If we try to do this and then the host countries say no, do we pull out and leave them vulnerable or do we stay? I think China would love what your proposing.
The case for a progressive foreign policy
- Thread starter CharminTide
- Start date
If they don't want us there, then why should we be there? We can't keep treating them as infants. If they make a decision and don't want us there, fine, pull our troops out and bring them home. Why is that hard to get? They understand the issue with China knocking at their back door. It's a chance they'll have to take if they chose to make it.
What is the advantage economically or otherwise to us being there at no cost to Koreans or Japanese?
At what cost? Are you willing to forego maintaining our country at the expense of providing protection to another? That makes no sense.
What level of navy would you maintain? Should it be mothballed? If not, would the navy travel the oceans of the globe or simply patrol our waters like the Coast Guard?
Last edited:
You and I have different ideas on the role of government so I doubt we would agree on where the money would be better spent or if the government should even spend it. However, if you read my posts from way earlier today, you will see I was not entirely pro military. I think there is alot of waste in the military. I have seen 6 men do a 2 man job before. I think we have a poster on tidefans that has a non military government job and posts about inefficiencies of government and trust me, it carries into the military too. I think we can both agree on cutting military spending, you just want to do it by becoming noninterventionist and I want to do it by becoming efficient.
Absolutely maintain our navy. That's our front line defense. We have Guam, Diego Garcia, & Hawaii in the Indian and Pacific not including state side. Atlantic is not as problematic in regards to initial responses from the countries that pose problems to us. I would like for us to have at least 10 carrier groups with 2-4 of those in ready reserve that are used in training and can be pivoted in a matter of a month or so to be fully operational.
Ditto for our air force.
I'd like to see us maintain 3 active Marine divisions, 10-12 active/reserve Army divisions with at least 1 reserve Marine division and I personally would like to see our National Guard be much, much bigger.
But with all this, we have to control costs.
Last edited:
And if you've read my posts over the last few years, you would know that I am pro military but I'd rather our military be locally sourced. I'm a big believer in us fixing our problems at home before we go and try and fix other countries problems. Again, $20T in debt, crumbling infrastructure, something has to give somewhere.
We keep buying more and more expense aircraft when the aircraft like the F-15 & F-16 and A-10 are still far superior to what most countries have and are economical. The F-15 & F-16 would run circles around anything the Iranians or Norks had.
The Russian air force is a joke. The only real threat is China and the only way they win is through shear overwhelming numbers. Instead, we're pumping hundreds of billions into a "cool" aircraft with substandard results in the F-35.
Ditto for our carriers. How much does one carrier cost now? $8B?
The Russian air force is a joke. The only real threat is China and the only way they win is through shear overwhelming numbers. Instead, we're pumping hundreds of billions into a "cool" aircraft with substandard results in the F-35.
Ditto for our carriers. How much does one carrier cost now? $8B?
This is one of the inefficiencies I was speaking on dealing with the military. I think Tidehsv posted a link about it maybe 2 years ago. We could save alot of money just by being smarter on what technology the military funds. Also, it's been a few years, but I saw where a National Guard soldier costs the government about one third of what an active duty soldier does so I could see moving alot of our army to NG. However, where do you come up with the numbers of how many we actually still need to stay active to respond to immediate threats? Are those guesses or do you have some data?
Educated guesses. As long as China has a large, active military, prudence demands we have an initial force to buffer, repel or respond as necessary.
Because some of us have ancestors who came from those places, as they wanted nothing to do with it.
Capisce?
Of course.................one can always get in their car, and drive north...............
(I also see we have different definitions of the word "effective". Or should I say, different metrics as to being effective in what terms. To the "progressive" mindset, it probably means rigid adherence to a convoluted theory of how the individual must set aside their being, for the greater good of the collective. Yes, those educational brainwashing techniques are effective. No, thanks.)
We already do have free and heavily subsidized education and while it has some serious problems, most adults in this country are products of said education. I think several billionaires are the product of this education, doctors, CEOs, etc.
As are millions of idiots.
"Drop out of school, before your mind rots, from exposure to our mediocre educational system." - Frank Zappa
"Drop out of school, before your mind rots, from exposure to our mediocre educational system." - Frank Zappa
Black Vermonters make up just 1.2% of the state's general population, but 10.7% of its incarcerated population.
So this thread is about foreign policy, education, and now the demographics and incarceration rate of another state?
Yes it is off topic and out of place. I even like Bernie Sanders but I see him as an elitist, and I am cynical of much of what he says. Same as I feel about most politicians. It was not meant to be a racially divisive remark, just that he lives in a different bubble than I do.
It also was part of a google search that has nothing to do with foreign policy. Please accept my apology. :redface: on TideFans.com
Last edited:
I felt it was due as much to his TV personality as anything.....so I blame Hollywood.
I've even begun to deplore the word progressive.
Last edited:
Does this mean that they were treated unfairly for going to prison for breaking the law? I hear this type of statistic all the time and it always makes me wonder why people think criminals should be in direct correlation with race.
Latest threads
-
SEC West Showdown Sends Alabama to Oxford to Meet with Ole Miss- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
Davis II Named to Stopper of the Year Midseason Watch List
- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
Eleven-Run Third Powers Alabama to 14-5 Win over Samford
- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
Maybe aTm's Pockets Aren't So Bottomless After All -- Layoffs In The Athletic Department
- Started by 4Q Basket Case
- Replies: 6
-
Time to un-vacate 2005-2007 on field victories and un-forfeit the 1993 season?
- Started by CmdrThor
- Replies: 24
-