Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

dirty dog · 08-22-2010, 07:28 PM

Several weeks ago, Wellendowed and I exchanged in a discussion on cutting military spending, he told me that we did not need out high tech weapons, and we did not need the f-22 because no other country was close to us in technology and they were not working hard to develope it. He told me that our enemeys were going to be middle eastern, poor and you dont need a stealth fighter to fight the taliban, I tried to explain to my brother that our enemys are always working to defeat us and cutting the military budget would be harmful to us as a nation.

Well since this discussion, the Chinese have announced the development of a carrier killing missle and today Iran (one of the poor middleeast country's) announced its first unmanned bomber. HMMMMMM naw they can never catch us right.

Heres the link.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100822/...nmanned_bomber

Guest052813-01 · 08-22-2010, 08:20 PM

This is why all of those people on the left have no idea of the true threat to our national security and why we have to keep ourselves actively pursuing high-tech weapons, because you never know who will develop their own weapons. We're not going to make peace with our enemies by sitting around in a circle holding hands and singing Kimbuya. The only way is deterrance to let our enemies know that if they attack is, we can destroy them three-times over.

Bartman1963 · 08-22-2010, 08:52 PM

All of those people on the left....

You're saying that everyone on the left has the same opinion. Get real. Not everyone on the left thinks we don't need high tech weapons, or even the best military. You wouldn't enjoy being lumped in with certain elements of the right, don't lump me in with those on the left who believe defense spending shouldn't be a priority.

I will say this. You want the best weapons? Money. Money from taxes. We want more and better superweapons, then we are gonna have to pay for them, and they are expensive as hell. I get so tired of people bitching about taxes, when we are in the middle of two wars! Pay our taxes, and support our troops with our money and our verbosity.

CuteOldGuy · 08-22-2010, 10:43 PM

Having a first rate military does not require an increase in taxes. Congress simply needs to prioritize and cut out waste, and unnecessary programs. But since Congress thrives on waste and unnecessary programs, good luck. When I complain about taxes, and I will, it is not because of the military.

john_galt · 08-23-2010, 01:41 AM

Bartman, riddle me this. Name a lefty (a real lefty) that is also pro-military. The dems have run all of the pro-military people out of their party.

I can name a couple of leftys that supported select programs because it benefited their districts and reelection chances; Ted Kennedy, Eleanor Holmes Norton

catnipdipper · 08-23-2010, 07:48 AM

Anyone else think that the Iranian Drone looked like a WWII V-1 rocket?

john_galt · 08-23-2010, 10:35 AM

and most rockets look like a World War II V-2 rocket, which looked like some of the stuff that Goddard launched. Your point? What works, works. I have a .44 cap and ball pistol like they had in 1860 and it will do some damage to you. So once again, what is your point?

Cheaper2buyit · 08-23-2010, 11:39 AM

well from what I have been told I am a lefty & I am pro smart military & by that I mean spend smart money Not help your buddy pet project money.

dirty dog · 08-23-2010, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bartman1963

All of those people on the left....

You're saying that everyone on the left has the same opinion. Get real. Not everyone on the left thinks we don't need high tech weapons, or even the best military. You wouldn't enjoy being lumped in with certain elements of the right, don't lump me in with those on the left who believe defense spending shouldn't be a priority.

I will say this. You want the best weapons? Money. Money from taxes. We want more and better superweapons, then we are gonna have to pay for them, and they are expensive as hell. I get so tired of people bitching about taxes, when we are in the middle of two wars! Pay our taxes, and support our troops with our money and our verbosity.

I agree with you Bart, spend it smart, and if we must reduce, reduce it smart. I would prefer not to reduce, but we can save money by changing the pro0cedures for procuring the equipment. For example: the Beretta 92 used by the military costs $200.00 more than a glock 17 which is a far better weapon, the sweetheart set ups for Boing, Mcdonnal Douglas, and Drummand, this needs to be opened up to true competion even from selected outside of the country sources.

Longermonger · 08-24-2010, 07:48 AM

This thread is all over the place. What are you talking about?

Handguns? Fighter jets? Space weapons? Multi-billion dollar hi-tech weapons research projects are different than buying handguns or wasting money on a turkey like the F-22 that's made for a fight we're not going to have.

dirty dog · 08-24-2010, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Longermonger

This thread is all over the place. What are you talking about?

Handguns? Fighter jets? Space weapons? Multi-billion dollar hi-tech weapons research projects are different than buying handguns or wasting money on a turkey like the F-22 that's made for a fight we're not going to have.

How do you know where not going to have it, besides the F22 is being replaced by the JSF, so the military believes we need the technology, how come you think that countrys like Russia and CHina are not working on this technology right now, they are. You have to have the hi tech research, that where the new weapons are coming from. If the Iranians see the need for this its amazing to me how come those on the far left dont. The point about handguns and other items was that there are areas that savings could be found without eliminating the high tech research, besides a lot of this research ends up as technology that we civilians use today. At one time, the internet was part of this high tech weapons research, so was GPS.....

lacrew_2000 · 08-24-2010, 01:20 PM

Wanna save tons of money? Put O'Reilly's or Autozone in charge of the Army parts system.

Army system: Some company owned by some congressman's son in law has the sole supplier contract....name your own price. Shipping is done low priority and can take weeks. If the parts keep breaking, you just keep buying more crappy parts. High wear parts are in short supply, low wear parts are gathering dust in warehouses.

Autozone system: Usually a few brands to chose from, have it here in two days. Surprisingly cost effective.

I'll give one quick example: A tank has four sprockets to drive the tracks, two on each side. When you order them, you can't get just one, can't order a pair, can't order four...they come packaged three to a pallet?!?!?

Cheaper2buyit · 08-24-2010, 03:53 PM

I would like to know how many prez or vice prezs ( like old dick) that has started a war have family that makes money off defence contracts

dirty dog · 08-24-2010, 06:01 PM

Well Johnson's wife was a large stockholder in dowell chemical, you know the maker of the Napalm which was used a lot in vietnam. Old Dick, I assume you mean Nixon, did not start the war he ended it, Kennedy started it. Bush didnt but Cheney did.

Cheaper2buyit · 08-24-2010, 06:21 PM

old dick cheney