. That did not stop them from causing fear in the U.S and starting an arms race known as the cold war. Today, they sell arms to anyone who is an enemy of the United States. No one can stop them from doing that, precisely because they have an army that kicks ass.

and chill out man, this ain't a debate. Some of you guys talk about this like if these comments were being broadcast in tv. Now i'll sit back and watch a bunch of you copy and paste my comments and say i'm wrong because I was not superspecific about [poo]... just to remind some of you, this is a forum thread, not a presidential debate or an essay competition, many things/details are being left out. That said, next time, think a bit more before saying "What you say is undeniably false"... you have your views, I have mine.

[(SWGO)SirPepsi]

not everything is about national security. Sometimes it's about exercising power in the interest of your country. And yeah, spend more efficiently is what I mean.

if the u.s had no military power, believe me, chavez would have stopped sending you oil decades ago ??, or China would have invaded Taiwan a long time ago Not our problem, or North Korea would have invaded the south a long time ago No, they would not have. UN Peacekeeping..., which is obviously bad for everyone. what I mean is, just having enough for national security is not the idea. Every country wants to have power to protect it's interests... the more of it, the better Not true, this is how corruption and debt develop (doesn't need to be military power though). That's why americans enjoy such a good lifestyle compared to other countries. you guys have had presidents that understand that a better lifestyle for americans is closely related to excercising power abroad. Not always. Most of it is a result of a large middle class and strong domestic output.That's why countries with no army are doomed to be controlled by everyone. That's why Brazil, for example, was never able to exercise enough economic and political control over south america... they have a crappy army.

so... don't reduce the defense budget too much!!

EDIT:

Iran has maintained peace with the US for the past 40 years...after the Iranian Hostage Crisis that our greed and puppet-leader caused.

oh so Iran is not a threat to the american interests???

Did you seriously mention Russia? That nation is swirling in economic troubles, any military action originating there would most likely be a result of the ongoing Chechnyan conflict - not by the government, which is having trouble solving its depopulation and low life expectancy problems, not to mention lack of national patriotism

the russians have had social problems throughout its history. That did not stop them from causing fear in the U.S and starting an arms race known as the cold war. Today, they sell arms to anyone who is an enemy of the United States BS, they sell to anyone who has the money to pay for it. And currently, they sell technology, not arms.. No one can stop them from doing that, precisely because they have an army that kicks ass. No, they don't. Nuclear warheads do not account for a ground force.

and chill out man, this ain't a debate. Some of you guys talk about this like if these comments were being broadcast in tv. Now i'll sit back and watch a bunch of you copy and paste my comments and say i'm wrong because I was not superspecific about [poo]... just to remind some of you, this is a forum thread, not a presidential debate or an essay competition, many things/details are being left out. That said, next time, think a bit more before saying "What you say is undeniably false"... you have your views, I have mine. Being factually incorrect is not a "view."

[CommanderOtto]

Being factually incorrect is not a "view."

wow pepsi, so I am suddenly an ignorant person because you don't read newspapers... and regarding the russians, BS?? lol they build ak-37s, submarines and jets and sell it... hell, like if every country has a fighter jet industry to start producing them. If that's factually incorrect go get a subscription of Time magazine or the New York Times.

and the UN peacekeeping might as well not exist.. they have never done anything to bring peace. Look at africa, that's practically the permanent home of UN peacekeeping. They just stand there while a bunch of guys carrying ak-47s shoot at the population. Look at the failure of Somalia's so called peacekeeping.

I know much more about international politics and war than you. I have a collection of military books that belonged to my dad and grandfather who used to be in the army, and I have read most of them... so, even though I agree with you that the budget needed to be reduced, you obviously couldn't stop from telling me I was wrong about everything just because you think you know more or because you feel it's necessary to prove me wrong, I don't know... pfft

oh nevermind... i'll just get out of here lol. m'kay these political threads.

"wow I like this icecream"
"BS, you are totally wrong, you are so ignorant.. it's a gelato".

[THEWULFMAN]

I think I found an answer that makes sense. Our gov't knows about aliens and their impending invasion, so they're just preparing.



No but seriously. Modern warfare is decided in the sky, and quite frankly we have an amazing air force. Probably close to the top of the best if not the literal best. I say that because the IAF is amazing as well and I don't feel a need to directly compare them.

Any nation without a proper air force can not protect their tanks and navy. Without tanks and navy, you've effectively lost the war.

Iran is a threat to Israel. If they try and launch a nuclear strike against them, either the nuke will be shot down or the responding Israeli attack will turn Iran into a sheet of nuclear glass. Iran is not a threat to us.

I completely agree with Pepsi about China in his first post, nosomuch about Taiwan in his most recent post though. The only real military hostility between us involves Taiwan and their desire for it. We continue to protect Taiwan as long as they want us to.

N. Korea is only a minor threat to S. Korea. I say minor, because the US and S. Korean military would crush the N. Koreans in weeks. We've been training for years.

Venezuela... don't know much about their military. Let me read up on them.

Lol. Turns out we sold F-16's to them and Venezuela has done joint-exercises with the rest of S. America.

Yeah, no, no problems there.

EDIT: Otto posted before I could.

Russia doesn't even produce AK-47's anymore. They're onto the AK-74, which is outdated and they should completely switch to the AK-101, AK-102, AK-103, AK-104, and AK-105. Why do they still use AK-74's? Because they can't afford to replace them all in their own army.

Yes, they produce jets. Yes, they sell them to anyone who is buying generally. This doesn't not mean they're an enemy of the United States. Not to mention the lower quality of jets they are, and the lower quality of the pilots of fly them.

Submarines? Lol. Minor threat if anything. We have the brand new P-8 Poseidon anti-submarine aircraft. It's expensive as hell, but I didn't mention it in my list because I felt it was useful and needed.

And finally, I don't like how you just came straight out and said you know more than Pepsi. But what goes around comes around, I generally will know more than you about the military. Studying warfare has been a passion for the last decade of my life. I study books my dad has, but also research things on the net, and read different articles in different magazines (U.S. Proceedings and Naval History) to give me a better idea of our current world.

[CommanderOtto]

I think I found an answer that makes sense. Our gov't knows about aliens and their impending invasion, so they're just preparing.



No but seriously. Modern warfare is decided in the sky, and quite frankly we have an amazing air force. Probably close to the top of the best if not the literal best. I say that because the IAF is amazing as well and I don't feel a need to directly compare them.

Any nation without a proper air force can not protect their tanks and navy. Without tanks and navy, you've effectively lost the war.

Iran is a threat to Israel. If they try and launch a nuclear strike against them, either the nuke will be shot down or the responding Israeli attack will turn Iran into a sheet of nuclear glass. Iran is not a threat to us.

I completely agree with Pepsi about China in his first post, nosomuch about Taiwan in his most recent post though. The only real military hostility between us involves Taiwan and their desire for it. We continue to protect Taiwan as long as they want us to.

N. Korea is only a minor threat to S. Korea. I say minor, because the US and S. Korean military would crush the N. Koreans in weeks. We've been training for years.

Venezuela... don't know much about their military. Let me read up on them.

Lol. Turns out we sold F-16's to them and Venezuela has done joint-exercises with the rest of S. America.

Yeah, no, no problems there.

EDIT: Otto posted before I could.

Russia doesn't even produce AK-47's anymore. They're onto the AK-74, which is outdated and they should completely switch to the AK-101, AK-102, AK-103, AK-104, and AK-105. Why do they still use AK-74's? Because they can't afford to replace them all in their own army.

Yes, they produce jets. Yes, they sell them to anyone who is buying generally. This doesn't not mean they're an enemy of the United States. Not to mention the lower quality of jets they are, and the lower quality of the pilots of fly them.

Submarines? Lol. Minor threat if anything. We have the brand new P-8 Poseidon anti-submarine aircraft. It's expensive as hell, but I didn't mention it in my list because I felt it was useful and needed.

And finally, I don't like how you just came straight out and said you know more than Pepsi. But what goes around comes around, I generally will know more than you about the military. Studying warfare has been a passion for the last decade of my life. I study books my dad has, but also research things on the net, and read different articles in different magazines (U.S. Proceedings and Naval History) to give me a better idea of our current world.

I don't want to say i'm better than him...but it's so freakin annoying when everything you say is Wrong, wrong wrong... jeez. I don't interrupt people in conversations in real life and say they are totally wrong even though I know they are...

but I do know a lot of military warfare too... and well, ok, it's not ak-47s, but now it's something with another new name. What's the difference. And russians don't make crappy airplanes. read this:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,195672,00.html

(Venezuela originally purchased its fleet of F-16s in 1983)


and the f16s... that was some time ago, when relations with the u.s were slightly better. Now the U.S doesn't sell it to Venezuela anymore and instead, the Russians happily supplied Chavez with some Sukhoi, even though there is a ban from the U.S to not sell weapons to him. and finally, regarding Iran... well, it's not a direct threat to the U.S but it is against american interests, or else, why does the U.S and all of Europe get so touchy when Iran says they have a nuclear program?

Nevermind.. point is, I never wanted to say I was better than Pepsi, but hell, it's so annoying when people are so picky about every little dot and coma you add to a comment. No this is wrong this too this too this too. Generally, everyone is correct in some sort of way in these forums. Who am I to say someone is completely wrong and point out every little [poo] that can be contested?? Imagine if I said you were wrong about everything you said... wouldn't that be just plain annoying when in fact, you know more than us both? see what I mean?

[THEWULFMAN]

Call this a debate if you will, I consider it more of a semi-friendly conversation. I don't hate you Otto, niether does Pepsi. We just want to get the facts right, because this is an important topic in life. If we all come out of this with a better understanding, maybe we'll make some tiny difference for the better.

Selling fighters to a nation and having them turn on us is nothing new. Doesn't er who has those F-16's, we'll shoot them down if we have to. We have superior avionics nowadays than in the 1980's, not to mention better pilots.

[CommanderOtto]

Call this a debate if you will, I consider it more of a semi-friendly conversation. I don't hate you Otto, niether does Pepsi. We just want to get the facts right, because this is an important topic in life. If we all come out of this with a better understanding, maybe we'll make some tiny difference for the better.

I don't know, sometimes it does become into a fiery debate (like the Why MT doesn't believe in this)... but i'm glad you prefer to see it as a friendly conversation.

Selling fighters to a nation and having them turn on us is nothing new. Doesn't er who has those F-16's, we'll shoot them down if we have to. We have superior avionics nowadays than in the 1980's, not to mention better pilots.

no doubt about it. They'll never be a threat to the U.S... but I had to mention Venezuela to explain that the Russians will sell it to us even though the U.S is obviously saying no about it. I always viewed it as a response from russia like "we sell it to who we want to".

about the north koreans, I figured that, the U.S was involved in the korean war and look where the lines ended.. in the middle of korea. Even though the U.S already had the best military technology, they couldn't "win" because, well, for a variety of reasons... if that happened in the past, then it could happen today I guess. Although it is true that south korea and the u.s have trained a lot, better prepared... but no one can be sure of the outcome if the fight started again. Who knows, China could respond negatively to that kind of move (just like in the korean war).... but it is hard to tell, maybe they won't even care.