Trump is just like George Washington...not

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
Post Reply
Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Trump is just like George Washington...not

Post by Silver »

I love how we've been avoiding all those foreign entanglements since the founding of our country...

Hopefully, we'll stop being warmongers after the 2nd Coming. Wait, since all the warmongers will be dead, I guess the peacemakers will be in the majority then.

Everything below the link, including some images which didn't copy, is from the article found there.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-1 ... 77-nations

America First? 200,000 Troops Deployed To 177 Nations

by Tyler Durden
Mar 19, 2017 9:50 PM

There was no shortage of cuts proposed in Trump’s budget for 2018, which was released earlier this week. However, as Visual Capitalist's Jeff Desjardins notes, one of the few departments that did not receive a haircut was the Department of Defense. If the proposed budget ultimately passes in Congress, the DoD would be allocated an extra $54 billion in federal funding – a 10% increase that would be one of the largest one-year defense budget increases in American History.

To put the proposed increase in context, the United States already spends more on defense than the next seven countries combined. Meanwhile, the additional $54 billion is about the size of the United Kingdom’s entire defense budget.

Courtesy of: Visual Capitalist

“BE ALL YOU CAN BE”
With over half of all U.S. discretionary spending being put towards the military each year, the U.S. is able to have extensive operations both at home and abroad. Our chart for this week breaks down military personnel based on the latest numbers released by the DoD on February 27, 2017.

In total, excluding civilian support staff, there are about 2.1 million troops. Of those, 1.3 million are on active duty, while about 800,000 are in reserve or part of the National Guard.

On a domestic basis, there are about 1.1 million active troops stationed in the United States, and here’s how they are grouped based on branch of service:

Internationally, there are just under 200,000 troops that are stationed in 177 countries throughout the world.

In 2015, Politico estimated that there are 800 U.S. bases abroad, and that it costs up to $100 billion annually to maintain this international presence.

User avatar
Different
captain of 100
Posts: 296

Re: Trump is just like George Washington...not

Post by Different »

Yeah agreed everyone thinks Trump is the messiah, when yet he is very immoral. The only one who can sort out the mess we are in now is Jesus Christ. The people will not repent truly and turn to the lord. That has to happen as a whole for real change for the better.

User avatar
Different
captain of 100
Posts: 296

Re: Trump is just like George Washington...not

Post by Different »

Silver wrote: March 19th, 2017, 8:04 pm I love how we've been avoiding all those foreign entanglements since the founding of our country...

Hopefully, we'll stop being warmongers after the 2nd Coming. Wait, since all the warmongers will be dead, I guess the peacemakers will be in the majority then.

Everything below the link, including some images which didn't copy, is from the article found there.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-1 ... 77-nations

America First? 200,000 Troops Deployed To 177 Nations

by Tyler Durden
Mar 19, 2017 9:50 PM

There was no shortage of cuts proposed in Trump’s budget for 2018, which was released earlier this week. However, as Visual Capitalist's Jeff Desjardins notes, one of the few departments that did not receive a haircut was the Department of Defense. If the proposed budget ultimately passes in Congress, the DoD would be allocated an extra $54 billion in federal funding – a 10% increase that would be one of the largest one-year defense budget increases in American History.

To put the proposed increase in context, the United States already spends more on defense than the next seven countries combined. Meanwhile, the additional $54 billion is about the size of the United Kingdom’s entire defense budget.

Courtesy of: Visual Capitalist

“BE ALL YOU CAN BE”
With over half of all U.S. discretionary spending being put towards the military each year, the U.S. is able to have extensive operations both at home and abroad. Our chart for this week breaks down military personnel based on the latest numbers released by the DoD on February 27, 2017.

In total, excluding civilian support staff, there are about 2.1 million troops. Of those, 1.3 million are on active duty, while about 800,000 are in reserve or part of the National Guard.

On a domestic basis, there are about 1.1 million active troops stationed in the United States, and here’s how they are grouped based on branch of service:

Internationally, there are just under 200,000 troops that are stationed in 177 countries throughout the world.

In 2015, Politico estimated that there are 800 U.S. bases abroad, and that it costs up to $100 billion annually to maintain this international presence.


No like button?

brianj
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4066
Location: Vineyard, Utah

Re: Trump is just like George Washington...not

Post by brianj »

There are 200,000 troops stationed in 177 countries? That's a shock?

We have bases overseas where we can base ships and aircraft, as well as providing staging and layover locations for ships and aircraft going to various locations around the world. I will bet most of those 200,000 troops are on bases in places like Germany, the Philippines, Okinawa, Korea, Diego Garcia, and others.

How many Marines are stationed at each embassy around the world? We have an obvious need to protect our embassies, some more than others.

These 200,000 servicemen overseas aren't evidence that we are about to start a bunch of new wars. They are continuing to do what we've done for decades: provide enough of a regional force that hostile nations and groups think twice before attacking.

And yes, we spend a lot of money on our military. Unfortunately many of our allies have become so dependent on us that they are incapable of fighting their own battles. I do believe that we need to make it clear to our allies that if they don't have a military that can aid us then we aren't going to provide much aid to them if the need arises. France only has one aircraft carrier. Currently the UK doesn't have any carriers. If Argentina were to repeat their invasion of the Falkland Islands today the British wouldn't be able to repel the invaders like they did the last time.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Trump is just like George Washington...not

Post by Silver »

brianj wrote: March 20th, 2017, 9:41 am 1. There are 200,000 troops stationed in 177 countries? That's a shock?

2. We have bases overseas where we can base ships and aircraft, as well as providing staging and layover locations for ships and aircraft going to various locations around the world. I will bet most of those 200,000 troops are on bases in places like Germany, the Philippines, Okinawa, Korea, Diego Garcia, and others.

3. How many Marines are stationed at each embassy around the world? We have an obvious need to protect our embassies, some more than others.

4. These 200,000 servicemen overseas aren't evidence that we are about to start a bunch of new wars. They are continuing to do what we've done for decades: provide enough of a regional force that hostile nations and groups think twice before attacking.

5. And yes, we spend a lot of money on our military. Unfortunately many of our allies have become so dependent on us that they are incapable of fighting their own battles. I do believe that we need to make it clear to our allies that if they don't have a military that can aid us then we aren't going to provide much aid to them if the need arises. France only has one aircraft carrier. Currently the UK doesn't have any carriers. If Argentina were to repeat their invasion of the Falkland Islands today the British wouldn't be able to repel the invaders like they did the last time.
There is so much that I disagree with in your post that I hardly know where to start. I'll attempt to respond point by point although most will simply be in the form of rhetorical questions.
1. So you think it's a good thing to have that many troops based overseas?
A. How do you intend to pay for that? What part of $20 Trillion in sovereign US debt do you not understand? If you like having troops all over the world, how about you pay for it and leave me and my family alone?
B. What harm has been done to the local economy, culture, residents by the placement of large contingencies of single, young, foreign men in those countries?

2. Yes, yours is the exact reasoning for the US taking over Hawaii, a sovereign kingdom. We stole the rights of self-government from the Hawaiian citizens. Where does it say we can do that in the Constitution? Does might make right? Depending on the timing of the 2nd Coming, I can imagine a day when the US has a lot less national strength. If we are taken over by an Asian or European country which builds military bases on our coasts for their ships and aircraft are you OK with that? By your reasoning, after a couple of generations, all the children in that country which takes over the US will just see the location of their bases here as the status quo, nothing to be questioned at all. You good with that?

3. I believe you know that a small contingency of Marines at each embassy is not what this thread is about. Denseness is not a feature that serves you well. Besides, there are more than 177 US embassies and missions spread throughout the world.

4. This portion of your post is particularly pernicious.
A. Funny, all the US has done is start a bunch of new wars. When have we not been at war or in conflict with other countries since WW2?
B. 200,000 troops aren't in other countries to mow the grass. They are there to kill anyone who doesn't bend their national will to that of the elites.
C. Hostile nations and groups? I suppose you mean Russia and/or China along with all the ME groups of late. Sorry, the US created both the USSR and modern-day China by financing them, trading with them and giving them our technological and military equipment and secrets. Al-Qaeda is a CIA fabrication. ISIS sells oil to our ally Israel and all the spooks know it. If we had a real enemy that attacked the US mainland, I would be all for a counter-attack. Instead, we have pretend enemies for which we arm up so the MIC can reap great profits. Or, we experience the horror of blowback for all the meddling we've been doing in the ME for over 60 years.
D. Finally, if after 60 years the countries of Germany/Japan/Korea can't defend themselves, perhaps it's time they admit that their national priorities need to change. Either they support their own defenses or they merge with a friendly neighbor or some other solution, but why should I pay one penny in taxes for a foreign country?

5. I'll only address the Falklands:
Just as I wrote above, first, what gave the UK the right to claim those islands in the first place? Obviously, it was military might and not proximity to their homelands. Second, if the UK no longer has the strength to maintain their claim on the Falklands, perhaps they should seek peace and negotiate for some kind of treaty to share the area's bounty with Argentina. Either way, it is not a concern of the US. In the last Falklands conflict, Britain couldn't attack the Argentinian forces and maintain its equipment obligation with NATO so the US temporarily "backfilled" for them. Outrageous!

brianj
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4066
Location: Vineyard, Utah

Re: Trump is just like George Washington...not

Post by brianj »

Silver wrote: March 20th, 2017, 11:11 am
brianj wrote: March 20th, 2017, 9:41 am 1. There are 200,000 troops stationed in 177 countries? That's a shock?

2. We have bases overseas where we can base ships and aircraft, as well as providing staging and layover locations for ships and aircraft going to various locations around the world. I will bet most of those 200,000 troops are on bases in places like Germany, the Philippines, Okinawa, Korea, Diego Garcia, and others.

3. How many Marines are stationed at each embassy around the world? We have an obvious need to protect our embassies, some more than others.

4. These 200,000 servicemen overseas aren't evidence that we are about to start a bunch of new wars. They are continuing to do what we've done for decades: provide enough of a regional force that hostile nations and groups think twice before attacking.

5. And yes, we spend a lot of money on our military. Unfortunately many of our allies have become so dependent on us that they are incapable of fighting their own battles. I do believe that we need to make it clear to our allies that if they don't have a military that can aid us then we aren't going to provide much aid to them if the need arises. France only has one aircraft carrier. Currently the UK doesn't have any carriers. If Argentina were to repeat their invasion of the Falkland Islands today the British wouldn't be able to repel the invaders like they did the last time.
There is so much that I disagree with in your post that I hardly know where to start. I'll attempt to respond point by point although most will simply be in the form of rhetorical questions.
1. So you think it's a good thing to have that many troops based overseas?
A. How do you intend to pay for that? What part of $20 Trillion in sovereign US debt do you not understand? If you like having troops all over the world, how about you pay for it and leave me and my family alone?
B. What harm has been done to the local economy, culture, residents by the placement of large contingencies of single, young, foreign men in those countries?
I didn't say it was good or bad, just that it isn't unusual. Furthermore, I think the number of personnel stationed overseas has decreased over the last several years.
Regarding paying for it, the 2016 budget has spent over $2.5 trillion on health care, entitlements, and social security. National defense was about 22% of the 2016 budget which is high, but there are other things that have a greater need to be cut.
As far as harm, talk to people who were stationed on Okinawa. You'll learn that students were shipped in from the main Japanese islands to protest the US presence on that island because Okinawans wouldn't protest. They know their economy depends on the presence of Americans and that they would be facing poverty if US military spending dried up.
2. Yes, yours is the exact reasoning for the US taking over Hawaii, a sovereign kingdom. We stole the rights of self-government from the Hawaiian citizens. Where does it say we can do that in the Constitution? Does might make right? Depending on the timing of the 2nd Coming, I can imagine a day when the US has a lot less national strength. If we are taken over by an Asian or European country which builds military bases on our coasts for their ships and aircraft are you OK with that? By your reasoning, after a couple of generations, all the children in that country which takes over the US will just see the location of their bases here as the status quo, nothing to be questioned at all. You good with that?
I don't have any idea how you make that leap. The Marines stationed at the Moscow embassy haven't tried to take over Russia! And you couldn't be more wrong about Hawaii. Queen Liliuokalani was forced off the throne by businessmen who wanted the US to annex Hawaii so their sugar wouldn't be taxed when imported to the US.

Russia and China each have one embassy and five consulates in the United States, all guarded by members of their respective militaries. WE'VE BEEN INVADED! So much for the Constitution. Should I learn Russian or Chinese?
3. I believe you know that a small contingency of Marines at each embassy is not what this thread is about. Denseness is not a feature that serves you well. Besides, there are more than 177 US embassies and missions spread throughout the world.
Marine Security Guard staff comprises about 1% of that 200,000 but they are assigned to 176 countries. If you exclude diplomatic missions from the 177 country number then how many nations are US forces actually deployed to for combat or permanent bases? Hint: It's a lot less than 100. The military does regularly send people to other countries to provide training and participate in joint exercises, but those are typically short term deployments that don't have anything to do with combat, as you probably already know.
4. This portion of your post is particularly pernicious.
A. Funny, all the US has done is start a bunch of new wars. When have we not been at war or in conflict with other countries since WW2?
B. 200,000 troops aren't in other countries to mow the grass. They are there to kill anyone who doesn't bend their national will to that of the elites.
C. Hostile nations and groups? I suppose you mean Russia and/or China along with all the ME groups of late. Sorry, the US created both the USSR and modern-day China by financing them, trading with them and giving them our technological and military equipment and secrets. Al-Qaeda is a CIA fabrication. ISIS sells oil to our ally Israel and all the spooks know it. If we had a real enemy that attacked the US mainland, I would be all for a counter-attack. Instead, we have pretend enemies for which we arm up so the MIC can reap great profits. Or, we experience the horror of blowback for all the meddling we've been doing in the ME for over 60 years.
D. Finally, if after 60 years the countries of Germany/Japan/Korea can't defend themselves, perhaps it's time they admit that their national priorities need to change. Either they support their own defenses or they merge with a friendly neighbor or some other solution, but why should I pay one penny in taxes for a foreign country?
With just a quick glance I don't find any active combat between 1945 and 1950, 1954-1957, 1959-1960, 62-63, 85-86, 96-97, and 2000.
As a Marine I take offense at your B. First off, the forces are usually there as a deterrent force. The hope is that, having a force nearby and ready for deployment, bad guys will think twice about attacking. And it works pretty well most of the time. Furthermore, keep in mind that around 75% of the US military are in support assignments so of those 198,000 only around 24,500 of those people are training for combat.
And it's obvious that you haven't been in the military, otherwise you would know that a lot of those people are there to mow the grass, sweep the pavement, and do a lot of other meaningless jobs just to keep them busy and keep the bases looking pretty.
We can agree on D. The problem isn't that those countries can't defend themselves; the problem is that most European militaries have been gutted by leftist politicians who either think they don't need a strong national defense or that they can rely on the US. But, with regard to Korea, don't forget that we are still at war with the north with a temporary cease fire in effect. The NK leaders believe war with the US is inevitable and that they will lose, but they want to hurt us as much as they can in the process. No amount of being nice will appease the North Koreans.
5. I'll only address the Falklands:
Just as I wrote above, first, what gave the UK the right to claim those islands in the first place? Obviously, it was military might and not proximity to their homelands. Second, if the UK no longer has the strength to maintain their claim on the Falklands, perhaps they should seek peace and negotiate for some kind of treaty to share the area's bounty with Argentina. Either way, it is not a concern of the US. In the last Falklands conflict, Britain couldn't attack the Argentinian forces and maintain its equipment obligation with NATO so the US temporarily "backfilled" for them. Outrageous!
You call it outrageous; I call it helping friends in need.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Trump is just like George Washington...not

Post by Silver »

brianj wrote: March 20th, 2017, 4:26 pm
Silver wrote: March 20th, 2017, 11:11 am
brianj wrote: March 20th, 2017, 9:41 am 1. There are 200,000 troops stationed in 177 countries? That's a shock?

2. We have bases overseas where we can base ships and aircraft, as well as providing staging and layover locations for ships and aircraft going to various locations around the world. I will bet most of those 200,000 troops are on bases in places like Germany, the Philippines, Okinawa, Korea, Diego Garcia, and others.

3. How many Marines are stationed at each embassy around the world? We have an obvious need to protect our embassies, some more than others.

4. These 200,000 servicemen overseas aren't evidence that we are about to start a bunch of new wars. They are continuing to do what we've done for decades: provide enough of a regional force that hostile nations and groups think twice before attacking.

5. And yes, we spend a lot of money on our military. Unfortunately many of our allies have become so dependent on us that they are incapable of fighting their own battles. I do believe that we need to make it clear to our allies that if they don't have a military that can aid us then we aren't going to provide much aid to them if the need arises. France only has one aircraft carrier. Currently the UK doesn't have any carriers. If Argentina were to repeat their invasion of the Falkland Islands today the British wouldn't be able to repel the invaders like they did the last time.
There is so much that I disagree with in your post that I hardly know where to start. I'll attempt to respond point by point although most will simply be in the form of rhetorical questions.
1. So you think it's a good thing to have that many troops based overseas?
A. How do you intend to pay for that? What part of $20 Trillion in sovereign US debt do you not understand? If you like having troops all over the world, how about you pay for it and leave me and my family alone?
B. What harm has been done to the local economy, culture, residents by the placement of large contingencies of single, young, foreign men in those countries?
I didn't say it was good or bad, just that it isn't unusual. Furthermore, I think the number of personnel stationed overseas has decreased over the last several years.
Regarding paying for it, the 2016 budget has spent over $2.5 trillion on health care, entitlements, and social security. National defense was about 22% of the 2016 budget which is high, but there are other things that have a greater need to be cut.
As far as harm, talk to people who were stationed on Okinawa. You'll learn that students were shipped in from the main Japanese islands to protest the US presence on that island because Okinawans wouldn't protest. They know their economy depends on the presence of Americans and that they would be facing poverty if US military spending dried up.
2. Yes, yours is the exact reasoning for the US taking over Hawaii, a sovereign kingdom. We stole the rights of self-government from the Hawaiian citizens. Where does it say we can do that in the Constitution? Does might make right? Depending on the timing of the 2nd Coming, I can imagine a day when the US has a lot less national strength. If we are taken over by an Asian or European country which builds military bases on our coasts for their ships and aircraft are you OK with that? By your reasoning, after a couple of generations, all the children in that country which takes over the US will just see the location of their bases here as the status quo, nothing to be questioned at all. You good with that?
I don't have any idea how you make that leap. The Marines stationed at the Moscow embassy haven't tried to take over Russia! And you couldn't be more wrong about Hawaii. Queen Liliuokalani was forced off the throne by businessmen who wanted the US to annex Hawaii so their sugar wouldn't be taxed when imported to the US.

Russia and China each have one embassy and five consulates in the United States, all guarded by members of their respective militaries. WE'VE BEEN INVADED! So much for the Constitution. Should I learn Russian or Chinese?
3. I believe you know that a small contingency of Marines at each embassy is not what this thread is about. Denseness is not a feature that serves you well. Besides, there are more than 177 US embassies and missions spread throughout the world.
Marine Security Guard staff comprises about 1% of that 200,000 but they are assigned to 176 countries. If you exclude diplomatic missions from the 177 country number then how many nations are US forces actually deployed to for combat or permanent bases? Hint: It's a lot less than 100. The military does regularly send people to other countries to provide training and participate in joint exercises, but those are typically short term deployments that don't have anything to do with combat, as you probably already know.
4. This portion of your post is particularly pernicious.
A. Funny, all the US has done is start a bunch of new wars. When have we not been at war or in conflict with other countries since WW2?
B. 200,000 troops aren't in other countries to mow the grass. They are there to kill anyone who doesn't bend their national will to that of the elites.
C. Hostile nations and groups? I suppose you mean Russia and/or China along with all the ME groups of late. Sorry, the US created both the USSR and modern-day China by financing them, trading with them and giving them our technological and military equipment and secrets. Al-Qaeda is a CIA fabrication. ISIS sells oil to our ally Israel and all the spooks know it. If we had a real enemy that attacked the US mainland, I would be all for a counter-attack. Instead, we have pretend enemies for which we arm up so the MIC can reap great profits. Or, we experience the horror of blowback for all the meddling we've been doing in the ME for over 60 years.
D. Finally, if after 60 years the countries of Germany/Japan/Korea can't defend themselves, perhaps it's time they admit that their national priorities need to change. Either they support their own defenses or they merge with a friendly neighbor or some other solution, but why should I pay one penny in taxes for a foreign country?
With just a quick glance I don't find any active combat between 1945 and 1950, 1954-1957, 1959-1960, 62-63, 85-86, 96-97, and 2000.
As a Marine I take offense at your B. First off, the forces are usually there as a deterrent force. The hope is that, having a force nearby and ready for deployment, bad guys will think twice about attacking. And it works pretty well most of the time. Furthermore, keep in mind that around 75% of the US military are in support assignments so of those 198,000 only around 24,500 of those people are training for combat.
And it's obvious that you haven't been in the military, otherwise you would know that a lot of those people are there to mow the grass, sweep the pavement, and do a lot of other meaningless jobs just to keep them busy and keep the bases looking pretty.
We can agree on D. The problem isn't that those countries can't defend themselves; the problem is that most European militaries have been gutted by leftist politicians who either think they don't need a strong national defense or that they can rely on the US. But, with regard to Korea, don't forget that we are still at war with the north with a temporary cease fire in effect. The NK leaders believe war with the US is inevitable and that they will lose, but they want to hurt us as much as they can in the process. No amount of being nice will appease the North Koreans.
5. I'll only address the Falklands:
Just as I wrote above, first, what gave the UK the right to claim those islands in the first place? Obviously, it was military might and not proximity to their homelands. Second, if the UK no longer has the strength to maintain their claim on the Falklands, perhaps they should seek peace and negotiate for some kind of treaty to share the area's bounty with Argentina. Either way, it is not a concern of the US. In the last Falklands conflict, Britain couldn't attack the Argentinian forces and maintain its equipment obligation with NATO so the US temporarily "backfilled" for them. Outrageous!
You call it outrageous; I call it helping friends in need.
You're right. I wasn't in the military. My son, however, just finished 4 years in the Marines and returned home about 2 months ago. He was stationed in Okinawa for a while where I visited him at Camp Hansen twice. I also lived in Japan for 6 additional years after my 2 year mission there. I have traveled back and forth on dozens of business trips. All of this gives me personal knowledge of how misguided your opinions are about the effects of having so many of our servicemen in Japan since the end of WW2. I'm 57 years of age and have had these types of discussions with many over the years. The propaganda runs deep in America. So personally it doesn't bother me if you feel offended as a Marine.

You're right. The pineapple interests needed the US to take over Hawaii. So now I'm going to use a line on you that your Mother surely said to you as you were growing up: Two wrongs don't make a right. The US was not forced to take over Hawaii. They did it because they could.

The most important thing you failed to respond to is the national debt. We're paying our credit card debts by borrowing from new credit cards. Common sense would demand that we stop spending so much on the military and that we bring the troops home. That you can't see that must be intentional because it could hurt your wallet.

Hope you get out soon and go home all in one piece.

brianj
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4066
Location: Vineyard, Utah

Re: Trump is just like George Washington...not

Post by brianj »

I made a mistake in my earlier post. Defense spending is not 22% of the federal budget, but 22% of what is spent on health care, entitlements, and social security. It was around 15% of the federal budget.
Silver wrote: March 20th, 2017, 7:46 pm You're right. I wasn't in the military. My son, however, just finished 4 years in the Marines and returned home about 2 months ago. He was stationed in Okinawa for a while where I visited him at Camp Hansen twice. I also lived in Japan for 6 additional years after my 2 year mission there. I have traveled back and forth on dozens of business trips. All of this gives me personal knowledge of how misguided your opinions are about the effects of having so many of our servicemen in Japan since the end of WW2. I'm 57 years of age and have had these types of discussions with many over the years. The propaganda runs deep in America. So personally it doesn't bother me if you feel offended as a Marine.

You're right. The pineapple interests needed the US to take over Hawaii. So now I'm going to use a line on you that your Mother surely said to you as you were growing up: Two wrongs don't make a right. The US was not forced to take over Hawaii. They did it because they could.

The most important thing you failed to respond to is the national debt. We're paying our credit card debts by borrowing from new credit cards. Common sense would demand that we stop spending so much on the military and that we bring the troops home. That you can't see that must be intentional because it could hurt your wallet.

Hope you get out soon and go home all in one piece.
Tell me something: Do you hold your son in contempt for going to Japan for no purpose but to kill Japanese people, or would you like to recant your earlier claim that servicemen stationed overseas are only there to kill the locals?

For the record, the propaganda I based my assertions and opinions on is personal statements from servicemen who were based on Okinawa, family members of servicemen who accompanied them to Okinawa, and Okinawans who married US servicemen then came to the US. People who grew up in Okinawa are probably not as reliable as your assertions, but I place higher value on what they say.

Regarding the national debt, if we are spending around $2.5 trillion per year on entitlements and a bit over $600 billion on defense, why do you think the big problem is defense? Maybe because you don't expect to personally benefit from it?

If we pretended we live in a fantasy world and cut 100% of defense spending in the 2018 budget it might be enough to almost break even, but it's not going to pay down the federal debt.If you want to pay down the national debt you're going to need to cut a whole lot more or really raise taxes.
A strong economy would be the best solution to the national debt. A strong economy would increase tax revenue to the point where revenue exceeds expenditures. This is what happened under Clinton. Unfortunately we would also need good politicians in congress who won't cut taxes or increase spending to continue deficit spending.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Trump is just like George Washington...not

Post by Silver »

brianj wrote: March 20th, 2017, 10:15 pm I made a mistake in my earlier post. Defense spending is not 22% of the federal budget, but 22% of what is spent on health care, entitlements, and social security. It was around 15% of the federal budget.
Silver wrote: March 20th, 2017, 7:46 pm You're right. I wasn't in the military. My son, however, just finished 4 years in the Marines and returned home about 2 months ago. He was stationed in Okinawa for a while where I visited him at Camp Hansen twice. I also lived in Japan for 6 additional years after my 2 year mission there. I have traveled back and forth on dozens of business trips. All of this gives me personal knowledge of how misguided your opinions are about the effects of having so many of our servicemen in Japan since the end of WW2. I'm 57 years of age and have had these types of discussions with many over the years. The propaganda runs deep in America. So personally it doesn't bother me if you feel offended as a Marine.

You're right. The pineapple interests needed the US to take over Hawaii. So now I'm going to use a line on you that your Mother surely said to you as you were growing up: Two wrongs don't make a right. The US was not forced to take over Hawaii. They did it because they could.

The most important thing you failed to respond to is the national debt. We're paying our credit card debts by borrowing from new credit cards. Common sense would demand that we stop spending so much on the military and that we bring the troops home. That you can't see that must be intentional because it could hurt your wallet.

Hope you get out soon and go home all in one piece.
Tell me something: Do you hold your son in contempt for going to Japan for no purpose but to kill Japanese people, or would you like to recant your earlier claim that servicemen stationed overseas are only there to kill the locals?

For the record, the propaganda I based my assertions and opinions on is personal statements from servicemen who were based on Okinawa, family members of servicemen who accompanied them to Okinawa, and Okinawans who married US servicemen then came to the US. People who grew up in Okinawa are probably not as reliable as your assertions, but I place higher value on what they say.

Regarding the national debt, if we are spending around $2.5 trillion per year on entitlements and a bit over $600 billion on defense, why do you think the big problem is defense? Maybe because you don't expect to personally benefit from it?

If we pretended we live in a fantasy world and cut 100% of defense spending in the 2018 budget it might be enough to almost break even, but it's not going to pay down the federal debt.If you want to pay down the national debt you're going to need to cut a whole lot more or really raise taxes.
A strong economy would be the best solution to the national debt. A strong economy would increase tax revenue to the point where revenue exceeds expenditures. This is what happened under Clinton. Unfortunately we would also need good politicians in congress who won't cut taxes or increase spending to continue deficit spending.
brian,
Two things:
1. You have a slight reading comprehension problem. I don't hold that against you, but you need to reread what I wrote. I can see from your last post that you have made some incorrect assumptions.
2. If you are so tense that you can't learn from your elders, you will not progress as quickly as you normally would.

brianj
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4066
Location: Vineyard, Utah

Re: Trump is just like George Washington...not

Post by brianj »

Silver wrote: March 21st, 2017, 5:07 am brian,
Two things:
1. You have a slight reading comprehension problem. I don't hold that against you, but you need to reread what I wrote. I can see from your last post that you have made some incorrect assumptions.
2. If you are so tense that you can't learn from your elders, you will not progress as quickly as you normally would.
If I have a reading comprehension problem, what did I get wrong?
You said that you lived in Japan for eight years, and based on that you know more about it than me. Where in Japan? Tokyo? Osaka? Sapporo? Okinawa? Okinawa is so far removed from Honshu that the cultures are very different. If you have spent time around Yokosuka does that mean you know more about Okinawa than people who spent years on Okinawa? Earlier you said that the 200,000 personnel stationed overseas are there to kill anyone who doesn't bend their will to that of the elites. Well the people of Iceland stuck it to the elites in their handling of their national banking crisis. We have a bunch of people at NAS Keflavik; when is the bloodbath scheduled? You also said that stationing military personnel in Hawaii was the reason we overthrew the Hawaiian government and annexed their islands, but the reality is that businessmen forced the royal family to abdicate and asked Washington to annex Hawaii so their sugar wouldn't be taxed when imported. Was that the statement I misunderstood?

Regarding learning from my elders, I have two questions: How do you know you are significantly older than me? And should I accept whatever people older than me say based on their age or should I rely on scripture, thought, and prayer to determine what really is true?

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Trump is just like George Washington...not

Post by Silver »

brianj wrote: March 21st, 2017, 10:35 am
Silver wrote: March 21st, 2017, 5:07 am brian,
Two things:
1. You have a slight reading comprehension problem. I don't hold that against you, but you need to reread what I wrote. I can see from your last post that you have made some incorrect assumptions.
2. If you are so tense that you can't learn from your elders, you will not progress as quickly as you normally would.
If I have a reading comprehension problem, what did I get wrong?
You said that you lived in Japan for eight years, and based on that you know more about it than me. Where in Japan? Tokyo? Osaka? Sapporo? Okinawa? Okinawa is so far removed from Honshu that the cultures are very different. If you have spent time around Yokosuka does that mean you know more about Okinawa than people who spent years on Okinawa? Earlier you said that the 200,000 personnel stationed overseas are there to kill anyone who doesn't bend their will to that of the elites. Well the people of Iceland stuck it to the elites in their handling of their national banking crisis. We have a bunch of people at NAS Keflavik; when is the bloodbath scheduled? You also said that stationing military personnel in Hawaii was the reason we overthrew the Hawaiian government and annexed their islands, but the reality is that businessmen forced the royal family to abdicate and asked Washington to annex Hawaii so their sugar wouldn't be taxed when imported. Was that the statement I misunderstood?

Regarding learning from my elders, I have two questions: How do you know you are significantly older than me? And should I accept whatever people older than me say based on their age or should I rely on scripture, thought, and prayer to determine what really is true?
OK.

Post Reply