San Francisco votes to completely erase naval shipyard with 10,000 houses

[Werewolf]

Have you ever heard of the "Peace Dividend"? Do we EVER get to collect?

That dividend is contingent upon there being an actual peace.

There's never been PEACE in the whole history of mankind. There's always a war going on somewhere.

The sheep won't admit it but mankind's favorite past time really is killing each other for fame, fortune, glory, money and - sometimes - fun.

[Manedwolf]

Si vis pacem, para bellum.

[ilbob]

Wars in the future will either be the low intensity conflicts we have been experiencing since the 60s, or (God forbid) one high intensity war where you will win or lose with whatever resources you have when it starts (or maybe whatever is left a few minutes after it started).

There will not be time to build vast fleets of ships and planes to bring into action as there was in WW2.

I don't see any reason to hang on to this kind of base on the off chance that we might be bombed back into the early 20th century and actually need such a facility again.

IMO, we should be militarizing space. With fast space planes we can bomb someone anywhere in the world within a few hours of a decision that they need to be bombed. or with bombs already in orbit, they can be bombed in a few minutes from such a decision. In fact, the bombs probably don't even need to be explosive. Gravity can be used to make a dense object accelerate to very high velocities that release an adequate amount of energy.

[MicroBalrog]

Have you ever heard of the "Peace Dividend"? Do we EVER get to collect?

That dividend is contingent upon there being an actual peace.

There's never been PEACE in the whole history of mankind. There's always a war going on somewhere.

Yes, yes, we all know that.

What I mean is, the US no longer needs such huge defense spending as the Soviets are no longer there.

That, and what ilbob said.

[The Annoyed Man]

What I mean is, the US no longer needs such huge defense spending as the Soviets are no longer there.

Unless you're able to replace the USSR with an even more dangerous, yet more elusive enemy.  Then you can justify the transfer of billions, ultimately trillions, of taxpayer $$ to private 'contractors' (your buddies in the corporate world).

[MicroBalrog]

What I mean is, the US no longer needs such huge defense spending as the Soviets are no longer there.

Unless you're able to replace the USSR with an even more dangerous, yet more elusive enemy.  Then you can justify the transfer of billions, ultimately trillions, of taxpayer $$ to private 'contractors' (your buddies in the corporate world).

And of course, the conservatives who will swoop down like hawks on any dime of waste elsewhere and decry it (but not actually do anything to remove it) will stare fawningly at any useless 'national defense' gizmo.

[roo_ster]

What I mean is, the US no longer needs such huge defense spending as the Soviets are no longer there.

Unless you're able to replace the USSR with an even more dangerous, yet more elusive enemy.  Then you can justify the transfer of billions, ultimately trillions, of taxpayer $$ to private 'contractors' (your buddies in the corporate world).

And of course, the conservatives who will swoop down like hawks on any dime of waste elsewhere and decry it (but not actually do anything to remove it) will stare fawningly at any useless 'national defense' gizmo.

Before you go a-painting with a broad brush, you might want to google a few of the following:
"RAH-66 Comanche"
"XM2001 Crusader"
"FMBT"
"A-12 Avenger II"
And then figure out if it was what would generally be considered a conservative or liberal administration that gave it the axe.

[MicroBalrog]

Before you go a-painting with a broad brush, you might want to google a few of the following:

I'm aware of the Comanche and Crusader. A-12 and FMBT are not familiar to me. Yes, I googled.

But my general point stands:

The Soviets are no longer here. Yet the overall defense budget is still remains at the same general level (as percentage of the GDP) as it was in the last few decades (according to Heritage).

And the GDP is growing.

[jamz]

I like how they are batching the "public housing" sector in one area.  Yeah, that's not a recipe for disaster or anything.

[LadySmith]

I like how they are batching the "public housing" sector in one area.  Yeah, that's not a recipe for disaster or anything.

Leftists are insane. They keep doing the same thing over and over hoping for different results. And they've taken over San Francisco.

[Nitrogen]

Hunter's Point hasn't been a naval shipyard for over a decade.

Right now it's just a huge, empty, nothing, with an enormous toxic waste problem.

It's also where many crackheads and the like hang out, causing quite a magnet for crime.

[Scout26]

Howzeabout having one of the Iowa Class BB's just pull into the shipyard and start shelling the whole freakin' city. 


That's some urban renewal I can support !!!!

[Manedwolf]

I like how they are batching the "public housing" sector in one area.  Yeah, that's not a recipe for disaster or anything.

Leftists are insane. They keep doing the same thing over and over hoping for different results. And they've taken over San Francisco.

I've heard they get quite upset when the violence doesn't stay in Oakland. The poor people are supposed to stay over THERE, don't they know that?

[Scout26]

They should have let the place burn to ground in 1906 and then bulldoze everything into the ocean.