Where would you make the budget cuts?

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Bureau of Alcohol & Tobacco of the Treasury Dept.

Sorry Charlie, they are with the justice department.

@oralloy,

Quote:

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.

The band that wants to withdraw right now from keeping the shipping lanes open long before the Chinese are ready to do it should considerer that the rag-tag Somali pirates quickly cost the global economy $7 billion a year. imagine what happens to the US economy without the US forces on the seas.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2014/05/global-cost-somali-piracy-halved-2013-201457223712567747.html

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Bureau of Alcohol & Tobacco of the Treasury Dept.

Sorry Charlie, they are with the justice department.

I guess thay were moven.

0 Replies

@Lustig Andrei,

Lustig Andrei wrote:

How long have you been suffering from this paranoia, oral?

It is not paranoia to find it unacceptable for the US military to be in such a weakened state that the nation can field only two brigades in defense of the nation.

That Leftists find the nation's defenselessness to be a desirable circumstance is good reason for America's voters to put as many Republicans into office as possible.

Lustig Andrei wrote:

I'd seek some good psychiatric help if I were you.

What I need is a good solid Republican victory. One that will crush the Left for generations to come.

Let's face it, Leftists are a danger to the security of the United States.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

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).

Quote:

It's pretty unbelievable that the Left actually wants the US to be completely defenseless against invasion.

How did you get from a large enough force since there wasn't an enemy capable of invading us to completely defenseless? I suppose I am nit picking now that I am pointing out your strawman argument.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Bureau of Alcohol & Tobacco of the Treasury Dept.

Sorry Charlie, they are with the justice department.

Currently they are. They have bounced back and forth between Treasury and Justice

Quote:

The ATF was formerly part of the United States Department of the Treasury, having been formed in 1886 as the "Revenue Laboratory" within the Treasury Department's Bureau of Internal Revenue. The history of ATF can be subsequently traced to the time of the revenuers or "revenoors"[7] and the Bureau of Prohibition, which was formed as a unit of the Bureau of Internal Revenue in 1920, was made an independent agency within the Treasury Department in 1927, was transferred to the Justice Department in 1930, and became, briefly, a division of the FBI in 1933.

When the Volstead Act, which established Prohibition in the United States, was repealed in December 1933, the Unit was transferred from the Department of Justice back to the Department of the Treasury
...

In the wake of the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, on September 11, 2001 President George W. Bush signed into law the Homeland Security Act of 2002. In addition to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, the law shifted ATF from the Department of the Treasury to the Department of Justice. The agency's name was changed to Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureau_of_Alcohol,_Tobacco,_Firearms_and_Explosives

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

It is not paranoia to find it unacceptable for the US military to be in such a weakened state that the nation can field only two brigades in defense of the nation.

It seems you have a different view of fielding a brigade than the military. The US is sending troops to Afghanistan that are not combat-ready but you seem to feel that brigades that are not combat ready are incapable of any military action.

1 Reply

@parados,

Don't you get it? Extremism = GOP. Their top priority is keep the citizen's scared shytless on EVERYTHING.

Obamacare = fiscal cliff & death panels, ebola = the biggest enemy our country ever had - but don't fund to protect us, fund the government = no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, we're spending too much money.........that cost our country $54 billion in our economy.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Don't you get it? Extremism = GOP. Their top priority is keep the citizen's scared shytless on EVERYTHING.

Unlike liberal extremists: GLOBAL WARMING! RAPE ON CAMPUS! WAR ON WOMEN! McD's IS KILLING OUR KIDS WITH HAPPY MEALS!

Anything to keep us occupied as the crooks pick our pockets. The increasing wealth inequity can only happen with the consent and assistance of both sides of the isle.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

You wrote,

Quote:

Unlike liberal extremists: GLOBAL WARMING! RAPE ON CAMPUS! WAR ON WOMEN! McD's IS KILLING OUR KIDS WITH HAPPY MEALS!

1. Global warming. Show us proof it doesn't exist?
2. Rape on campus. Show us proof it doesn't exist?
3. McD's happy meals. Show us proof they're healthy?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

"LOOK, A SQUIRREL!"

If there should happen to be a squirrel does not change the profit from the diversion. You have been around the world many times, do you seriously not know how pick-pockets work?

1 Reply

Somehow, I get the feeling that a lot of people think a brigade is much larger and more important than it really is.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

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.

parados wrote:
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.

IT'S A GOOD THING FOR THE 2nd AMENDMENT!!!

David

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

What has pickpockets have anything to do with a) global warming, b) women rape, and c) McD's happy meals?

Your advice about world travel and pickpockets belong on the laffer curve; once again proving your total ignorance.

Answer the damn questions. Your diversions are childish.

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

How did you get from a large enough force since there wasn't an enemy capable of invading us to completely defenseless?

From the fact that the United States had only two brigades capable of serious combat.

parados wrote:

I suppose I am nit picking now that I am pointing out your strawman argument.

Not necessarily nit picking, but there certainly isn't any straw man argument.

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

It seems you have a different view of fielding a brigade than the military.

Not likely. Only Left-wingers think that it is even remotely acceptable for the military to have only two brigades to defend the nation with.

The rest of the nation views our utter defenselessness as totally unacceptable.

parados wrote:

The US is sending troops to Afghanistan that are not combat-ready

If that is true, that is also unacceptable.

We need to vote all the Left-wingers out of Washington while we still have a country.

1 Reply

@roger,

roger wrote:

Somehow, I get the feeling that a lot of people think a brigade is much larger and more important than it really is.

It's a matter of the Left actually wanting the United States to be destroyed.

When the Left sees us in a position of complete defenselessness, surviving only because no one is currently in a position to attack us, their reaction is to try to make sure we stay in that defenseless state until someone is finally able to destroy us.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

IT'S A GOOD THING FOR THE 2nd AMENDMENT!!!

True. But I would rather we just vote all the Left-wingers out of office (and maybe start detaining some of them at Guantanamo).

If the Left ever succeeds in their efforts to get the United States conquered by a foreign enemy, that's not going to be a good situation.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

True. But I would rather we just vote all the Left-wingers out of office (and maybe start detaining some of them at Guantanamo).

Ahhh, your fascist agenda finally surfaces! Arrest all those who disagree with me and send 'em the hell to a concentration camp. Thank you for your honesty, comrade.

1 Reply

@Lustig Andrei,

Lustig Andrei wrote:

Ahhh, your fascist agenda finally surfaces!

Don't be silly. Fascism is a silly ideology that takes the stupidest ideas of both the Right and the Left and combines them into an unwholesome hybrid of idiocy.

I merely object to the fact that the Left actively tries to get America conquered by a foreign enemy.

Lustig Andrei wrote:

Arrest all those who disagree with me and send 'em the hell to a concentration camp. Thank you for your honesty, comrade.

You are a danger to the United States. We would end up conquered by God-kows-who if you had your way with the nation's defenses.

2 Replies

Where would you make the budget cuts?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know