Iran threatened to shoot down US Navy spy planes in the Persian Gulf

[poido123]

There is nothing wrong with America having a vastly superior military.

The wrong guy has the control.

The problem is that Obama has been willfully creating a divide and shaming americans into believing that nationalism and self preservation is racist.


Iran is about to find out how fcked they are when Trump gets into office. Trump will actually listen to his military advisors and senior staff, not override their decisions and ignore them like Obama does.

[HarryBergeron]

Poido, mate... You really shouldn't be so expansive with your posts, you very clearly have ZERO idea what you are talking about. Trump has proposed a non-interventionist foreign policy, which would likely mean not patrolling the water 900m from Iran. Why would they be "fvcked?" He's proposing not doing the things that might lead to a confrontation, silly.

As for America's military, history would beg to differ. The U.S is currently $18T in debt w/ $120T in unfunded liabilities (money they have promised to spend, but have not set aside for). Much of this is caused by having a military budget larger than the next seven countries (China, Saudi Arabia, Russia, UK, India, France, Japan) combined. Most of this is not spent on actual defence (like Israel's missile shield, border wall, armed patrols etc. now that's defence), but rather on relics from the past, for example the large number of troops that are perpetually station in Australia, Japan and Germany (among others) things that have not served a legitimate defencive purpose in 70 years. Not to mention that the US is guarding the South Korean border, despite the South Koreans being perfectly capable of doing the jobs themselves.


You are however, correct in saying that Trump is arguing for an America-first, nationalist foreign policy... That's what non-interventionism is.

[UK2K]

I'm pretty sure if UK was born Iranian he'd be the biggest US hater of all time.

But I vote Republican...

[9erempiree]

The problem is our military sucks right now. I have been following the development of our 5th gen fighters because I'm a huge fan of aviation and it fails in comparison to Russia's and China's.

In a recent dogfight between a F-16 and the F35....the F16 dominated it.

The jet is a lemon and we are spending a lot of money to redesign it.

Google and read this failure.

The F22 was a pretty good jet but it can only fight in packs like a pack of wolves to be effective but they ceased production and parts are no longer available. So we basically have a bunch of grounded F22's that we hardly and don't ever use but the technology is still too new and advanced to sell to other countries.

So for those wondering what Trump is referring to when he says our military sucks....he's referring to this new jet, that we are spending 80% of our budget on. I don't know the exact figures but this program is the most expensive and we are not developing anything as of right now besides this jet.

[HarryBergeron]

The problem is our military sucks right now. I have been following the development of our 5th gen fighters because I'm a huge fan of aviation and it fails in comparison to Russia's and China's.

In a recent dogfight between a F-16 and the F35....the F16 dominated it.

The jet is a lemon and we are spending a lot of money to redesign it.

Google and read this failure.

It seems like this is a terrible side-effect of pork barreling. Some Congressman from the third district of West dummyois fights tooth and nail to keep a plant that manufactures some component of an outdated fighter so he can get re-elected. The US WAY overspends for the actual amount of effective defence they have.

[UK2K]

It seems like this is a terrible side-effect of pork barreling. Some Congressman from the third district of West dummyois fights tooth and nail to keep a plant that manufactures some component of an outdated fighter so he can get re-elected. The US WAY overspends for the actual amount of effective defence they have.

That's called politics... and from the DNC leaks, it appears our current administration is pretty good at it...

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2...esnt-want.html

The new defense spending bill includes $120 million for tanks that the Army has repeatedly said it doesn't want.

"It's just one example and it's not unique to this year," Harrison said. "In some cases, Congress is using its appropriate role of oversight. In some cases, Congress can act out of purely parochial interests."

The tank debate between the Army and Congress goes back to 2012 when Odierno testified that "we don't need the tanks. Our tank fleet is two and a half years old on average now. We're in good shape and these are additional tanks that we don't need."

Odierno lost then too. Congress voted for another $183 million for tanks despite Odierno's argument that the Army was seeking to become a lighter force. He told the Associated Press at the time that "if we had our choice, we would use that money in a different way" than spending it on 70-ton Abrams tanks.

Where do you think those tanks are manufactured? In someone's district, of course....

[HarryBergeron]

No, it's called pork barreling and it is unnecessary