Military drawdown

Posted by Robbie53024 12 years, 6 months ago to Government
9 comments | Share | Flag

My black helicopter has been buzzing since I first heard the news.

1) Reduction of a standing army so that there is less of a "resistance force" for any governmental action.
2) Purging those that don't show the proper "attitude" to support a governmental lockdown.
3) Punishment to red states (by reducing/eliminating military bases) due to reduced military base needs.
SOURCE URL: http://news.yahoo.com/pentagon-proposes-shrink-us-army-pre-wwii-level-183915098.html;_ylt=AwrTWf1X8gtTyCsAGVTQtDMD


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by 12 years, 6 months ago
    Just to support #3 -

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/02/24/21...

    Looks like 2 red states are being targeted. Coincidence?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by khalling 12 years, 6 months ago
      Besides it is better in the long run for red states to be less dependent on military industry. In my city there are 5 count em 5 military bases. In our economic development meetings the talk would always be - support expansion of the bases! Look how these troops help our local economy. And it's true. We would always say and a burgeoning startup that employs 500 engineers and tech management positions where salaries are much higher and the synergy of bringing other high tech in because they tend to cluster- let's not focus on THAT?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by khalling 12 years, 6 months ago
      But also I saw three dem states affected in the article. You 've got to admit as with anything run by the govt the bloat is huge the duplication of force structure etc. We need to be moving towards smaller more highly trained forces.
      The part that bothered me was the reduction of national guard.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by 12 years, 6 months ago
        Yes, I'll agree that the bloat is huge. But the reductions in force structure is the wrong approach.
        This thinking that technology is less costly is absurd. One Tomahawk missile is what $10 Million? And we lob those out like they were candy.
        No war was ever won without occupying the terrain, and never will be. You need boots to occupy.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo