parados wrote: oralloy wrote:
It is a fact that our readiness is critically low (note the article Hawkeye linked where we were down to just two brigades capable of serious combat -- it is a very good thing that we did not have an enemy capable of invading us right then, or the United States might not be here right now).
Is this meant to be satire? Or are you just being stupid?
Neither. As usual it was me pointing out unvarnished facts, just as I always do.
Our readiness is more than enough to defend us for what is really out there but that means we need to be prepared for something that can't happen just because oralloy likes to **** his pants.
Your point could be boiled down to: No one was capable of invading us at that moment in history.
Yes, it is indeed true that we survived that moment in history due to the fact that no one was in a position to invade us right then.
But the mere fact that we would have been completely unable to mount any serious defense, had there been such an invasion, should be very disturbing to people.
Do you remember the Roman Empire? Guess what happens to a polity that is unable to defend themselves once someone actually does invade them?
I am not sure why you are objecting to me making an issue of our unacceptable defenselessness, but if the Left is going to take the position that we should remain defenseless into the future, that is good cause for the voters of America to send lots and lots of Republicans to Washington.