Deep Cuts

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cancel5
  • Start date Start date
Ohh really, tell us more. Is he just cutting shit programs or is he cutting 30 to 40% of the total military budget. I doubt he's making any cuts much less deep cuts like 50%.
 
Threedee said:
Actually, Europe and Asia both have a HUGE interest in Mideast stability. You see, we import 70% of our oil from Canada and an additional 20-25% from Venezuela. It is just the richest and finest grade of oil that is left over which comes from Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, etc. However, we are indirectly reliant on Mideast stability/oil, because the world market is tied to it, and it would collapse our distributers if it fell apart.

But Europe sucks. You know that they did nothing in response to the Balkans during the 90s, and so you can expect them to be just as worthless in containing the Mideast and protecting countries such as Kuwait, and stabilizing other such as Syria and Saudi Arabia, and so forth... Which pisses me off, and adds to the reasons why I hate Europe.
Click to expand...

The Euros have decimated their own standing military due to social spending and have long depended on the US to police the world. The added benefit for them is that they also get to point their hypocritical finger and accuse us of hegemony and being arrogant. Yet, with all the belly-aching, they do not want this arrangement to change.
 
Ice Dancer said:
The Euros have decimated their own standing military due to social spending and have long depended on the US to police the world. The added benefit for them is that they also get to point their hypocritical finger and accuse us of hegemony and being arrogant. Yet, with all the belly-aching, they do not want this arrangement to change.
Click to expand...

They aren't stupid. If someone else is willing to open their umbrella most European nations will actively choose not to spend on their military. If they were forced to they would.

America selectively "polices" the world entirely for its own benefit.
 
charver said:
They aren't stupid. If someone else is willing to open their umbrella most European nations will actively choose not to spend on their military. If they were forced to they would.

America selectively "polices" the world entirely for its own benefit.
Click to expand...

Yes, they are not stupid, just arrogant hypocrites. America "polices" the world for the benefit of global economic stability, they do so at the mutual behest of all those economically concerned as much as for ourselves...it's called keeping the machine going.
 
Ice Dancer said:
Yes, they are not stupid, just arrogant hypocrites. America "polices" the world for the benefit of global economic stability, they do so at the mutual behest of all those economically concerned as much as for ourselves...it's called keeping the machine going.
Click to expand...

Doesn't really matter what the rest of the world wants though, eh?
 
charver said:
Maybe you could tell some of your short-sighted pilots what a British soldier looks like and our death toll would be even lower. Much obliged.
Click to expand...
We could, but then our kill ratio would be lower and we'd get less bonuses.
 
charver said:
Doesn't really matter what the rest of the world wants though, eh?
Click to expand...

That's a cop out response. The EU, as you admitted to earlier, gets exactly what they want and give as little as they can get away with. The only difference between Obama and Bush as far as the Eu is concerened is that Obama won't bare their asses for all to see what hypocrites they are because he wants to be liked by the scoundrels. Bush didn't care about his popularity, and so was willing to hang the EU's asses out for all to see what selfish, self interested hypocrites they were/are.
 
charver said:
They aren't stupid. If someone else is willing to open their umbrella most European nations will actively choose not to spend on their military. If they were forced to they would.

America selectively "polices" the world entirely for its own benefit.
Click to expand...

The irony is, my good fellow, that the US exists today because we refused to contribute money to your army to protect our colonial borders! This must be you chaps turning the tables right around on us!

That said, you Brits do keep a much better military than those cheap bastards on the Continent.

:clink:
 
Ice Dancer said:
That's a cop out response. The EU, as you admitted to earlier, gets exactly what they want and give as little as they can get away with. The only difference between Obama and Bush as far as the Eu is concerened is that Obama won't bare their asses for all to see what hypocrites they are because he wants to be liked by the scoundrels. Bush didn't care about his popularity, and so was willing to hang the EU's asses out for all to see what selfish, self interested hypocrites they were/are.
Click to expand...

I won't disagree that the Europens have had a good deal from America in the post war era although when the big bad USSR was around, i don't imagine you'd disagree, the arrangement was based on mutual interest. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union every attempt by the EU to establish any type of coordinated armed forces has been both opposed by the US and made impossible by the refusal of the UK to jeopardise our illusory "special relationship". The EU nations are incredibly anti-American at times (sometimes justifiably so, sometimes for purely political motives) and i wouldn't necessarily disagree with a charge of arrogance or hypocrisy.

However, the US is fine with European forces under the NATO umbrella (and under US command) but an independent EU force is viewed as a potential threat to US dominance. The UK has always been encouraged to stay close to Washington rather than Paris. I'd welcome a closer integration of European forces and a break with the US. It won't happen, of course, because the US doesn't want it to happen and the Europeans are reasonably happy with the status quo.

The thing about policing the world is that the citizens of the world don't like policemen. Britain has been there and done it. People still don't like Britain in much of the world and they've got reasonable cause. Policing tends to work best when it's done with the consent of those being policed. Europe consents, mainly because through NATO it has been made a special constable and that makes them feel powerful and influential, but most of the rest of the world can't stand it because they look at the neighbourhood policeman and all they see is a bent copper taking bribes and beating the shit out of them in the cells. There's plenty arrogance and hypocrisy to go round.
 
Threedee said:
The irony is, my good fellow, that the US exists today because we refused to contribute money to your army to protect our colonial borders! This must be you chaps turning the tables right around on us!

That said, you Brits do keep a much better military than those cheap bastards on the Continent.

:clink:
Click to expand...

:D

Actually, the French get a bad press all round due to their, how shall we say, tendency to choke on the big stage. However, their military is pretty decent and they spend big on it.

Admittedly, unlike us, they don't have to shell out on transporting all their little tanks and things thousands of miles round the world every 5 minutes for the latest "war on an illusory threat" so they have plenty of spare cash to blow on pretty hats and cheese.
 
Some dont understand the fancy gadgets are not exactly what we will need in the future to truely protect ourselves.

Its a different world folks and just stoking the fires of the military industrial complex is not the real answer to protection anymore.
 
charver said:
I won't disagree that the Europens have had a good deal from America in the post war era although when the big bad USSR was around, i don't imagine you'd disagree, the arrangement was based on mutual interest. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union every attempt by the EU to establish any type of coordinated armed forces has been both opposed by the US and made impossible by the refusal of the UK to jeopardise our illusory "special relationship". The EU nations are incredibly anti-American at times (sometimes justifiably so, sometimes for purely political motives) and i wouldn't necessarily disagree with a charge of arrogance or hypocrisy.

However, the US is fine with European forces under the NATO umbrella (and under US command) but an independent EU force is viewed as a potential threat to US dominance. The UK has always been encouraged to stay close to Washington rather than Paris. I'd welcome a closer integration of European forces and a break with the US. It won't happen, of course, because the US doesn't want it to happen and the Europeans are reasonably happy with the status quo.

The thing about policing the world is that the citizens of the world don't like policemen. Britain has been there and done it. People still don't like Britain in much of the world and they've got reasonable cause. Policing tends to work best when it's done with the consent of those being policed. Europe consents, mainly because through NATO it has been made a special constable and that makes them feel powerful and influential, but most of the rest of the world can't stand it because they look at the neighbourhood policeman and all they see is a bent copper taking bribes and beating the shit out of them in the cells. There's plenty arrogance and hypocrisy to go round.
Click to expand...


You appear to be wanting it both ways. First you acknowledge that the EU has allowed the US to be the military might in the world so that they can spend their dollars on their over extended social programs. Now you want to say that they, the EU, don't grow their militaries because the US prevents them? Pure hogwash!

Policing the globe is exactly what the US is encouraged to do, albeit not publically by the rest of the world. This said, there certainly is a kind of policing that the EU elite do not want policed i.e., Bush and Blair's courage in exposing the FFO scandal for instance. As to being the power to spend billions per annum, however, keeping thuggary and arms trading under control, the EU is perfectly happy to allow the US the lions share of the burden, both financially and physically. Too, there is the oft overlooked useage of our military by Europe namely; we are used by nations around the globe to make certain that traded and donated goods arrive at their intended destinations, especially on the African continent. This last little expenditure is added to our military budget and is disallowed by the UN to be counted towards foreign aid. If this expenditure were added into a recognized budget of US foreign aid by the UN it would put the rest of the world to shame.
 
Dungheap said:
I don't understand how a budget increase is a deep cut, but that's just me.
Click to expand...
I'll have to hold this quote for when there is one of those "cuts" by Rs in the future that we hear about where there is a budgeted increase but it counts as a "cut" by Ds because it wasn't the amount that it normally would increase by....
 
Ice Dancer said:
You appear to be wanting it both ways. First you acknowledge that the EU has allowed the US to be the military might in the world so that they can spend their dollars on their over extended social programs. Now you want to say that they, the EU, don't grow their militaries because the US prevents them? Pure hogwash!

Policing the globe is exactly what the US is encouraged to do, albeit not publically by the rest of the world. This said, there certainly is a kind of policing that the EU elite do not want policed i.e., Bush and Blair's courage in exposing the FFO scandal for instance. As to being the power to spend billions per annum, however, keeping thuggary and arms trading under control, the EU is perfectly happy to allow the US the lions share of the burden, both financially and physically. Too, there is the oft overlooked useage of our military by Europe namely; we are used by nations around the globe to make certain that traded and donated goods arrive at their intended destinations, especially on the African continent. This last little expenditure is added to our military budget and is disallowed by the UN to be counted towards foreign aid. If this expenditure were added into a recognized budget of US foreign aid by the UN it would put the rest of the world to shame.
Click to expand...

The EU doesn't "allow" the US to be the dominant military power. It just is by virtue of its size. Neither did i say the US "prevents" the EU from forming a military bloc. The EU is made up of separate and distinctive states which are not natural political bedfellows and there would be large obstacles to overcome before such a project were to become reality. That the US discourages such moves, though, is not really debatable.

So the rest of the world wants the US to police it? Are you really sure about that? The EU heads of government may want the US to work with the international community to intervene in global conflicts (although frequently this differs from the views of actual EU citizens) but the old world order is not acceptable any more. Africa, Asia and South America have had their fill of Western European and American interference and exploitation.

What do you look for in a policeman? I'd wager if your local copper came round and turned a blind eye to your neighbour committing a whole host of criminal acts and then threatened to shoot you because you'd dropped some litter you wouldn't be too happy.

Would you expect your policeman to then arm your neighbour with a whole array of military hardware aimed at you? Or would this be a new way of "keeping thuggery and arms trading under control"?

You may have noticed the debates which rage constantly on the subject of gun control on the board. It is often claimed that in order to keep the government in check you need a strong well armed citizenry. Well, the world community seem to have come to the same conclusion and are actively arming themselves with nuclear weaponry in order to prevent unwarranted and intrusive policing by a self appointed corrupt policeman. Like it or not America is not seen as a guardian angel and hasn't been for some considerable time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top