Comments on: GOP Sounds The Call: Spend More, Engage Less

By: TJRedneck

TJRedneck — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 14:36:12 +0000

worrier, yes Bush and the RINOs that controlled Congress for 6 years were pretty worthless. If they would have stuck to the GOP platform, they wouldn’t have opened the door to this mess in the first place. But the most worhtless bunch of law makers in our great nations history? No, sorry, you’re idols Obama, Reid, and Pelosi take the title for that. They are not only doing what Bush and the RINOs did, but they are taking that to a whole higher level. They have already increased our debt in one year more than Bush did in eight years. Things are better? Maybe the weed you are smoking is better, and you probably think things are better because you heard it on one of the state-run networks like the CommunistNewsNetwork, the AllBarackChannel, the NothingButCrap, PMSNBC, networks, or the NYT. By the way, that pinko commie is failing, I guarantee you that 2010 will be a politcal disaster for the democraps.

By: TJRedneck

TJRedneck — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 14:15:44 +0000

Partizan, yeah right, what was I thinking? I shouldn't have looked at the data from the CBO and OMB on the federal budget during the Reagan years. I shouldn't look at the FACT that almost 2/3rds of the budget is locked up in entitlements and barely 1/8th of the budget goes to defense. I shouldn't look at the FACT that 6 of the Reagan years, we had a democrat congress. I shouldn't look at the FACT that social spending skyrocketed during those years, far more than the "evil defense spending" that you demonize. Sure, I agree that there is a lot of fraud and waste in defense spneding, that can and should be corrected, but it is a drop in the bucket compared to the fraud, waste, and abuse that happens in entitlement spending. And when you actually look at both the CBO's and OMB's budget reports, it's very easy to see the correlation between entitlement spending and the deficit. But no, you're right, we need more Presidents like Carter and Obama who care so much for our nation's defense, LOL. And you and your ACORN buddies should be the only ones that should be allowed to vote.

By: wtpworrier

wtpworrier — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 13:26:43 +0000

I see you can’t make changes here either when you make a mistake.

By: wtpworrier

wtpworrier — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 13:23:58 +0000

The GOP, you got to be kidding me. Never before in the History of this greate nation has there been a more worthless bunch of so called law makers as todays GOP. Most of them will probably be voted into office again, but I'll bet some of them will be gone....soon but not soon enough. "Spend more, engage less", that don't make sense, I'll bet that don't even make sense to them, they probably said it because they heard it on FAKE NEWS. I think they are up-set because things are better and they wanted things to "fail". I love it when they are wrong, of course they've been wrong for the last umteen years.

By: Big fig

Big fig — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 17:24:52 +0000

This exactly is why we needed Obama in office this red necks wanna just continue to make the high dollar but not think about others needs..Forget about China we’ve got our own problems here take care of america first then worry of what needs to be done else where…stop the corruption and miss handleling of the tax payers.

By: Bill R.

Bill R. — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 15:04:58 +0000

Bill Lind has drunk this koolaid. Anything to make our defenses weaker, I guess, is the definition of military “reform”

By: PrahaPartizan

PrahaPartizan — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 00:16:39 +0000

We do know how much Blackwater has done to the War on Terrorism, and it isn’t pretty. Your comment has no factual basis either from what I can tell, other than your assertion that you know more than others. That’s the type of authoritarian response I might expect someone to provide. All that you want to do is shut me up because Blackwater and other crony corporations have pilfered the Treasury and harmed this nation and its reputation. That’s fact and you aren’t going to be allowed to rewrite history to your liking because your boys are goons and you don’t want to acknowledge it.

By: Carl D

Carl D — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:06:40 +0000

Have you considered banana republics increase their strength for use internally. Our Can’t. Wan’t is Presidnet Obama that stated he wanted a second Military Force to be funded eqaully as our Combat Military. History tells us only totalitariians find it necessary to have a force to use against their own. I believe you may have your story backwards.

By: D.J. Foote

D.J. Foote — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 21:57:22 +0000

Sometimes policy validity can only be tested on a “recon-by-fire” approach. Most of our nations current and post 1800 engagements have been on foreign soil as preemptive endeavors to protect our native land and to assist our allies.

By: Gordon

Gordon — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 19:34:17 +0000

It all comes down to simple Economics 101…guns or butter. Ya cannot keep attempting to maximize both, sooner or later you go broke trying.

As far as the military is concerned, there isn’t a thing that can be built that cannot be defeated or destroyed. Most of what we see and hear from the military/industrial complex is just BS and an attempt to suck more and more taxpayer dollars into their web of waste. And of course, they always add the fear factor into the equation. Keep people scared and they will agree to almost anything.

We have enough now to destroy planet Earth. How much more do we need? No matter what is developed, there are always other smart and intelligent people in this world that will develop a system to defeat anything. Does everyone remember the Chinese diesel sub that popped up in the middle of one of our small armada’s in the South China Sea? So much for our technology leadership and progress…a diesel sub faking us out after the taxpayer has shelled out billions of dollars with promises from the fat cats of the arms industry! And there are those here who want to give them more $$$$$‘s…

S/F Gordon

By: William C.

William C. — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 05:16:59 +0000

You could at least try to make sense…

By: William C.

William C. — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 05:16:40 +0000

What? Are you insane? Thomas Jefferson himself said banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies. The concept of a militia based military does not work for a country like the United States in modern times. Tell me how is one state going to afford a single modern submarine or destroyer? Or develop a new fighter aircraft? And why should we let any foreign power rule over us because they have invested in such weaponry?

There was a draw-down after World War II, yet we rightfully did not repeat the same mistake we made after World War I. We maintained our strength and have continued the research and development required to keep the technological edge. If we had declawed the American eagle after World War II, why wouldn’t have Stalin roll into Western Europe during his final years? Even after Stalin died would it have been wise to let the Soviets be the world’s unchallengeable superpower?

The National Guard is armed with equipment it takes a serious investment to design and build. They and the active Army are trained far better than our early militias, and this is necessary in this day and age.

Even if we withdraw most of our forces from countries like Germany, South Korea, and Japan, we should maintain the size of our currently military, continue building new equipment, and ensuring they are a 1st class fighting force.

By: Logan

Logan — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 02:44:04 +0000

You have no comprehension how much Blackwater has done for the War on Terrorism. Please refrain from making statements which have no factual basis.

By: Gordon of Khartoum

Gordon of Khartoum — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 00:52:52 +0000

During teddy Roosevelt’s second primary, things wre dull, until he heard that the Ragouli, a Morrocan bandit, ha kidna[ed a U.S. citizen. Teddy sent the fleet to Tunis, and told the Sultan, either he got the hostage (Greek name, can’t remember it) back alive, or the Ragouli dead-or, th eimplication was, he’d level Tunis. The Sultan paid the ransom and delivered the hostage. No troops, no nation builidng-end of story (not really, read about the Riff Rebellion for more). Politcs is simple-and war is just an extension of politcs by other means-Our problem is that we’re trying to social engineer the world the same way we’re social engineering our own coutnry and discovering that it doesn’t work aborad any better than it works here.

By: John King

John King — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:59:54 +0000

Finally! Some intelligent exchanges. Our Founding Fathers had it right. A standing army only gets you into trouble — losing both blood and treasure. We never demobilized after WW2. Too much fear. Same as now. We should not be expanding the Army and Marine Corps; we should be shrinking them, with a large reserve element — like our original militias, which really are the National Guard. That will keep us well armed and ready, but not fighting other nations’ fight. Germany, South Korea, japan — all have plenty of money to defend themselves. Let them do it.

By: PrahaPartizan

PrahaPartizan — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:36:25 +0000

BOOMER, your radical activist Roberts Court appointed by good, right-thinking Republican administrations has made it impossible to make lobbying illegal. Without think tanks to give jobs to out-of-work Republican policy wonks, what do you think these failures are going to do? All of those programs you decry would not fund the DoD for an hour. We wasted more money with Blackwater and Halliburton contracts over the last eight years than any of those organizations you clearly hate so much have received over the last century. The same could be said for the poorly administered defense programs in which the contractors have been allowed to charge multiple times for the technologies they were supposed to deliver in the original contract. That’s the welfare in our modern world.

By: PrahaPartizan

PrahaPartizan — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:27:48 +0000

You are aware that the $60 trillion figure you just bruited about the Social Security and Medicare obligation isn’t for the next 20 years but for infinity, right? Without lying about the debt built up through conservative improvidence and insane fiscal and financial policies, I guess you wouldn’t have much of a strawman to wrestle with though. For the last thirty years, the average working person has been carrying the wealthy on their backs through the Social Security surplus and now that elitist scum wants to renege on the “bargain” Greenspan crafted back in the mid-1980s. That’s theft writ large, and it ain’t the underclasses pulling off the heist.

By: PrahaPartizan

PrahaPartizan — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:20:51 +0000

Redneck, you are so wrong in your evaluation of Reagan's running up the deficit that it boggles the imagination that you are still allowed to vote. You are aware that St. Ronny Ray-gun never did offer a balanced budget to Congress in the eight years he was in the Oval Office (he really wasn't President for the last four years of that, as we now know, only keeping the chair warm for Bush Pere), right? I'm not talking about what he might have "had" to sign after it was massaged by Congress, I'm talking about what his boys sent up to Congress for consideration. Further, after Greenspan bamboozled everybody with his Social Security reform, FICA surpluses made St. Ronny's budget deficits look better than they should have. Over-expenditure on defense programs is precisely what drove the budget deficits up, no matter how much you and your like-minded colleagues might like to re-write history. Even Stockman knows that the Reagan administration was a fiscal disaster and has said so and he headed up St. Ronny's budget office.

By: Bill R.

Bill R. — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:44:05 +0000

This post has a lot of code language in it. “integrated standing force” ? Sounds like the Canadian Defense Forces. And forward deployments are a way of life in the US military. Foward deployment keeps the USA engaged in the world. Otherwise we will become a third-rate declining power. One of the most interesting comments McKeon made was his reference to “an increasing reliance on foreign firms to meet our defense needs” — now maybe that is just a reference to BAE and Qiniteq — services rather than products. MRAP notwithstanding, I don’t see a really coherent “two way street” approach to arms cooperation with our allies from this administration, much less the GOP.

By: robertro2

robertro2 — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:12:14 +0000

THIS COUNTRY GOES UP AND DOWN WITH OUR ELECTED LEADERS,SOME TIMES TO FAR DOWN,IS THE ONE TIME WE ARE “OUT”.….…