Obama lashes waste in defense spending

[Balog]

How else would you have them do thier jobs in the current war on Terror? 
You cannot occupy a people you do not understand, you will not succeed.
If we were pointing them at the middle east and asking them to scorch earth, then sure, screw culture and language.  But this isn't that kind of war.

Because the previous President didn't invade two countries and leave troops there after the January transition of power?

I actually like the British colonial model. If we adopted it, I think it'd be a lot better for us and the Iraqis.

[roo_ster]

Road mobile missiles in Chinese hands = Bad
Road mobile missiles in US hands = Good

That about right?

Yeah, but the USA hasn't got any.

And the only land ICBMs we have in operation are Minuteman III missiles that date from 1970.  Let me repeat: 19-freaking-70.

[MicroBalrog]

Yeah, but the USA hasn't got any.

Wait, where did Midgetman go?

[taurusowner]

I'm not afraid to admit that I don't have a problem with the US having some things that other countries can't.  I genuinely see the US as the "good guy" in certain areas and other countries as the "bad guy".  I'm fine with that double standard.

[MicroBalrog]

To be fair, if I were a US taxpayer, I would oppose certain programs.

Not every newfangled DARPA gizmo has to be introduced.

[Racehorse]

Yeah, but the USA hasn't got any.

And the only land ICBMs we have in operation are Minuteman III missiles that date from 1970.  Let me repeat: 19-freaking-70.

Yes, they're old. But they're lovingly maintained. My dad worked as an engineer finding parts to maintain Minuteman missiles until about 5 years ago. They may be old, but they're still fully functional.

But I do believe it would be good to come up with some newer, better nuclear missile technology.

[Gewehr98]

You see, normally ICBMs are tied to a silo or (more rarely) a train.

Since when?

The Soviet SS-25 was operational in 1985.

The U.S. Midgetman was test-flown in 1991, before the program was cancelled in deference to SALT/START treaties.

The Chinese road-mobile DF-31 and DF-31A are currently deployed as we speak.

"Normal" is a relative term, in that respect.

[MicroBalrog]

"Normal" is a relative term, in that respect.

True. Perhaps it would be best to say "most ICBMs currently deployed go on silos or trains", as IIRC Topol-series truck-based ICBMs comprise a minority of the Russian arsenal.

[RevDisk]

True. Perhaps it would be best to say "most ICBMs currently deployed go on silos or trains", as IIRC Topol-series truck-based ICBMs comprise a minority of the Russian arsenal.

Road or rail mobile ICBM's aren't that important, frankly.  SRBM's on the subs, ICBM's in silos on land, and nuke cruise missiles on bombers really do offer all you realistically need.  Not saying I'm biased against road or rail ICBM's, I'm just saying they're a niche market that neither the US nor Russia actually need. 

Naturally, we probably both have a handful stashed somewhere...

Our current ICBM's seem to be fine.  Apparently they fit our needs as I've really heard of no one screaming that our strategic missile assets are inop.  Old, sure.  So what?  I had a Korean era switchboard we used for field phones.  We once dropped it off the tailgate of a truck.  It dented the concrete, and the switchboard merely had some scratched paint.  You just couldn't kill it, and gods did we do our best.  Last I saw, it was on a pallet going to Afghanistan.  I'll probably be dead and buried, and that switchboard will still be in service in the hands of 18 year old signal guys.  Good tech is good tech.

[Strings]

I seem to recall OPFOR routinely kicking the hell out of groups armed with "the latest & greatest", all while using 60's era tech...

[Perd Hapley]

I'm not afraid to admit that I don't have a problem with the US having some things that other countries can't.  I genuinely see the US as the "good guy" in certain areas and other countries as the "bad guy".  I'm fine with that double standard.

Same here.

[HankB]

You cannot occupy a people you do not understand, you will not succeed.

We understood Japan - home of sneak attacks, Bataan, Nanking, and kamikazes - well enough to nuke them before successfully occupying them.

If we were pointing them at the middle east and asking them to scorch earth, then sure, screw culture and language.  But this isn't that kind of war.

So we're kind of in the situation Rome was in during & after the first two Punic Wars. They wised up after the Third. (There was no Fourth.)

[MicroBalrog]

So we're kind of in the situation Rome was in during & after the first two Punic Wars. They wised up after the Third. (There was no Fourth.)

If you want to model yourself on a civilization of corrupt (look up how their elections normally went on), slave-owning bastards, then be my guest.

[roo_ster]

If you want to model yourself on a civilization of corrupt (look up how their elections normally went on), slave-owning bastards, then be my guest.

So, which civilization:
A: Evinced no corruption
and
B: Never had slavery

Just wonderin'.

[MicroBalrog]

The question is not whether there are morally perfect civilizations. Obviously there are not.

Modern American civilization has rejected slavery, it has rejected Roman voting practices (because they led to the collapse of the Roman Republic), it has (by and large) rejected Roman Law (whereas the Europeans have adopted it as a basis for their own).

What the Romans did may have worked for them to maintain a society based on the concepts of discipline, slavery, and so forth. American civilization is supposed to be based about the ideas of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Their means are not conducive to your ends.

[longeyes]

America's obviously not Rome.  And shouldn't be.

But we could use some of that Roman spirit these days.

[makattak]

America's obviously not Rome.  And shouldn't be.

But we could use with some of that Roman spirit these days.

SENATUS POPULUSQUE ROMANI!

I'd argue we should take from the Roman heritage in our Western Culture those things which are valuable and discard those which aren't.

The success of the Roman military, though, is perhaps one of those we should pay attention to.

[MicroBalrog]

Do you seriously argue that America should do what Rome did to Carthage? To whom, then?

[MechAg94]

SENATUS POPULUSQUE ROMANI!

I'd argue we should take from the Roman heritage in our Western Culture those things which are valuable and discard those which aren't.

The success of the Roman military, though, is perhaps one of those we should pay attention to.

So we should conquer foreign lands, pillage everything not nailed down and send it back to D.C, occupy the area, and turn it into a province.  Isn't that what the British did first?  Don't forget about the foreign auxiliary troops.  

I think militarily we are doing just fine.  It is the corruption and sloth that come with prosperity that we are having problems with.


On the OP, Presidents and other politicians have been complaining about waste in Defense spending for years.  When Obama actually does something constructive about it, then I'll stand up and look.  Otherwise, it is just more crap that Obama says and promises which he has no expectation to deliver. 

[Gewehr98]

SENATUS POPULUSQUE ROMANI!

Shouldn't that be SENATVS POPVLVS QVE ROMANI?

Or the much easier SPQR. 

(Knew I took 4 years of Latin for a reason...)   

[MicroBalrog]

Technically, "Que" is a suffix added to denote "and".

[makattak]

Technically, "Que" is a suffix added to denote "and".

Precisely, and yes, I was referring to SPQR found on Roman banners. (My idea of the "Roman spirit")

And, also, I did not say we should follow Rome's strategies, I said we should pay attention to their military victories.

I also said we should take what is valuable and discard what is not.

As a history major, you should recall that Rome took good care of its allies, as well as crushing its enemies. My thoughts were more that we should follow the "No greater friend, no worse enemy" line of thought rather than the "An ok friend, when the right people are in office, and a dangerous enemy, when the right people are in office" strategy.

[MicroBalrog]

I was specifcially referring to the Punic Wars and HankB's argument.

(It's interesting that Rome *started* the first Punic war through treachery and violating their agreement with Carthage, and further started the third Punic war. It would not be fair to say the Punic wars were in any way like America's conflict with the several Islanic terrorist organizations). By the time of the Third Punic War, Carthage was not a threat to Rome in any way, shape, or form.

[Jamisjockey]

Thread veer is getting pretty odd in this one....
 

[makattak]

Thread veer is getting pretty odd in this one....
 

Indeed, I was trying to bring it back somewhat to the whole idea of the purpose for the military, at least.

My point was our military should be equipped to kill people and break things. If we want a colonial police force, we should create one, not make our military "more understanding of other cultures".