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.

All Comments

  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 12 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Thought that I had replied to this post, but for some reason, it isn't showing up.

    Yes, reducing the national guard would concern me, but this isn't up to the Fed gov't. They can reduce/eliminate funding, but it is ultimately up to the state governors. They control the size and make up of the nat gd.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 12 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    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 | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 12 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Well, I would prefer to bring our forces home from Europe instead of closing continental bases. Why should we be pumping money into foreign economies to protect against no real threat?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Hiraghm 12 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I've noticed how, this time, Southern States are getting industry... some of it foreign industry... unlike last time.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 12 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    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 | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 12 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    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 | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo