The House $643,000,000,000 defense bill
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 61
  1. #1
    Sculpture on 2 wheels
    Reputation: Bullvine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,600

    The House $643,000,000,000 defense bill

    Well done GOP it's about time somebody finally put there foot down and began taking action
    to reduce the national debt.

    Let's now watch the spend happy Democrats in the Senate try and shoot this bill down. The weak Democratic-led Senate will whine & argue the Donkeys will bring up the fact that this bill exceeds the cap set for defense programs in last year's deficit reduction plan reached by the administration and congressional leaders. They may also try to bring up small things like tank upgrades, additional submarines, long-range bomber development for drones all opposed by the Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta. I say bravo what does the Secretary of Defense know about Defense anyways.

    Other fine notable features the measure would prohibit the transfer of Guantanamo prisoners to the United States and other countries. It would also Ban same-sex marriage ceremonies on U.S military bases.

    Finally it would require the installation of an East Coast missile defense system to counter
    threats from countries such as Iran and North Korea. Never mind the N Korean's can't seem to fly a missile past there own bay they scare me! Sorry West Coast try getting rid of a few Democrats and maybe we can talk.

    Bravo GOP and if there were ever a doubt Mittens is pushing for a significant defense spending increase. I say bring on Iran and North Korea we will be ready after November!

  2. #2
    Call me a Fred
    Reputation: MikeBiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    16,998
    The East Coast missile defense system is to counter the Al Qaeda battleships that are sailing over from the middle east.
    Mike

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    You may starch my jumper
    Hang it upside your wall
    You know by that, baby
    I need my ashes hauled.

    Sleepy John Estes

    H

  3. #3
    Adorable Furry Hombre
    Reputation: Marc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    28,576
    Quote Originally Posted by Bullvine View Post
    Well done GOP it's about time somebody finally put there foot down and began taking action
    to reduce the national debt.

    Let's now watch the spend happy Democrats in the Senate try and shoot this bill down. The weak Democratic-led Senate will whine & argue the Donkeys will bring up the fact that this bill exceeds the cap set for defense programs in last year's deficit reduction plan reached by the administration and congressional leaders. They may also try to bring up small things like tank upgrades, additional submarines, long-range bomber development for drones all opposed by the Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta. I say bravo what does the Secretary of Defense know about Defense anyways.

    Other fine notable features the measure would prohibit the transfer of Guantanamo prisoners to the United States and other countries. It would also Ban same-sex marriage ceremonies on U.S military bases.

    Finally it would require the installation of an East Coast missile defense system to counter
    threats from countries such as Iran and North Korea. Never mind the N Korean's can't seem to fly a missile past there own bay they scare me! Sorry West Coast try getting rid of a few Democrats and maybe we can talk.

    Bravo GOP and if there were ever a doubt Mittens is pushing for a significant defense spending increase. I say bring on Iran and North Korea we will be ready after November!
    In fairness, considering some of the places we have military bases and their own laws the bolded part isn't necessarily a bad idea. In several countries who are our "allies", simply inviting a woman who is not your wife to your hotel room can get you jailed.
    "Refreshingly Unconcerned With The Vulgar Exigencies Of Veracity "

  4. #4
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Snakebit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    69,526
    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    In fairness, considering some of the places we have military bases and their own laws the bolded part isn't necessarily a bad idea. In several countries, simply inviting a woman who is not your wife to your hotel room can get you jailed.
    It can also get you shot if her husband finds out.

  5. #5
    Sculpture on 2 wheels
    Reputation: Bullvine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,600
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeBiker View Post
    The East Coast missile defense system is to counter the Al Qaeda battleships that are sailing over from the middle east.
    Really? we need to stop that threat early.

    Maybe under a Mittens Administration we can finally rename it to the Department of Offense.

  6. #6
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: troutmd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    25,400
    Quote Originally Posted by Bullvine View Post
    Well done GOP it's about time somebody finally put there foot down and began taking action
    to reduce the national debt.

    Let's now watch the spend happy Democrats in the Senate try and shoot this bill down. The weak Democratic-led Senate will whine & argue the Donkeys will bring up the fact that this bill exceeds the cap set for defense programs in last year's deficit reduction plan reached by the administration and congressional leaders. They may also try to bring up small things like tank upgrades, additional submarines, long-range bomber development for drones all opposed by the Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta. I say bravo what does the Secretary of Defense know about Defense anyways.

    Other fine notable features the measure would prohibit the transfer of Guantanamo prisoners to the United States and other countries. It would also Ban same-sex marriage ceremonies on U.S military bases.

    Finally it would require the installation of an East Coast missile defense system to counter
    threats from countries such as Iran and North Korea. Never mind the N Korean's can't seem to fly a missile past there own bay they scare me! Sorry West Coast try getting rid of a few Democrats and maybe we can talk.

    Bravo GOP and if there were ever a doubt Mittens is pushing for a significant defense spending increase. I say bring on Iran and North Korea we will be ready after November!
    What only a double digit increase for defense. Those tightwads!
    I am 100% convinced the internet and social media are not the salvation to human civility.

  7. #7
    Adorable Furry Hombre
    Reputation: Marc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    28,576
    Quote Originally Posted by Snakebit View Post
    It can also get you shot if her husband finds out.
    I'm not talking affairs, I mean a run of the mill what we call "date" in the USA. Being in a private space with a woman you are not married to is not legal in Dubai last I knew. Sometimes those laws aren't enforced, unless someone complaints. But the points is that given some of our "allies", something like gay marriage on military bases could easily be a political landmine.
    "Refreshingly Unconcerned With The Vulgar Exigencies Of Veracity "

  8. #8
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Snakebit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    69,526
    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    I'm not talking affairs, I mean a run of the mill what we call "date" in the USA. Being in a private space with a woman you are not married to is not legal in Dubai last I knew. Sometimes those laws aren't enforced, unless someone complaints. But the points is that given some of our "allies", something like gay marriage on military bases could easily be a political landmine.
    I understood what you were saying and I agree, I was just being facetious. Even so, if and when we pass a Federal law making SSM a legal right we could hardly refuse to honor that right on a military base. What would be required would be banning ALL marriage ceremonies on bases.

  9. #9
    Big is relative
    Reputation: bigbill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    11,887
    Quote Originally Posted by Snakebit View Post
    I understood what you were saying and I agree, I was just being facetious. Even so, if and when we pass a Federal law making SSM a legal right we could hardly refuse to honor that right on a military base. What would be required would be banning ALL marriage ceremonies on bases.
    You're not going to be able to force Chaplains to go against their beliefs. If their religious affiliation recognizes SSM, then fine, but you aren't going to see Catholic SSM's.
    Retired sailor

  10. #10
    Sculpture on 2 wheels
    Reputation: Bullvine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,600
    Quote Originally Posted by bigbill View Post
    You're not going to be able to force Chaplains to go against their beliefs. If their religious affiliation recognizes SSM, then fine, but you aren't going to see Catholic SSM's.
    Gay Catholic's unthinkable. One day a pope will come along and wake up from a bad nights sleep clamming the holy father told him last night that gay marriage for the people is ok.
    I figure it will happen when attendance and donations drop off a conciderable bit.

    And that will be that.
    Last edited by Bullvine; 05-20-2012 at 10:50 AM.

  11. #11
    waterproof*
    Reputation: Creakyknees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    41,589
    Ike was right.

    Question is, what do we do about it?
    * not actually a Rock Star

  12. #12
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    11,561
    Quote Originally Posted by Creakyknees View Post
    Ike was right.

    Question is, what do we do about it?
    A good place to start might be to stop all the silly rhetoric that if not outright equating things like roads, bridges, schools and other infrastructure with "socialism" comes pretty close.

    It's absolutely absurd to be spending this kind of money on "defense" when there is for all intents and purposes no one that poses the least bit of threat to us.

    We're liable to be broke by the time it comes to the possibility of actually needing the military to retain "access" to the dwindling world oil supplies.

  13. #13
    Sculpture on 2 wheels
    Reputation: Bullvine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,600
    Quote Originally Posted by Creakyknees View Post
    Ike was right.

    Question is, what do we do about it?
    Look and vote towards the future. Lasers, and unmanned boats and aircraft are soon to be here. They both cost money but not as much as current battle platforms. The age of a vast number of nuclear ships and billion dollar aircraft is comming to a close. There is no easy answer but voting out the Hawks that are too tied to the past would be a good start.

  14. #14
    eminence grease
    Reputation: terry b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    18,538
    $17,000 drip pan. Kentucky. Republican representative. Cut spending. Earmarks. Deficit. Jobs.

    21st century search keywords.
    You'd be better off with a netbook, they do everything better.

    My travel blog: http://tbaroundtheworld.blogspot.com

  15. #15
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    16,915
    Quote Originally Posted by Dwayne Barry View Post
    It's absolutely absurd to be spending this kind of money on "defense" when there is for all intents and purposes no one that poses the least bit of threat to us.
    Why do you suppose "no one poses the least bit of threat to us" ??

  16. #16
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    11,561
    Quote Originally Posted by AM999 View Post
    Why do you suppose "no one poses the least bit of threat to us" ??
    Because in a global economy no one with the sort of economy that could finance the threat could afford the economic consequences of doing anything more than posturing. In such a world where you already have a military that could squash such opposition, even if they did suicidally decide to create a military situation, the smart thing is to downsize.

    China/Russia aren't interested in provoking a military confrontation because we have a big, bad military, they aren't interested in doing it because it would wreck their economy even worse than it would ours.
    Last edited by Dwayne Barry; 05-20-2012 at 03:00 PM.

  17. #17
    Daft Punk built my hotrod
    Reputation: PaxRomana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,828
    Quote Originally Posted by AM999 View Post
    Why do you suppose "no one poses the least bit of threat to us" ??
    Because they already own the US, so why would they attack it.

  18. #18
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: troutmd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    25,400
    Quote Originally Posted by Dwayne Barry View Post
    Because in a global economy no one with the sort of economy that could finance the threat could afford the economic consequences of doing anything more than posturing. In such a world where you already have a military that could squash such opposition, even if they did suicidally decide to create a military situation, the smart thing is to downsize.

    China/Russia aren't interested in provoking a military confrontation because we have a big, bad military, they are interested in doing it because it would wreck their economy even worse than it would ours.
    Your post reminded me of my former profession.

    When I was in the state capitol I always admired the fire department lobbyists.

    When there was a big rainfall year they'd cry the hillsides have so much brush growth that the coming fire season is going to be cataclysmic. And when there was a less then normal rainfall they'd clamor the hillsides are bone dry and the coming fire season is going to be horrific.

    Kinda the same approach used by the Military/Industrial Complex inside the Greenbelt.
    I am 100% convinced the internet and social media are not the salvation to human civility.

  19. #19
    n00bsauce
    Reputation: Mel Erickson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    13,507
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeBiker View Post
    The East Coast missile defense system is to counter the Al Qaeda battleships that are sailing over from the middle east.
    Would that be polyester or aramid sails? And would they be sporting the skull and crossbones or a skeleton on their flags?
    "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire

    There are your fog people & your sun people, he said. I said I wasn't sure which kind I was. He nodded. Fog'll do that to you, he said.

    "We are all ignorant about most things."
    Mel Erickson

  20. #20
    Low rep power
    Reputation: saf-t's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    6,264
    Quote Originally Posted by terry b View Post
    $17,000 drip pan. Kentucky. Republican representative. Cut spending. Earmarks. Deficit. Jobs.

    21st century search keywords.
    Let's not forget selling off the helium while searching.....
    We'll be back soon, there will be more of us, and next time we won't be dropping leaflets.

    “The problem with quotes on the internet is that it’s hard to verify their authenticity” – Abraham Lincoln

  21. #21
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    16,915
    Quote Originally Posted by Dwayne Barry View Post
    Because in a global economy no one with the sort of economy that could finance the threat could afford the economic consequences of doing anything more than posturing. In such a world where you already have a military that could squash such opposition, even if they did suicidally decide to create a military situation, the smart thing is to downsize.

    China/Russia aren't interested in provoking a military confrontation because we have a big, bad military, they aren't interested in doing it because it would wreck their economy even worse than it would ours.
    Yes, but that won't stop both Russia and China from building up their military which they are doing and throwing their weight around regionally. The US now controls the oceans which is a huge advantage and we must invest to keep it that way. Both Russia and China are flawed in different ways and will begin to implode starting in the 2020's. Also because of technology warfare will become cheaper and more precise - we see that now in the use of drones. The US must however continue to invest in military capability.

    Did I think up this stuff all by myself - no, but have just finished George Friedman's book "The Next 100 Years" which is fascinating. Freidman predicts that the next challengers to the US will be Turkey and Japan. Poland will also rise to prominence. There will be a major war in ~ 2050 against a Turk/Japan alliance which will be fought in high tech mode. Interesting stuff and instructive of the past and present as well. Accuracy ?? Time wil tell.

  22. #22
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    16,915
    Quote Originally Posted by PaxRomana View Post
    Because they already own the US, so why would they attack it.
    To get their money - we'll never repay the way we are going. But actually China may implode within a few years so the point may be moot. They have a demographic problem in that their coastal and productive population is about the size of the US but they also have a billion people living on less than $2K per year plus ~ 25% (could be as high as ~ 40%) of their GDP is tied up in bad debt (gov loans that will not be repaid). They can't afford to slow down but of course they will.

    Source - "The Next 100 Years" by George Friedman.

  23. #23
    ___________
    Reputation: bricoleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    13,506
    .
    .

    Quote Originally Posted by AM999
    ...

    Freidman predicts that the next challengers to the US will be Turkey and Japan.

    ...


    he's been saying that re: Japan for 20+ years now.



    Political predictions they got wrong - Matthew Ashton



    McStrategy - David P. Goldman | Tablet

    .

  24. #24
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    11,561
    Quote Originally Posted by AM999 View Post
    There will be a major war in ~ 2050 against a Turk/Japan alliance which will be fought in high tech mode. Interesting stuff and instructive of the past and present as well. Accuracy ?? Time wil tell.
    Yes that seems real likely.

    Well worth spending on ever increasing military for something that might, maybe, happen in 40 years as the infrastructure of the country deteriorates and we largely ignore domestic health care and energy issues.

    Live scared rather than live well.

  25. #25
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    12,550
    I do not have a problem investing in new technology. I do have a problem with troops all over the world.

    Look if Germany and Japan want us to be their military Pay us for it. Not looking for a profit just cover the costs or do it yourself.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT ROADBIKEREVIEW

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.