Russian troops and FEMA

[U201491]

Yeah, Obama really slashed military spending....

File:InflationAdjustedDefenseSpending.PNG - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://www.google.com/search?as_q=..._rights=#as_qdr=all&lr=&q=obama+military+cuts

 

[U201491]

Yeah, Obama really slashed military spending....

File:InflationAdjustedDefenseSpending.PNG - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

AND

https://www.google.com/search?as_q=...s_qdr=all&lr=&q=danger+of+obama+military+cuts

Wickipedia is about as reliable as Biden is intelligent.

 

[Netspirit]

The US military spending, while being the largest single expenditure in the world, is still peanuts when you divide it by the country's GDP (3-4%).

The Department of Defense defends the entire country and entire economy, so I do not see it as excessive. A lot of it goes to Research and Development, and occasionally great things (like the Internet) come out of it.

 

[DMax]

The US military spending, while being the largest single expenditure in the world, is still peanuts when you divide it by the country's GDP (3-4%).

The Department of Defense defends the entire country and entire economy, so I do not see it as excessive. A lot of it goes to Research and Development, and occasionally great things (like the Internet) come out of it.

When was the last time you saw 3-4% GDP?

 

[Netspirit]

When was the last time you saw 3-4% GDP?

Quoting Wiki:

"In 2005, the United States spent 4.06% of its GDP on its military (considering only basic Department of Defense budget spending), more than France's 2.6% and less than Saudi Arabia's 10% This is historically low for the United States since it peaked in 1944 at 37.8% of GDP (it reached the lowest point of 3.0% in 1999–2001). Even during the peak of the Vietnam War the percentage reached a high of 9.4% in 1968. Countries such as Canada and Germany spend only 1.4% of GDP on their military."

In 2010, military spending was 4.7% of the country's GDP. It is very affordable.

 

[Misterbill]

Quoting Wiki:

"In 2005, the United States spent 4.06% of its GDP on its military (considering only basic Department of Defense budget spending), more than France's 2.6% and less than Saudi Arabia's 10% This is historically low for the United States since it peaked in 1944 at 37.8% of GDP (it reached the lowest point of 3.0% in 1999–2001). Even during the peak of the Vietnam War the percentage reached a high of 9.4% in 1968. Countries such as Canada and Germany spend only 1.4% of GDP on their military."

In 2010, military spending was 4.7% of the country's GDP. It is very affordable.

4.7% is about 300 BILLION dollars a year more than out next competitor.

% GDP means nothing. Are you totally insane? Or do you think we NEED to spend 5-10-times more dollars than everyone else on the planet to defend ourselves?

 

[Kat3eWhit]

Normally I would chalk this up to a Sci Fi thriller plot.

 

[Brutus57]

I am pretty sure the Russians remember everything they learned in extended Urban Warfare during the battle for Stalingrad, Leningrad and then their battle for Berlin not to mention every other hot conflict they have been involved in in Afghanistan and Eastern Europe since then. Except for the lethality of of some weapons and the addition of pinpoint accuracy of aerial bombardment what has really changed in urban warfare? Snipers are still nasty! Control of a city usually involves block by block clearing of buildings, one room at a time by each squad. It is still one of the most difficult sorts of warfare . One thing we and the russkies have in common. Chechen terrorists still want us both dead.

Brutus out

 

[Mark W.]

If you think Putin is putting any Russian troops in the US to help OBAMA do anything your on drugs.

 

[Stomper]

If you think Putin is putting any Russian troops in the US to help OBAMA do anything your on drugs.

Most likely vodka....

 

[Brutus57]

If you want the best, as they say, you are going to pay for it. I think we can all agree there is some waste in military spending and inefficiency in the government bureaucracy that supports it. It's total BS we have troops not on patrol at major bases eating MREs instead of having a chow hall. I know this cause I have a friend with the 101st HQ over there now. She has worked like 190 days in a row without a day off and she's a Lt. Col.

Brutus out

 

[U201491]

If you think Putin is putting any Russian troops in the US to help OBAMA do anything your on drugs.

Our LE have traveled to Russia for training. That was common a few yrs ago. Not sure if it still is.
Not sure I like them learning Russian tactics either.

 

[Netspirit]

4.7% is about 300 BILLION dollars a year more than out next competitor.

Our "next competitor" (China) lies about a lot of things; there is no reason to trust their official military spending figures.

And please, do everybody a favor: stop writing BILLION in all caps unless you want to be reminded that the US economic output is 15 TRILLION.

% GDP means nothing

4.7% means affordability.

Are you totally insane? Or do you think we NEED to spend 5-10-times more dollars than everyone else on the planet to defend ourselves?

It is not just about "defending ourselves". There are enormous long-term geopolitical, economical, cultural benefits of being a superpower. A lot of defense money goes to R&D and drives our science and technology forward (think of GPS navigation, Internet). A lot of that money goes to American employees and contractors, and therefore gets back to the economy (think of companies like Boeing).

 

[Grunwald]

So for those that don't know Sorcha Faal is a well known disinformation artist, famous in many places for outrageous and outlandish claims and predictions.

Realistically, I think if 15K russians showed up it would do nothing but bolster the ranks of the freemen, think about it, america has better weather, better booze, most of our hookers don't have aids, oh yea, and we don't conscript people.

Also, I have a higher opinion of putin than I do of obama. That guy at least has a clue what he's doing. He also realizes a fundamental thing about the middle east when it comes to syria, something mccain and the rest of the capitol circus fail to grasp: syria is an a**hole magnet, and right now arming the christians, the alowites and the shia is a good way to bring an untimely end to the jihadists who are pouring in from all over the world. The best possible outcome is to make sure the bloodletting goes on as long as it can, as all it will do is pit the al nusra brigades against hezbollah. If we decide we want to arm the "rebels" we need to make sure they're spending their saudi petro-allowance on the weapons we sell to them.

Frankly, what I think we really should be doing the world over is telling the jihadists that predator drones can read their thoughts and make them sterile with death rays, all the while advertising a "big push" that will put the rebels over the top in syria. Then we can nerve gas the whole place and make it a national park.

That was quite a prophetic statement you've made a couple of months ago.
Who would have seriously though that Obama would take us to the edge of war and McStain would be the ugly head cheerleader.

 

[Grunwald]

Our "next competitor" (China) lies about a lot of things; there is no reason to trust their official military spending figures.

And please, do everybody a favor: stop writing BILLION in all caps unless you want to be reminded that the US economic output is 15 TRILLION.



4.7% means affordability.



It is not just about "defending ourselves". There are enormous long-term geopolitical, economical, cultural benefits of being a superpower. A lot of defense money goes to R&D and drives our science and technology forward (think of GPS navigation, Internet). A lot of that money goes to American employees and contractors, and therefore gets back to the economy (think of companies like Boeing).

Remind us again what the budget surplus is?
If you cannot pay for something and take out loans which you can NEVER pay back (nor intend to) you cannot afford it.

 

[Netspirit]

Remind us again what the budget surplus is?
If you cannot pay for something and take out loans which you can NEVER pay back (nor intend to) you cannot afford it.

There are two mistakes here.

1. National defense is a primary Constitutional duty of the federal government. This expenditure has been increasing due to various reasons:



Overall, the federal government is now spending 19% on military stuff:



You cannot tell whether we "can afford" or "cannot afford" it just by looking at the military budget alone. Is it Defense (Constitutional duty) or Social Security (non-Constitutional expenditure) that we "cannot afford"?

2. "Cannot afford" is a huge myth.

It is easy to assume that the government is like your family and its budget is like your credit card. You have to limit your spending, otherwise you will not be able to pay your debts off, but a sovereign government does not.

The difference is: they print their own money. They "owe" their own "produce" (U.S. dollars) like a farmer may "owe" their own future produce. "Paying off" the government debt (in effect re-purchasing the low-yielding Treasuries off the secondary market - instead of investing that money into the economy which will grow the GDP and boost tax revenues) is as silly as for a farmer to repurchase their own future produce - instead of using the money to buy more land and grow more stuff.

The U.S. federal government (Federal Reserve + Treasury + White House + Congress) unlike state, county and city governments, companies or individuals, Euro-nations - it is very special and subject to its own math. Feeling patriotic? Be a lefty when it comes to federal spending, be a righty when it comes to local (state / county / city) and personal finances.

How can the government be held accountable when they possess such a huge fiscal and monetary power (that can easily distort all markets, kill all competition, redistribute all wealth arbitrarily, inflate/devalue the currency to the point of rendering it useless, etc.)? That is a whole different conversation but it sure can "afford" its military spending at the current levels. The Left wing is always fighting against the "excessive military spending" not because they suddenly became fiscal conservatives, but because most big companies that benefit from military spending are major GOP donors.

 

[MinnesotaORnewbie]

That's nothing...this same website claimed in the past that the Obama plans to invade, conquer, Christianize, and use North korea and its citizens as a huge number of sweat shops for American clothing businesses in order to boost our economy in hopes of paying off the national debt with the combination of investing such money in Canada's poor housing market crash that is following like a mirror of the U.S.'s previous loan swap fiasco. Great news source and worth every second of my life wasted reading it and writing this post. More conspiracies, fear mongering, and utter pucker your A hole Bullsheit please.1

 

[chrisk86]

Hopefully the Russian troops shoot a hell of alot better than they drive...