What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

  • Thread starter Thread starter Priceless
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Bakunin said:
Obama campaigned on this, yet instead of ending them, we're in more of them.

This all has a certain sense of futility to it, doesn't it? :p
Click to expand...

He can have his Libyan air support if he pulls out of Iraq and Afghanistan completely.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Kepler said:
He can have his Libyan air support if he pulls out of Iraq and Afghanistan completely.
Click to expand...

I got a kick out of the whiny speech of Gates. He was cricizing the Euros for not helping to support NATO...and was saying the group is on thin ice. Perhaps other countries feel that military budgets are a big waste and that its not necessary to dump tons of taxpayer dough into an out of date framework. Hopefully those in charge catch on rather than get pis sy.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

5mn_Major said:
I got a kick out of the whiny speech of Gates. He was criticizing the Euros for not helping to support NATO...and was saying the group is on thin ice. Perhaps other countries feel that military budgets are a big waste and that its not necessary to dump tons of taxpayer dough into an out of date framework. Hopefully those in charge catch on rather than get pis sy.
Click to expand...

They don't have to have large military budgets because of the size of the US military budget. They got used to having the US subsidize their defense costs during the cold war.

When you frame the US military budget as the military budget for the western world, it doesn't look so outrageous. I saw Gates speech as more of a warning to those Western European nations that the US isn't going to be politically willing or able to carry such a large portion of the costs of NATO anymore.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Almington said:
They don't have to have large military budgets because of the size of the US military budget. They got used to having the US subsidize their defense costs during the cold war.

When you frame the US military budget as the military budget for the western world, it doesn't look so outrageous. I saw Gates speech as more of a warning to those Western European nations that the US isn't going to be politically willing or able to carry such a large portion of the costs of NATO anymore.
Click to expand...

Why should Europe be concerned with a massive military budget? And no, not just because the US is carrying the load.

They're too large (at a half billion citizens) and too powerful to be at risk from any conventional military. The EU's only potential military threat is Russia...which has a quarter of the population, a seventh of the economy and far worse technology. Other countries are either far too weak or want to gain the EUs favor or both. Beyond that, they don't have the burning desire to tell other countries how to behave and have very little in the way of 'sphere of influence'.

And in the end, the US will spend the money on military regardless of just what the EU does and how obsolete military bases/tanks are...cause that's the way we roll.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

5mn_Major said:
Why should Europe be concerned with a massive military budget? And no, not just because the US is carrying the load.

They're too large (at a half billion citizens) and too powerful to be at risk from any conventional military. The EU's only potential military threat is Russia...which has a quarter of the population, a seventh of the economy and far worse technology. Other countries are either far too weak or want to gain the EUs favor or both. Beyond that, they don't have the burning desire to tell other countries how to behave and have very little in the way of 'sphere of influence'.

And in the end, the US will spend the money on military regardless of just what the EU does and how obsolete military bases/tanks are...cause that's the way we roll.
Click to expand...

It isn't about tanks, boots on the ground, or bases. It's the fact that most European countries are not even spending on special forces, counter-terrorism, precision guided weapons, and military intelligence. With few exceptions, the nations of Europe were woefully unprepared and unable to intervene in Libya, other side of the Mediterranean LIBYA. This isn't a military operation being conducted on the other side of the world be a few hundred km from Europe itself and they didn't even have the capability of dealing with that.

The whole world is interconnected, and in this era of globalization the interests and concerns of the state do not stop at the geographic boarder. The Western European nations know that no one is going to mess with them and they don't have to worry because the big mean US will handle any major issues.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

We've known that for fifteen years. They weren't able to project power in Kosovo, either, and that's in Europe itself less than 1,000 miles from the Austrian border. We should have held their nose to the grindstone on that one. The next time the Germans want to arbitrarily recognize someone's independence they need to have the stones to back it up without calling Washington.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Almington said:
It isn't about tanks, boots on the ground, or bases.
Click to expand...

It isn't for Europe. Unfortunately, it is for the US. And it shouldn't be for either.

IMO your view is one sided. Youre looking at it from a US point of view and positioning that on others with a completely different point of view. Europe does not look at taking advantage of the US military nor does it really care. Its just not a priority for them. One could make the case that the Euros put stuff at risk during the cold war...but now their perspective is right on. The world is largely a single entity...and the once a decade issues that pop up they feel do not merit driving a massive permanent sums into their military. Lastly, they see an issue that happens between Bangladesh and India as an international problem. Not a Europe problem...and therefore, the solution should be driven by the UN in the end. The UN just needs to be positioned for the role...not handcuffed.

It doesn't surprise me that some here feel that Europe feels as you say. It helps us to justify the need for US taxpayers to finance half the world's military budget.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

**** Europe. If they want our help again, they can pay for it.

Maybe if we weren't paying for our defense plus the defense of 20 other countries, our fiscal situation would be a bit better.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Bakunin said:
**** Europe. If they want our help again, they can pay for it.

Maybe if we weren't paying for our defense plus the defense of 20 other countries, our fiscal situation would be a bit better.
Click to expand...

You nailed it. We're the idiots who keep paying for everyone's military...and then we stupidly blame them for it.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

5mn_Major said:
It isn't for Europe. Unfortunately, it is for the US. And it shouldn't be for either.

IMO your view is one sided. Youre looking at it from a US point of view and positioning that on others with a completely different point of view. Europe does not look at taking advantage of the US military nor does it really care. Its just not a priority for them. One could make the case that the Euros put stuff at risk during the cold war...but now their perspective is right on. The world is largely a single entity...and the once a decade issues that pop up they feel do not merit driving a massive permanent sums into their military. Lastly, they see an issue that happens between Bangladesh and India as an international problem. Not a Europe problem...and therefore, the solution should be driven by the UN in the end. The UN just needs to be positioned for the role...not handcuffed.

It doesn't surprise me that some here feel that Europe feels as you say. It helps us to justify the need for US taxpayers to finance half the world's military budget.
Click to expand...

The US view is that of a intrenched old school view point, same problem that has afflicted many military structures over the years: inability to recognize how the changes in technology have altered strategy and tactics on the battlefield.

Western Europe has largely been shielded militarily by the US for roughly the last 70 years, of course that isn't a problem for Europe, that is just what they have come to expect. If you don't spend anything on the military how do you deal with those events that do arise every ~10 or so years?

Gates is right, do they need to decide if they want to spend the money and remain a important factor in the world of if they want to cede that power to developing nations? The ability to project military power is a very important aspect of diplomacy, lacking that ability significantly impairs your diplomatic options and importance. It isn't about having a fleet of tanks able to roll across nations it's about the ability to tell third world leaders that they can't just have their opposition or whole minority groups disappear or put down public demonstrations with military force. Britain learned this lesson the hard way when they were slowly demobilizing the traditional surface forces of the Royal Navy in favor of submarines and other cold war focused components in the 80's when Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands. Had the invasion been 6 months to a year later and the British would not have had the ability to respond militarily.

The UN isn't going to be the solution to anything, national sovereignty isn't going to be willingly sacrificed to an organization that large. Not withstanding that as formed, the UN resolutions only have as much force as the member nations are willing to back those resolutions with military force.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

5mn_Major said:
You nailed it. We're the idiots who keep paying for everyone's military...and then we stupidly blame them for it.
Click to expand...

As foreign policy, it's not idiocy at all -- it's how we've run the world since 1945. It isn't charity, it's "he who has the gold makes the rules." A very clear-headed, deeply cynical strategy. And it's worked, which is more than you can say for pretty much every other American foreign policy strategy since the Monroe Doctrine.

As domestic policy, our military spending stopped being about national defense a long time ago. Now it's a national economic policy. It's state welfare that can be wrapped in the flag, with a few dead Marines from time to time to sanctify it. It's nationalization of a huge industrial and technological sector of the economy, but it's safe for Republicans to vote for it.
 
Last edited:
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Top Congressional Democrats including DCCC Chair Israel, DNC Chair Wasserman-Schultz and Leader Pelosi have called on Rep. Weiner to quit. Haven't heard anything from David Vitter yet.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Priceless said:
Top Congressional Democrats including DCCC Chair Israel, DNC Chair Wasserman-Schultz and Leader Pelosi have called on Rep. Weiner to quit. Haven't heard anything from David Vitter yet.
Click to expand...
Fox is doing a hard hitting expose on sex scandals among the gov't. Over under on how many republicans are featured? My tv guide only lists democrats.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Foxton said:
Fox is doing a hard hitting expose on sex scandals among the gov't. Over under on how many republicans are featured? My tv guide only lists democrats.
Click to expand...

Somehow my TV is never stops at Fox, just like it never stops at MSNBC
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Foxton said:
Fox is doing a hard hitting expose on sex scandals among the gov't. Over under on how many republicans are featured? My tv guide only lists democrats.
Click to expand...

Any Republicans who make the show will be mysterious identified as Democrats.

s-FOLEY-large.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top