reddogblitz Posted July 13, 2015 Share Posted July 13, 2015 We live in a world in which the reality is that there are individuals who wish to do us great harm, and have made that known to us in no uncertain terms. It would be irresponsible to sit back and wait for them to bloody us, given their stated intentions. In today's world, a foreign policy that projects our military might outward may well be the most wise policy. That aside, it is with those objectives that our military recruits. You've seen this, I presume? I'm going to agree to disagree on the bolded part. You have bought into this boogey man theory and I have not. Yes, there are dangers. If we get intel that a specific attack is in the works, yeah stop it. Someone does attack us and we wipe them off the map. But attack a country because it's leader might build a nuke someday and give it to a terrorist, not so much. Yes, I have seen the Navy slogan. Navy does a lot of good work. You do realize it's a marketing slogan to try to get people to sign up for the Navy, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted July 13, 2015 Share Posted July 13, 2015 You do realize it's a marketing slogan to try to get people to sign up for the Navy, right?I imagine that's why he posted it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 13, 2015 Share Posted July 13, 2015 I'm going to agree to disagree on the bolded part. You have bought into this boogey man theory and I have not. Wow. This is astonishing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 13, 2015 Share Posted July 13, 2015 I imagine that's why he posted it. This. Wow. This is astonishing. And this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 13, 2015 Share Posted July 13, 2015 Get technical why don't ya? They don't still make helicopters and weapons systems? Your statement might be right, but still doesn't negate my point? Surely you're not saying defense contractors do not have a vested interest in when the US goes to war, are you? Read it again. I disagreed with your retarded and ignorant statement that current defense levels are "adequate." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 I disagreed with your retarded and ignorant statement that current defense levels are "adequate." Define "adequate". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 Define "adequate". Are you !@#$ing kidding me? You said defense was adequate, and now I'm required to define your own statement for you? After giving concrete, verifiable examples of why you're wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 No arguments here. But just because someone signs up for the military doesn't mean they should be deployed willy nilly in perpetual wars where we are not threatened. Leadership has the responsibility to use them wisely and only when needed IMHO. It's the Department of DEFENSE, not the Department of OFFENSE. Dude, STFU. There isn't a single person who signs up who doesn't understand the commitment. And no one is delusional enough to think politicians are going to make good decisions regarding the military. We ALL knew/know better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 Dude, STFU. There isn't a single person who signs up who doesn't understand the commitment. And no one is delusional enough to think politicians are going to make good decisions regarding the military. We ALL knew/know better. But it's not the politicians making the decisions. It's companies like Northrup-Grummonds and Boing and Lockhead-Martian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 We do? Do you feel our current defenses are inadequate or that we should be invading someone big and need the headcount? Are you !@#$ing kidding me? You said defense was adequate, and now I'm required to define your own statement for you? After giving concrete, verifiable examples of why you're wrong? Something wrong with the ole sarcasm meter DC? I was responding to KD's question. Your opinion is that it's not and that's cool. None of our military shortcomings have been due to the military or a lack of air craft carriers, but the Commander in Chief(s). Somehow I think we can limp by with the air craft carriers we have. As far as Commander in Chief, that's a whole other deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 Something wrong with the ole sarcasm meter DC? I was responding to KD's question. Your opinion is that it's not and that's cool. None of our military shortcomings have been due to the military or a lack of air craft carriers, but the Commander in Chief(s). Somehow I think we can limp by with the air craft carriers we have. As far as Commander in Chief, that's a whole other deal. Only one of us is informed, and it's not you. You have absolutely no basis for having an opinion on the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 Only one of us is informed, and it's not you. You have absolutely no basis for having an opinion on the matter. So says you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 But it's not the politicians making the decisions. It's companies like Northrup-Grummonds and Boing and Lockhead-Martian. Boing. Do they make air crafts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Boing. Do they make air crafts? Boing is what happens to him when he gets to call someone an idiot. I bet you thought he was talking about that aircraft manufacturer, didn't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbillievable Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Am I going crazy or did I just read in this thread that someone thinks soldiers should have a say in why they are deployed? Ours is not to reason why... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandius Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 2 years? that's it? Hopefully there is a certain pecking order in military prisons like there are in regular prisons. I would think deserters are like the child rapists of regular prisons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sherpa Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 None of our military shortcomings have been due to the military or a lack of air craft carriers, but the Commander in Chief(s). Somehow I think we can limp by with the air craft carriers we have. As far as Commander in Chief, that's a whole other deal. If you are claiming that none of our military failures were due to inadequate material being available, you are grossly mistaken. There have been many such instances in our past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 If you are claiming that none of our military failures were due to inadequate material being available, you are grossly mistaken. There have been many such instances in our past. Like what? Seriously, can you tell me about a few of the many times when missions were failed or compromised due to faulty or under supplied equipment? The only one I can think of off the top of my head was Operation Eagle Claw, the failed Iran hostage rescue mission in 1980. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Like what? Seriously, can you tell me about a few of the many times when missions were failed or compromised due to faulty or under supplied equipment? The only one I can think of off the top of my head was Operation Eagle Claw, the failed Iran hostage rescue mission in 1980. Guadalcanal, Buna, the submarine campaign against Japan in WWII. There's three examples from one year in one theater of one war. Funny thing, too, is that Eagle Claw isn't an example. That failed because of bad C&C and staff work, not faulty equipment. You really are an ignorant little spud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 (edited) Guadalcanal, Buna, the submarine campaign against Japan in WWII. There's three examples from one year in one theater of one war. Funny thing, too, is that Eagle Claw isn't an example. That failed because of bad C&C and staff work, not faulty equipment. You really are an ignorant little spud. Anything in the last 70 years? I was responding to your idiotic statement that our military is not adequate due to under supply and sherpa's comment that it had happened many times. If yall can't come up with anything in the last 10 years or so that caused a failure or defeat, sort of calls your point into question. Name calling is always an effective strategy when you're typing out of your A$$ (again). Edited July 15, 2015 by reddogblitz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts