Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops

Go Back   Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops > InsideHoops Main Basketball Forums > Off the Court Lounge

Off the Court Lounge Basketball fans talk about everything EXCEPT basketball here

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-02-2012, 07:18 PM   #32
Balla_Status
______________________
 
Balla_Status's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,763
Balla_Status is popular on this boardBalla_Status is popular on this boardBalla_Status is popular on this boardBalla_Status is popular on this board
Default Re: People actually think that reducing the size of military will weaken America...

Par for the course of the corps at Texas A&M.

Less than 10% of the university yet are the most embarrassing.
Balla_Status is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 07:31 PM   #33
Joshumitsu
Local High School Star
 
Joshumitsu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,789
Joshumitsu has an incredible reputation hereJoshumitsu has an incredible reputation hereJoshumitsu has an incredible reputation hereJoshumitsu has an incredible reputation hereJoshumitsu has an incredible reputation hereJoshumitsu has an incredible reputation hereJoshumitsu has an incredible reputation here
Default Re: People actually think that reducing the size of military will weaken America...

Reducing the size of the military is a necessity, especially in this economy and especially since the War is drawing down to a close. Unfortunately, if you reduce the military budget, our vets will be the ones left without jobs and/or basic needs while all the aircraft, tank, and missile contracts will still be left intact.

As for military reductions and defense? We only need to expand special operations instead and not allow them be used by politicians to promote an agenda (otherwise, everything else needs to be cut). We could've saved hundreds of billions if we let Special Forces (The Green Berets) handle Afghanistan. They had already toppled the Taliban before conventional troops stepped foot and has the kind of nation build and cultural sensitivity training that no 19 year old grunt has.

Also, contrary to popular liberal belief (I'm liberal btw), having military bases around the world ISN'T as bad as it sounds. It actually prevents major conflicts from erupting (no one wants to use military might because it would erupt into a full-scale war where everyone loses).

Last edited by Joshumitsu : 11-02-2012 at 07:33 PM.
Joshumitsu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 09:53 PM   #34
Kumo
ISH Jump Crew
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Behind you.
Posts: 2,404
Kumo is considered somewhat coolKumo is considered somewhat coolKumo is considered somewhat cool
Default Re: People actually think that reducing the size of military will weaken America...

Military member here. If done correctly, it's my opinion that we'll have a stronger military if it's smaller. If we can downsize, and keep the top Soldiers, Marines, Sailors, it will become more competitive, and the remaining troops will be the most qualified/strong/smart.

It's the military though, so they'll probably cut all the good ones, and keep the shitbags.
Kumo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 06:53 AM   #35
LuppersGB
GB Laker Nation
 
LuppersGB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Across the Pond
Posts: 890
LuppersGB is considered somewhat coolLuppersGB is considered somewhat coolLuppersGB is considered somewhat cool
Default Re: People actually think that reducing the size of military will weaken America...

The way I have interpreted it is a net decrease but a strategic increase based on the future intentions of US Foreign Policy. The US is slowly leaving Europe and moving to the Pacific. Like a Previous poster it is a situation where reducing strength will actually increase strength.
The same thing is happening here in the UK, We are reducing our forces to become streamlined, efficient and fingers crossed therefore more effective
LuppersGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 09:55 AM   #36
D-Rose
Mavericks/Bulls
 
D-Rose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11,309
D-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable
Default Re: People actually think that reducing the size of military will weaken America...

If anyone else is really into foreign policy, please read Leslie Gelb's book "Power Rules" or watch some of his lectures on youtube. Absolute genius.
D-Rose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 12:26 PM   #37
Nanners
Decent college freshman
 
Nanners's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: OKC
Posts: 2,868
Nanners is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableNanners is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableNanners is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableNanners is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableNanners is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableNanners is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableNanners is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableNanners is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableNanners is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableNanners is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableNanners is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable
Default Re: People actually think that reducing the size of military will weaken America...

Quote:
Originally Posted by longhornfan1234
We should cut back, but we need to cut entitlements first.


List of cuts:

Welfare and food stamps

Medicare

SS

Parent planhood

PBS

Medicaid

Subsidies for oil companies


No more freebies.

anybody who says we need to cut Planned Parenthood and PBS is basically screaming "I AM AN IDIOT"

I agree about subsidies for oil companies though. end corporate welfare and entitlements (tax cuts) for the super rich, then we can talk about ending welfare for the poor.
Nanners is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 01:41 PM   #38
Kobe 4 The Win
Chasing Legends
 
Kobe 4 The Win's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Staples Center
Posts: 2,206
Kobe 4 The Win is a pretty well-respected posterKobe 4 The Win is a pretty well-respected posterKobe 4 The Win is a pretty well-respected poster
Default Re: People actually think that reducing the size of military will weaken America...

I don't have words to describe the f**king idiocy I'm reading in this thread. Terrorism will decrease if we cut our defense spending? They hate us because we bomb and occupy their countries. What muslim country were we bombing and occupying on 9/11 or the first time they tried to blow up the WTC? Pick up a history book you f**king morons.
Kobe 4 The Win is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 01:59 PM   #39
Kobe 4 The Win
Chasing Legends
 
Kobe 4 The Win's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Staples Center
Posts: 2,206
Kobe 4 The Win is a pretty well-respected posterKobe 4 The Win is a pretty well-respected posterKobe 4 The Win is a pretty well-respected poster
Default Re: People actually think that reducing the size of military will weaken America...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kumo
Military member here. If done correctly, it's my opinion that we'll have a stronger military if it's smaller. If we can downsize, and keep the top Soldiers, Marines, Sailors, it will become more competitive, and the remaining troops will be the most qualified/strong/smart.

It's the military though, so they'll probably cut all the good ones, and keep the shitbags.

The enemies of the future like the Chinese and the Russians are going to require larger numbers of forces than the wars in the middle east. Also, what wins wars for us is technological superiority and that costs money. The .gov blows through money like a coke addict. We need to reign in spending that is not neccessary. National defense is one of the few important responsabilities that .gov has. How does sending billions of dollars in foreign aid to countries that hate us benefit the citizens of the USA?
Kobe 4 The Win is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 02:49 PM   #40
D-Rose
Mavericks/Bulls
 
D-Rose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11,309
D-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableD-Rose is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable
Default Re: People actually think that reducing the size of military will weaken America...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobe 4 The Win
I don't have words to describe the f**king idiocy I'm reading in this thread. Terrorism will decrease if we cut our defense spending? They hate us because we bomb and occupy their countries. What muslim country were we bombing and occupying on 9/11 or the first time they tried to blow up the WTC? Pick up a history book you f**king morons.
It's obvious that preventing foreign attacks on American soil is not dependent on how large our military is, but on how strong our intelligence and leadership is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobe 4 The Win
The enemies of the future like the Chinese and the Russians are going to require larger numbers of forces than the wars in the middle east. Also, what wins wars for us is technological superiority and that costs money. The .gov blows through money like a coke addict. We need to reign in spending that is not neccessary. National defense is one of the few important responsabilities that .gov has. How does sending billions of dollars in foreign aid to countries that hate us benefit the citizens of the USA?

Do you understand foreign policy at all? Have you any idea beyond military use what makes one successful in negotiating with other nations? I know that many entitlements we give to countries are not justified, but many are far more powerful than any military assault. These are the threads by which our diplomacy is held together. There are two sides to the negotiation, you must give up something to gain allies. Can you imagine where we would be if we didn't give aid to Pakistan after 9/11? Can you imagine a volatile and militarily powerful Pakistan allied with the insurgents right now? Probably not, because our leaders aren't so rash after all.

We are spending about $750 billion a year on our military. The next country? China at $143 billion. Do you want to know why China is rising so fast in the global spectrum without spending even half what we do on defense? Their economy and their power as a lender. International policy is not entirely about diplomacy or military power. These are merely cherries to a much larger cake. The means by which we can have other nations give us what we want and what they wish not to give up is the greatest indication of power. Soft power and Hard power are both flawed in this regard, don't let party ideology define views on this.

The era of mass ground warfare between large and powerful nations is over. We are in the era of nuclear weapons, wake up! It's not like we're going to deploy all of our troops onto a ground assault against Russia or China. These sorts of assertions are ridiculous. These nations for the most part are not even players in the international community in terms of making alliances and entering into the affairs of other countries (for the most part at least). They're more concerned with their internal affairs, such as economics. If there ever was a legitimate war against either of them, it'd involve nuclear weapons. I fully believe that the amount of obstacles and stupidity that exist before that point are so overwhelming, that it won't happen.

But just in case it does...our military spending is already far more than the next greatest nations, our technology is far superior, and our alliances further reaching and more powerful. We're still the indispensable nation in this world, yet we now have to be mindful of the nations that have risen and must use effective policy to work and deal with them.

The post-WWII and Cold War era has taught us that conventional military interventions without substance or direction are the demise of our international power. Vietnam, Iraq II, Afghanistan are prime examples. Some "good" wars have been Iraq I and Korea. Military muscle is proving to be less effective as the years go on. How is it that the most powerful country in the world with the most advanced military technology can not defeat insurgents with limited resources and weaponry? Welcome to the 21st century.

/end essay
D-Rose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 04:33 PM   #41
MavsSuperFan
NBA lottery pick
 
MavsSuperFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 5,604
MavsSuperFan is popular on this boardMavsSuperFan is popular on this boardMavsSuperFan is popular on this boardMavsSuperFan is popular on this board
Default Re: People actually think that reducing the size of military will weaken America...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobe 4 The Win
I don't have words to describe the f**king idiocy I'm reading in this thread. Terrorism will decrease if we cut our defense spending? They hate us because we bomb and occupy their countries. What muslim country were we bombing and occupying on 9/11 or the first time they tried to blow up the WTC? Pick up a history book you f**king morons.

Ever read about the Shah of Iran, partitioning of Palestine (which I agree with, but imagine if someone came to us and said that we needed to partition out land for a new nation controlled by native Americans, I understand why they are mad), Overthrow of democratically elected Mossadegh, giving WMDs (nerve gas) to Saddam, which was used to massacre Kurds, claiming to be neutral in the Palestine/Israeli dispute (I am not saying Israel is always wrong, just that we are obviously not neutral), Supporting brutal dictators in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, UAE, Oman, Bahrain, Kuwait, the Shah, etc.

Terrorism wont decrease if we cut defence. Terrorism will decrease when we stop supporting dictators in the middle east and stop antagonizing them with our foreign policy.

America is the strongest country in the world. Imagine how much Brock Lesnar would have to piss you off before you took a swing at him. We managed to incite nations obviously weaker than us to attack us, do you realize what that took? Basically raping them for 5 decades.
MavsSuperFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 04:44 PM   #42
MavsSuperFan
NBA lottery pick
 
MavsSuperFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 5,604
MavsSuperFan is popular on this boardMavsSuperFan is popular on this boardMavsSuperFan is popular on this boardMavsSuperFan is popular on this board
Default Re: People actually think that reducing the size of military will weaken America...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobe 4 The Win
The enemies of the future like the Chinese and the Russians are going to require larger numbers of forces than the wars in the middle east. Also, what wins wars for us is technological superiority and that costs money. The .gov blows through money like a coke addict. We need to reign in spending that is not neccessary. National defense is one of the few important responsabilities that .gov has. How does sending billions of dollars in foreign aid to countries that hate us benefit the citizens of the USA?

Foreign aid is about 1% of government spending, getting rid of it does nothing.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-percent-us-b/

Secondly the vast majority of foreign aid goes to countries who are allies (at the very least their governments are) or countries we are strategically interested in (Eg. its important for Pakistan to have money to protect its nukes so they dont go loose). A miniscule amount of foreign aid money goes to countries that don't benefit America at all.

Technological superiority is what will decide who has the strongest military, we agree there. Spending mountains of money on increasing the size of the military doesn't necessarily help its technological level. The most important element in fielding an advanced military is economic success. Stimulating the economy and helping people find jobs is the best way to ensure our national security.
MavsSuperFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 05:02 PM   #43
Pacers4ever
Banned
 
Pacers4ever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 953
Pacers4ever has an OK reputation so far
Default Re: People actually think that reducing the size of military will weaken America...

Quote:
Originally Posted by D-Rose
It's obvious that preventing foreign attacks on American soil is not dependent on how large our military is, but on how strong our intelligence and leadership is.



Do you understand foreign policy at all? Have you any idea beyond military use what makes one successful in negotiating with other nations? I know that many entitlements we give to countries are not justified, but many are far more powerful than any military assault. These are the threads by which our diplomacy is held together. There are two sides to the negotiation, you must give up something to gain allies. Can you imagine where we would be if we didn't give aid to Pakistan after 9/11? Can you imagine a volatile and militarily powerful Pakistan allied with the insurgents right now? Probably not, because our leaders aren't so rash after all.

We are spending about $750 billion a year on our military. The next country? China at $143 billion. Do you want to know why China is rising so fast in the global spectrum without spending even half what we do on defense? Their economy and their power as a lender. International policy is not entirely about diplomacy or military power. These are merely cherries to a much larger cake. The means by which we can have other nations give us what we want and what they wish not to give up is the greatest indication of power. Soft power and Hard power are both flawed in this regard, don't let party ideology define views on this.

The era of mass ground warfare between large and powerful nations is over. We are in the era of nuclear weapons, wake up! It's not like we're going to deploy all of our troops onto a ground assault against Russia or China. These sorts of assertions are ridiculous. These nations for the most part are not even players in the international community in terms of making alliances and entering into the affairs of other countries (for the most part at least). They're more concerned with their internal affairs, such as economics. If there ever was a legitimate war against either of them, it'd involve nuclear weapons. I fully believe that the amount of obstacles and stupidity that exist before that point are so overwhelming, that it won't happen.

But just in case it does...our military spending is already far more than the next greatest nations, our technology is far superior, and our alliances further reaching and more powerful. We're still the indispensable nation in this world, yet we now have to be mindful of the nations that have risen and must use effective policy to work and deal with them.

The post-WWII and Cold War era has taught us that conventional military interventions without substance or direction are the demise of our international power. Vietnam, Iraq II, Afghanistan are prime examples. Some "good" wars have been Iraq I and Korea. Military muscle is proving to be less effective as the years go on. How is it that the most powerful country in the world with the most advanced military technology can not defeat insurgents with limited resources and weaponry? Welcome to the 21st century.

/end essay
I'm going to need that essay/rant for school if you don't mind.
Pacers4ever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 06:46 PM   #44
Kobe 4 The Win
Chasing Legends
 
Kobe 4 The Win's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Staples Center
Posts: 2,206
Kobe 4 The Win is a pretty well-respected posterKobe 4 The Win is a pretty well-respected posterKobe 4 The Win is a pretty well-respected poster
Default Re: People actually think that reducing the size of military will weaken America...

D-Rose-

I can't respond to all that bullshit. A forum like this is not a place for f**king essays. I think you are naive and the scary thing is that the United States is breeding and entire generation of people who think just like you. Best of luck to you when the shit hits the fan......and it will.
Kobe 4 The Win is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 08:32 PM   #45
LuppersGB
GB Laker Nation
 
LuppersGB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Across the Pond
Posts: 890
LuppersGB is considered somewhat coolLuppersGB is considered somewhat coolLuppersGB is considered somewhat cool
Default Re: People actually think that reducing the size of military will weaken America...

Quote:
Originally Posted by D-Rose
It's obvious that preventing foreign attacks on American soil is not dependent on how large our military is, but on how strong our intelligence and leadership is.



Do you understand foreign policy at all? Have you any idea beyond military use what makes one successful in negotiating with other nations? I know that many entitlements we give to countries are not justified, but many are far more powerful than any military assault. These are the threads by which our diplomacy is held together. There are two sides to the negotiation, you must give up something to gain allies. Can you imagine where we would be if we didn't give aid to Pakistan after 9/11? Can you imagine a volatile and militarily powerful Pakistan allied with the insurgents right now? Probably not, because our leaders aren't so rash after all.

We are spending about $750 billion a year on our military. The next country? China at $143 billion. Do you want to know why China is rising so fast in the global spectrum without spending even half what we do on defense? Their economy and their power as a lender. International policy is not entirely about diplomacy or military power. These are merely cherries to a much larger cake. The means by which we can have other nations give us what we want and what they wish not to give up is the greatest indication of power. Soft power and Hard power are both flawed in this regard, don't let party ideology define views on this.

The era of mass ground warfare between large and powerful nations is over. We are in the era of nuclear weapons, wake up! It's not like we're going to deploy all of our troops onto a ground assault against Russia or China. These sorts of assertions are ridiculous. These nations for the most part are not even players in the international community in terms of making alliances and entering into the affairs of other countries (for the most part at least). They're more concerned with their internal affairs, such as economics. If there ever was a legitimate war against either of them, it'd involve nuclear weapons. I fully believe that the amount of obstacles and stupidity that exist before that point are so overwhelming, that it won't happen.

But just in case it does...our military spending is already far more than the next greatest nations, our technology is far superior, and our alliances further reaching and more powerful. We're still the indispensable nation in this world, yet we now have to be mindful of the nations that have risen and must use effective policy to work and deal with them.

The post-WWII and Cold War era has taught us that conventional military interventions without substance or direction are the demise of our international power. Vietnam, Iraq II, Afghanistan are prime examples. Some "good" wars have been Iraq I and Korea. Military muscle is proving to be less effective as the years go on. How is it that the most powerful country in the world with the most advanced military technology can not defeat insurgents with limited resources and weaponry? Welcome to the 21st century.

/end essay

nice, decent and enjoyable read. Though contrary to what I said earlier I would like counter this argument:
In a world of uncertainty that we live in the only currency is power. What is power? is it economics? - yes in part, is it diplomacy? - yes in part or the notion of history and prestige? - yes again. However the real truth is that power lies in violence, the true concept of a nation state relies on the ability to act violently to legitimise power. Thusly, in a world of uncertainty surely increasing the monopoly, of the ability to assert, power through its one true identity:violence is the only way to truly defend yourself.
LuppersGB is offline   Reply With Quote
This NBA Basketball News Website Sponsored by:
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:07 PM.




NBA Basketball Forum Key Links:
InsideHoops Home
NBA Rumors
Basketball Blog
NBA Daily Recaps
NBA Videos
Fantasy Basketball
NBA Mock Draft
NBA Free Agents
All-Star Weekend
---
High School Basketball
Streetball
---
InsideHoops Twitter
Search Our Site













Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Terms of Use/Service | Privacy Policy