Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Do you think we have a strong enough military to achieve deterence

Do you think we have a strong enough military to achieve deterence

5 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

2seaoat



No sir.


Here we go again. Mic has won the day, and despite President elect talking about making military cuts, Mattis thinks our military is not large enough to deter bad actors. Dear God what has happened to sanity.

gatorfan



The "MIC" aside, maintaining an adequate military force to protect our global interests as dictated by the President and Congress, is no easy feat. The Air Force is short approximately 1,000 pilots, the Navy is severely over-tasked causing manning issues and even worse, delayed maintenance and overhaul issues. Equipment in the Marines and Army (including ground and air) are being used up far earlier than their projected life cycle.

With so many tasks being required of them the Military is struggling to stay within budget while being mission capable. And that's just to meet known and immediate commitments. I almost doubt we have the shipping capacity or manpower with equipment to engage even North Korea at this point.

A major overhaul of the military is past due. I've suggested in a Military Times letter some time ago that the Marines ought to be rolled into the Army, the Air Force disbanded with their missions given to the Army and Navy, and other integration strategies to make the entire military more streamlined and cost-effective.

Never happen - too many rice bowls to kick over.

Guest


Guest

A continued build up of a standing army is wrong both in the constitution... but also in allocation or priority of tax dollars. Our bases around the world are simply another give away. That should concern every citizen... it's waste. The other issue is our numerous military adventurism... to include bombing. That must end too... for a variety of sound reasons. I just thght of another waste... the gazillion contractors in the Pentagon... we have to be smarter than this. A leaner military could use technology to be meaner. I refuse to believe this can't be done... no matter the whining and protestations of the mic.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

PkrBum wrote:A continued build up of a standing army is wrong both in the constitution... but also in allocation or priority of tax dollars. Our bases around the world are simply another give away. That should concern every citizen... it's waste. The other issue is our numerous military adventurism... to include bombing. That must end too... for a variety of sound reasons.  I just thght of another waste... the gazillion contractors in the Pentagon... we have to be smarter than this. A leaner military could use technology to be meaner. I refuse to believe this can't be done... no matter the whining and protestations of the mic.

Agree with you 1,000% Expect to be attacked for voicing such a logical opinion.

So many civilians work at NAS Whiting and NAS Pensacola that closing or consolidating just one of those bases would send this area into recession. Whiting has been a target since before I returned there to be a flight instructor in 1981. I was warned to be ready to move to Fort Rucker if helicopter training was consolidated. That threat has always lingered and would not injure readiness at all.

The argument is that Navy helicopters land on ships and there are no ships near Fort Rucker. It is a lame argument, because when I went through flight training, the Lex was not available. I skipped that part and made my first shipboard landings on the USS Tarawa some months later, off the coast of Camp Pendleton.

I bet there is tons of pork aboard the Eglin complex, too.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

I do, however hope Trump accomplishes the revitalization of our nuclear deterrent forces. This is long overdue, and is necessary; it will not be cheap, too.

The concept of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) is still valid. We need to remain ready to push "the button" so it never becomes a 'for real' scenario.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

2seaoat



A major overhaul of the military is past due. I've suggested in a Military Times letter some time ago that the Marines ought to be rolled into the Army, the Air Force disbanded with their missions given to the Army and Navy, and other integration strategies to make the entire military more streamlined and cost-effective.

I agree completely. I have seen horrible duplication in private corporations and I imagine you have seen the same with the military. I remember back when I was working with Borg Warner in Manufacturing Resource Planning when this guy was working on a lathe making a part......one part. One machine. One operator for three years, when somebody finally looked at the part inventory and the demand, he had created a 100 year supply of the part and there was over a hundred thousand dollars of capital sitting in skids of excess parts. So even the most efficient industry in public traded companies can be inefficient, but if those rice bowls are political connections with bases and jobs in congressional districts the complexity is overwhelming. I like the idea of consolidation and unification of service branches. It will take a concerted effort but we can do a better job. It starts with a commitment by President Trump, and Congress to revamp our military. If he can accomplish this, he could become a historic President.

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:No sir.


Here we go again.   Mic has won the day, and despite President elect talking about making military cuts, Mattis thinks our military is not large enough to deter bad actors.   Dear God what has happened to sanity.
Well until our threats decrease, we don't have much choice. We're at bare bones and cannot fight a two theatre war- even the Obama admin admitted as such.  Sure, decrease bases and watch who occupies the power vacuum. We did so in Syria (departure from Iraq early) and look at the mess we have. Everywhere Obama has removed us from he has renegaged us with the smaller force he downsized to. He hasn't lessened the areas we deploy to, he's actually increased them and spread us very thin. That's a dangerous thing to be doing.

2seaoat



Well until our threats decrease, we don't have much choice.

Other than North Korea who has limited ability to endanger continental United States, what other threats are imminent which has this nation at risk?

2seaoat



We did so in Syria (departure from Iraq early) and look at the mess we have.

Saudi Arabia and Israel funded ISIS in Syria to ferment civil war and weaken the Iran/Syria link. America was complicit in wanting Syria and what we had called for 40 years a state sponsor of terrorism weakened. The event in Syria had little to do with the American invasion of Iraq, or the withdrawal from the same. A healthy GDP without wasteful and pointless military expenditures is the greatest indicator of a nation's ability to support a military. It is time for us to consolidate and reduce our footprints around the globe. President elect Trump is correct. It is time for Europe to pay the bill. It is time for South Korea and Japan to pay the bill. Reductions of military spending if done correctly can result in a more responsive and long term stable military.

Guest


Guest

We are not going to abandon our allies old man. Remember Obama is leaving office in abandoning allies is what he did



Last edited by Tellthetruth on 1/12/2017, 6:18 pm; edited 1 time in total

Guest


Guest

The world is more dangerous place Due to leading from behind that Obama did all the way up until his last day in office I am sure .  The power vacuum has been filled with people who have nefarious intentions especially towards the United States. We're not going to reduce our military anymore than it already is as a matter fact we're going to be gaining some troops back because were at dangerously low levels.  The Air Force is short 30,000 Nierman the Army is cut smaller than the pre-World War II army yet Obama has overstressed just an over committed us to more obligations that I can post on this forum due to the classified nature of the information .

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:No sir.

Here we go again.   Mic has won the day, and despite President elect talking about making military cuts, Mattis thinks our military is not large enough to deter bad actors.   Dear God what has happened to sanity.

Perhaps I missed it but I recall President Trump stating that he was going INCREASE our military which we NEED DESPERATELY!

Telstar

Telstar

Markle wrote:
2seaoat wrote:No sir.

Here we go again.   Mic has won the day, and despite President elect talking about making military cuts, Mattis thinks our military is not large enough to deter bad actors.   Dear God what has happened to sanity.

Perhaps I missed it but I recall President Trump stating that he was going INCREASE our military which we NEED DESPERATELY!  

Why don't you join up gramps? Your talents are wasted in Tallahassee.

Guest


Guest

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
PkrBum wrote:A continued build up of a standing army is wrong both in the constitution... but also in allocation or priority of tax dollars. Our bases around the world are simply another give away. That should concern every citizen... it's waste. The other issue is our numerous military adventurism... to include bombing. That must end too... for a variety of sound reasons.  I just thght of another waste... the gazillion contractors in the Pentagon... we have to be smarter than this. A leaner military could use technology to be meaner. I refuse to believe this can't be done... no matter the whining and protestations of the mic.

Agree with you 1,000% Expect to be attacked for voicing such a logical opinion.

So many civilians work at NAS Whiting and NAS Pensacola that closing or consolidating just one of those bases would send this area into recession. Whiting has been a target since before I returned there to be a flight instructor in 1981. I was warned to be ready to move to Fort Rucker if helicopter training was consolidated. That threat has always lingered and would not injure readiness at all.

The argument is that Navy helicopters land on ships and there are no ships near Fort Rucker. It is a lame argument, because when I went through flight training, the Lex was not available. I skipped that part and made my first shipboard landings on the USS Tarawa some months later, off the coast of Camp Pendleton.

I bet there is tons of pork aboard the Eglin complex, too.
Ft Rucker will never get the helo training as it is a one horse base that served only the army. Whiting Field serves multiple branches and is BRAC - proof.

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:Well until our threats decrease, we don't have much choice.

Other than North Korea who has limited ability to endanger continental United States, what other threats are imminent which has this nation at risk?

Russia, China, Iran.

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:Well until our threats decrease, we don't have much choice.

Other than North Korea who has limited ability to endanger continental United States, what other threats are imminent which has this nation at risk?
Are you that dense or
Do you just not care?

2seaoat



Are you that dense or
Do you just not care?


I must be pretty dense because I am unaware of one potential enemy in the world who has thirty percent of our Military capacity as we have taken our GDP and instead of investing in capital equipment which grows our economy we have piszed it away on wars on terrorism.  Russia's GDP is below Brazil now, and Iran a threat to America.....dear God what idiocy.  People who care understand history and the foolishness of standing armies draining our treasury and militarizing our society which threatens democracy.  Not one person could name a viable threat to this nation other than a legitimate threat from North Korea.  President Obama failed to make real cuts in the military.  President Clinton was the last President who balanced the budget and made real cuts in military spending.

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:Are you that dense or
Do you just not care?


I must be pretty dense because I am unaware of one potential enemy in the world who has thirty percent of our Military capacity as we have taken our GDP and instead of investing in capital equipment which grows our economy we have piszed it away on wars on terrorism.  Russia's GDP is below Brazil now, and Iran a threat to America.....dear God what idiocy.  People who care understand history and the foolishness of standing armies draining our treasury and militarizing our society which threatens democracy.  Not one person could name a viable threat to this nation other than a legitimate threat from North Korea.  President Obama failed to make real cuts in the military.  President Clinton was the last President who balanced the budget and made real cuts in military spending.

With the help of the Newt Gingrich House, Clinton was able to almost balance the budget. Income, as you know, skyrocketed due to the dot.com explosion.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Do you think we have a strong enough military to achieve deterence

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum