If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Philly.com)   America's military is in gave danger of not spending as much money as the rest of the world combined. It's time to panic   (philly.com) divider line 68
    More: Scary, strong forces, missing people, McKeon, combat operations, House Armed Services Committee, risks  
•       •       •

1366 clicks; posted to Politics » on 29 Nov 2013 at 1:06 PM (38 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



68 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-11-29 01:07:52 PM
To defense contractors and war hawks:

Shut. The. Fark. Up.

 
2013-11-29 01:09:58 PM
I'm scared to death Iran is going to invade us,,,, Hold me....
 
2013-11-29 01:10:17 PM
I hear Lithuania is outspending us on toilet seats by $50.
 
2013-11-29 01:13:36 PM
"You'd better hope we never have a war again," the House Armed Services Committee chairman, Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., said of the decline in what the military calls its readiness.

Well yes, we all do hope for that, every farking day of our lives, you farking piece of shiat. The fact that you are so farking eager to send young men and women to die is disgusting beyond my ability to express in words.
 
2013-11-29 01:15:19 PM
steynian.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-11-29 01:16:10 PM
Well the bloodthirsty Republicans need satisfaction.   Maybe they will settle for a dozen poor people they can take home and torture to death.  Lets exchange that for increases in food stamps.
 
2013-11-29 01:18:50 PM
The US military could get by on a lot less money if the politicians would cut commitments and hidden costs along with the budget.  For instance, why are we still in Continental Europe?  Why are literally billions of dollars in environmental funds hidden in the defense budget?  Why are we buying airplanes we don't need or want?  (I'm lookin' at YOU, C-27 Spartan)

/And so on.
 
2013-11-29 01:19:25 PM
Maybe we should stop buying tanks n planes n shiat the military doesn't want and spend it on what they need?
 
2013-11-29 01:20:29 PM
Gave Danger is Carlos Danger's broski.
 
2013-11-29 01:21:05 PM
diogenesii.files.wordpress.com

We must cut SNAP and Education. The red isn't large enough.
 
2013-11-29 01:24:14 PM
3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-11-29 01:24:15 PM
When all you have is a wallet, everything looks like F-35 JSF.
 
2013-11-29 01:25:37 PM

Brick-House: [3.bp.blogspot.com image 684x333]


Dude, you're trying way too hard.
 
2013-11-29 01:28:04 PM
So, the solution is to make every one else that depends on the US military to do their dirty work for them start paying up?  The EU owes an overdue bill for the entire cold war & South Korea looks to be paying for the foreseeable future.
 
2013-11-29 01:29:22 PM
Internet dentist like typing...
 
2013-11-29 01:30:32 PM

LordZorch: So, the solution is to make every one else that depends on the US military to do their dirty work for them start paying up?  The EU owes an overdue bill for the entire cold war & South Korea looks to be paying for the foreseeable future.


Yeah, cause we did that stuff out of the goodness of our hearts.
 
2013-11-29 01:32:22 PM
Gave in to the danger zone?
 
2013-11-29 01:32:41 PM
Conservatives only care about fetuses and defense.
 
2013-11-29 01:35:47 PM
A war weary America is settling into a fairly normal peacetime slump.     I don't think it's dire, since I can't see any Administration in the next 5-10 years going off on another war.

I know the Navy cut 10 billion in 2012, then 14 more billion in 2013.    A good start but not near enough for a country that is 17 Trillion in debt.    America is going broke starting at the middle class.

Yet the US Airforce is taking posession of brand new C-27 cargo AC and rolling them to a boneyard at Davis-Montham because they have no need for them.   (they'll get sold for a loss to firefighters or some other Gov't agency)   No wonder we are going broke.

But as soon as you cut a program, you CUT JOBS.    And for his talk, Obama has done little to reign in spending.    The Military spent more in 2013 with sequestration than in 2012.

And for all the Democrats posturing on defense spending, they aren't willing to cut anything either for fear of losing a a big cash cow in their own backyard.   Or lose jobs for constituents.

We will have degrades capabilities in the near future.    Less capable, and less prepared.   More like the military of the early 1980's.
 
2013-11-29 01:37:13 PM

Mouldy Squid: We must cut SNAP and Education. The red isn't large enough.


Cut Stars and Stripes. See we've cut Defense. Ta Da!
 
2013-11-29 01:37:52 PM
Does the DoD still have problem meeting government accountability standards, regarding reporting how money spent?

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/11/22/209356/pentagons-bosses-thwart -a ccurate.html
 
2013-11-29 01:39:52 PM

netcentric: A war weary America is settling into a fairly normal peacetime slump.     I don't think it's dire, since I can't see any Administration in the next 5-10 years going off on another war.


I can very easily see that. Look how desperate Republicans are to go to war with Iran.
 
2013-11-29 01:40:47 PM

netcentric: But as soon as you cut a program, you CUT JOBS.    And for his talk, Obama has done little to reign in spending.    The Military spent more in 2013 with sequestration than in 2012.

And for all the Democrats posturing on defense spending, they aren't willing to cut anything either for fear of losing a a big cash cow in their own backyard.   Or lose jobs for constituents.


It's because everyone, including conservatives, are magically Keynesians when it comes to military spending. It's too bad they aren't in other areas because a lot of that money could be more productively shifted somewhere else (like infrastructure) and jobs could still be maintained.

Our country's priorities are completely screwed up.
 
2013-11-29 01:50:59 PM

eiger: netcentric: But as soon as you cut a program, you CUT JOBS.    And for his talk, Obama has done little to reign in spending.    The Military spent more in 2013 with sequestration than in 2012.

And for all the Democrats posturing on defense spending, they aren't willing to cut anything either for fear of losing a a big cash cow in their own backyard.   Or lose jobs for constituents.

It's because everyone, including conservatives, are magically Keynesians when it comes to military spending. It's too bad they aren't in other areas because a lot of that money could be more productively shifted somewhere else (like infrastructure) and jobs could still be maintained.

Our country's priorities are completely screwed up.


yeah you have all this expertise that could translate into a number of other things that would have a better return on the tax money than building some war machine only to box it up and put it in a warehouse. swords to plowshares, brehs!
 
2013-11-29 01:51:45 PM

LordJiro: netcentric: A war weary America is settling into a fairly normal peacetime slump.     I don't think it's dire, since I can't see any Administration in the next 5-10 years going off on another war.

I can very easily see that. Look how desperate Republicans are to go to war with Iran.



Yeah, about that.    You may want to ease back on the number of hours you spend on KOS and HuffPo.

This administration, nor the next, will be anxious to start conflicts.  Unless someone literally invades California... and even then we would probably first look at what parts of Cali. they took.    You know, make a conscious decision for use of force if it is worth it.

Face it.    We are not as economically strong as we were.    And won't be for sometime if economic pundits are correct.
 
2013-11-29 01:52:15 PM

eiger: LordZorch: So, the solution is to make every one else that depends on the US military to do their dirty work for them start paying up?  The EU owes an overdue bill for the entire cold war & South Korea looks to be paying for the foreseeable future.

Yeah, cause we did that stuff out of the goodness of our hearts.


Good to know, but your outburst of stupid wasn't even related to my post, so please go back to smoking weed while the adults are on the internet.
 
2013-11-29 01:58:31 PM
It's called the military-industrial complex, General of the Army Dwight D. Eisenhower (ret.) had a few words to say about it something like 50 years ago. As long as the defense contractors get away with making sure that their major projects get spread out amongst as many states and congressional districts as possible (thereby increasing inefficiencies and expenses), all while making sure that their campaign contributions to politicians get wrapped in the American flag, the US military will continue to get told to spend money on things they don't want or need, all while having to short-change the people who actually have to do the fighting and dying (with equipment that may or may not do the job that it was designed and intended for).
 
2013-11-29 02:03:13 PM

Brick-House:


Strangely enough that comic would've been mildly amusing if it just stopped at "no not vets, veterans!"

But instead it had to go of and actually define what a veteran is because their readers are apparently too stupid to know the difference, and then go off on some unfunny tangent about homeland security.
 
2013-11-29 02:04:38 PM
Considering the last major war on American soil was our own civil war, I question the wisdom of having a large standing military to prepare for some unknown conflict, especially when we're outspending the pants off the rest of the world already. And yes, I'm discounting the small beachhead that was established in Alaska by the Japanese during WWII and Pearl Harbor was bombed, not invaded.

Additionally, it's been shown time and again the wastefulness of the US military, whether it is planes and tanks immediately mothballed in the Mohave desert or the inability to account for spending, we are not putting ourselves in any serious jeopardy by curtailing military spending. Just means the military has to actually put some thought into the money it spends instead of the blank check given to it now.
 
2013-11-29 02:05:29 PM

eiger: netcentric: But as soon as you cut a program, you CUT JOBS.    And for his talk, Obama has done little to reign in spending.    The Military spent more in 2013 with sequestration than in 2012.

And for all the Democrats posturing on defense spending, they aren't willing to cut anything either for fear of losing a a big cash cow in their own backyard.   Or lose jobs for constituents.

It's because everyone, including conservatives, are magically Keynesians when it comes to military spending. It's too bad they aren't in other areas because a lot of that money could be more productively shifted somewhere else (like infrastructure) and jobs could still be maintained.

Our country's priorities are completely screwed up.


With all due respect, I have no idea what you are saying.    Our POTUS has said repeatedly we do not have a problem with spending.   We just have a revenue problem.

If you personally wish to change something regarding spending.   You need to convince the guys at the very top first.    If you want some cuts... in Defense?    You will need to accept the LOSS of JOBS.

You can't just flip people out of their Defense Jobs and suddenly have them start manufacturing wind mills and Rainbow machines.

Our countries priorities are screwed up????     That is subjective.

I'm pretty sure that if you stuck anybody in the Oval Office for a day and said  "hey, in the middle of this piss poor stagnating economy of ours... I propose we gut the military and lay off  a couple hundred thousand workers"     Even if it was the libbyest libtard of them all...  they would probably balk at that proposal.

Even once Obama is gone.    If Hillary is elected.... she will face the same situation.

Lose jobs... again?     No.
How you gonna fuel a comeback economy with no jobs?
 
2013-11-29 02:07:16 PM

Mouldy Squid: [diogenesii.files.wordpress.com image 523x528]

We must cut SNAP and Education. The red isn't large enough.


You forgot we need to kill Acorn and Sesame Street as well. Cheney and his pals need bigger jets and yachts.
 
2013-11-29 02:07:57 PM

LordZorch: eiger: LordZorch: So, the solution is to make every one else that depends on the US military to do their dirty work for them start paying up?  The EU owes an overdue bill for the entire cold war & South Korea looks to be paying for the foreseeable future.

Yeah, cause we did that stuff out of the goodness of our hearts.

Good to know, but your outburst of stupid wasn't even related to my post, so please go back to smoking weed while the adults are on the internet.


My "outburst of stupid" was wholly relevant. You said that these countries have an "overdue bill." But for what exactly? The US acting in its own self-interest. What kind of fantasy world are you living in that other countries owe the US anything?
 
2013-11-29 02:15:20 PM

netcentric: eiger: netcentric: But as soon as you cut a program, you CUT JOBS.    And for his talk, Obama has done little to reign in spending.    The Military spent more in 2013 with sequestration than in 2012.

And for all the Democrats posturing on defense spending, they aren't willing to cut anything either for fear of losing a a big cash cow in their own backyard.   Or lose jobs for constituents.

It's because everyone, including conservatives, are magically Keynesians when it comes to military spending. It's too bad they aren't in other areas because a lot of that money could be more productively shifted somewhere else (like infrastructure) and jobs could still be maintained.

Our country's priorities are completely screwed up.

With all due respect, I have no idea what you are saying.    Our POTUS has said repeatedly we do not have a problem with spending.   We just have a revenue problem.

If you personally wish to change something regarding spending.   You need to convince the guys at the very top first.    If you want some cuts... in Defense?    You will need to accept the LOSS of JOBS.

You can't just flip people out of their Defense Jobs and suddenly have them start manufacturing wind mills and Rainbow machines.

I'm pretty sure that if you stuck anybody in the Oval Office for a day and said  "hey, in the middle of this piss poor stagnating economy of ours... I propose we gut the military and lay off  a couple hundred thousand workers"     Even if it was the libbyest libtard of them all...  they would probably balk at that proposal.

Even once Obama is gone.    If Hillary is elected.... she will face the same situation.

Lose jobs... again?     No.
How you gonna fuel a comeback economy with no jobs?


Buddy, I'm really not sure what you got out of my post. My point was that we are ALL (or almost all) Kensyians when it comes to the military but only the military. If we were Kensyian on everything else, then we could, you know, spend some of that money on other things.  I never said we should just stop immediately spending that money on military stuff. In fact, as a believer in the power of government spending, I suspect doing so would be a disaster. It would just be nice if we could all agree that spending can help the economy and then maybe transfer some of that military spending, over time, to more productive areas. Or, hey, how about we raise taxes on the wealthy and spend some extra money on infrastructure?

Our countries priorities are screwed up????     That is subjective.

This part was really neat. Yes, that was a subjective statement. Most political judgments are in the end, you know. By my subjective judgement (which I though was what my post was about) our priorities are screwed up. You clearly disagree. That is your subjective right.

The really bizarre thing is I suspect we agree on all of these core points, so I, once again, don't get the bizarre assertion that I think we should just cut tons of government spending tomorrow.
 
2013-11-29 02:16:13 PM
Time to set thermonuclear ICBM's to stun.
 
2013-11-29 02:22:29 PM
FTA:

"You'd better hope we never have a war again," the House Armed Services Committee chairman, Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., said of the decline in what the military calls its readiness.


That is the sincere hope of every veteran I know, bucko.
/(I see that you're the same kind of veteran as Rmoney.)
 
2013-11-29 02:30:57 PM

eiger: The really bizarre thing is I suspect we agree on all of these core points, so I, once again, don't get the bizarre assertion that I think we should just cut tons of government spending tomorrow.



That was one of the reasons I said "With all due respect..."I had no idea what you were saying.

Kenyesian???
Drop down about 10,000 feet in altitude to my level.

Our nations spending priorities are screwed up,   was a comment you made.    I dunno about that.

But I know the POTUS along with Congress is to budget what is spent.    Every year Defense goes up.  Even with sequestration, it is up.

Obama won't cut.
Harry Ried won't cut
Boehner might cut, but deep down doesn't want to lose jobs.  (sequestration is tiny cut)

So what we have is spend, spend, spend and spend some more.    For the sake of jobs.

No cuts will occur.    Even if they were needed.    Because jobs...

True ?
 
2013-11-29 02:37:00 PM
I see the FARK mods are hard at work...

img.fark.net
 
2013-11-29 02:37:41 PM

Brick-House: [3.bp.blogspot.com image 684x333]


*pulls string* "The whackadoodle goes herpa derp."
 
2013-11-29 02:47:55 PM

Brick-House: So WTF Dudes, arguing for a strong military is somehow now against the posting rules???



No, it's not.

But people here want to argue against anyone who is a proponent of a strong military.

Yet...

They can't right now.    It sucks for them.

Because is they argue 'Cuts',  they go against what the President says, and Leader Ried.
POTUS and the SENATE say spend spend spend spend.   Then raise taxes and spend spend spend.


As much as Obama would love to do it.    Gutting the military in the US would do harm to the weak, anemic and bordering on depression economy.

...and these farkers know it.
 
2013-11-29 02:48:24 PM

AtlanticCoast63: The US military could get by on a lot less money if the politicians would cut commitments and hidden costs along with the budget.  For instance, why are we still in Continental Europe?  Why are literally billions of dollars in environmental funds hidden in the defense budget?  Why are we buying airplanes we don't need or want?  (I'm lookin' at YOU, C-27 Spartan)

/And so on.


Well that one is easy. After they closed all the bases in the 90's they left behind superfund sites that they military is responsible for cleaning it up before those plots can be productive again.
 
2013-11-29 02:49:52 PM

Brick-House: [3.bp.blogspot.com image 684x333]


Was that funny, Haha or funny like a clown?
 
2013-11-29 02:50:28 PM
Yea, lotta good the big budget did on 9-11-01...mybe if you guys had a trillion dollar budget we would be safe?  Whoops, that bought us Iraq and Afghaninamistan. 

Yea, fark yourselves.
 
2013-11-29 02:55:27 PM

netcentric: eiger: netcentric: But as soon as you cut a program, you CUT JOBS.    And for his talk, Obama has done little to reign in spending.    The Military spent more in 2013 with sequestration than in 2012.

And for all the Democrats posturing on defense spending, they aren't willing to cut anything either for fear of losing a a big cash cow in their own backyard.   Or lose jobs for constituents.

It's because everyone, including conservatives, are magically Keynesians when it comes to military spending. It's too bad they aren't in other areas because a lot of that money could be more productively shifted somewhere else (like infrastructure) and jobs could still be maintained.

Our country's priorities are completely screwed up.

With all due respect, I have no idea what you are saying.    Our POTUS has said repeatedly we do not have a problem with spending.   We just have a revenue problem.

If you personally wish to change something regarding spending.   You need to convince the guys at the very top first.    If you want some cuts... in Defense?    You will need to accept the LOSS of JOBS.

You can't just flip people out of their Defense Jobs and suddenly have them start manufacturing wind mills and Rainbow machines.

Our countries priorities are screwed up????     That is subjective.

I'm pretty sure that if you stuck anybody in the Oval Office for a day and said  "hey, in the middle of this piss poor stagnating economy of ours... I propose we gut the military and lay off  a couple hundred thousand workers"     Even if it was the libbyest libtard of them all...  they would probably balk at that proposal.

Even once Obama is gone.    If Hillary is elected.... she will face the same situation.

Lose jobs... again?     No.
How you gonna fuel a comeback economy with no jobs?


So when you cut non-military spending those job losses are somehow better?
 
2013-11-29 02:58:40 PM
Heaven forbid we use some of that money to fix the country's infrastructure.
 
2013-11-29 03:01:19 PM

All2morrowsparTs: So when you cut non-military spending those job losses are somehow better?


edit for brevity...


No, see that is the corner that the nation has worked itself into.     Any cut, to any program means damaging this slug like,  shiattybeyondthepale,  JohnBoyWaltonDepression economy we have.

If feel a Krugman reference coming on.

...can't - hold - off - much - longer
 
2013-11-29 03:09:55 PM

jayhawk88: "You'd better hope we never have a war again," the House Armed Services Committee chairman, Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., said of the decline in what the military calls its readiness.

Well yes, we all do hope for that, every farking day of our lives, you farking piece of shiat. The fact that you are so farking eager to send young men and women to die is disgusting beyond my ability to express in words.


How many military bases and munitions/equipment manufacturers are there in his district.  I'm betting... a lot.
 
2013-11-29 03:13:20 PM
To be fair, the US does need to spend as much on their military as the rest of the world combined.

After all, the rest of the world is America's enemy. First, you've got the entire Islamic world, the entire former communist bloc, and China with their plans of world domination. Plus the Bolivaran/Castro axis. The Vietnamese are not fans of the US either.

But the threats don't stop there.

Germany's never been completely de-Nazified. Brazil elected a trade unionist a few years ago for god's sake. Canada invaded once, you know they'll do it again. France is a communist police-state that stomps on religious freedoms. Belgium's always threatening to spiral into civil war, and we know that civil war always gives birth to an Islamic theocracy.

And see how Australia has started cuddling up to the Chinese? What about New Zealand with their anti-nuclear stance? The Netherlands is a drug haven, Haiti is full of armed gangs and Tuvalu is blaming America for that whole global warming thing.

Frankly, given the numbers of America's enemies, I think military spending should be ten times what it is now. Every American should serve in the military for ten years, minimum. The entire economy should be dedicated to making more war stuff. Until we can blacken the skies with a million fighter planes and blacken the seas with a million battleships, we will remain forever in danger!
 
2013-11-29 03:17:08 PM

Suckmaster Burstingfoam: To be fair, the US does need to spend as much on their military as the rest of the world combined.

After all, the rest of the world is America's enemy. First, you've got the entire Islamic world, the entire former communist bloc, and China with their plans of world domination. Plus the Bolivaran/Castro axis. The Vietnamese are not fans of the US either.

But the threats don't stop there.

Germany's never been completely de-Nazified. Brazil elected a trade unionist a few years ago for god's sake. Canada invaded once, you know they'll do it again. France is a communist police-state that stomps on religious freedoms. Belgium's always threatening to spiral into civil war, and we know that civil war always gives birth to an Islamic theocracy.

And see how Australia has started cuddling up to the Chinese? What about New Zealand with their anti-nuclear stance? The Netherlands is a drug haven, Haiti is full of armed gangs and Tuvalu is blaming America for that whole global warming thing.

Frankly, given the numbers of America's enemies, I think military spending should be ten times what it is now. Every American should serve in the military for ten years, minimum. The entire economy should be dedicated to making more war stuff. Until we can blacken the skies with a million fighter planes and blacken the seas with a million battleships, we will remain forever in danger!


...it sucks to be you right now,   doesn't it?


/painful
 
2013-11-29 03:17:47 PM

Brick-House: I see the FARK mods are hard at work...

[img.fark.net image 800x571]



You poor, poor oppressed troll, having your posts that are just personal attacks deleted.

Mine was deleted too. You don't see me whining.
 
2013-11-29 03:27:18 PM
If we can't have more troops than the world, where will we be when the world revolts against us? We'll be enslaved by the Chinese! The British! The Greeks! The Lithuanians! Oh God, the Lithuanians!
 
Displayed 50 of 68 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report