« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: THIS is progress! Part Two!!  (Read 837 times)

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
THIS is progress! Part Two!!
« Reply #15 on: June 09, 2004, 03:06:06 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Thrawn
wether or not the US, as whole, can afford to pay.


Well, obviously Canada can't or won't. Guess you'll just have to trail along behind us and see how it all turns out.

Them as can, does. Them as can't, don't.

;)
Logged
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
THIS is progress! Part Two!!
« Reply #16 on: June 09, 2004, 03:13:19 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by AKIron
You must be talking about the US Army, there are considerably more than 500,000 active duty US military personnel. Will look it up.


My mistake, I saw the 500,000 thousand number not to long ago when I was looking up this very issue. Perhaps it means deployable?


Quote
Originally posted by Toad
Well, obviously Canada can't or won't.



Indeed, but one good sign is that the Conseratives are now leading the Liberals.  ;)

After I made my statement about being able to afford the financial costs I thought of what should have been obvious solution to both our countries problems with funding our militaries, cut the fricken pork.
Logged

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13313
THIS is progress! Part Two!!
« Reply #17 on: June 09, 2004, 03:15:46 PM »
The biggest pork is defending those countries capable of providing for their own defense. Agree it needs to be cut.
Logged
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
THIS is progress! Part Two!!
« Reply #18 on: June 09, 2004, 03:18:15 PM »
ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS BY REGIONAL AREA AND BY COUNTRY (309A)

That's as of Sept '03.

What a coincidence! The Conservatives are now leading our country too!  ;)

Cut the pork? And starve the homeless politicians?
Logged
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
THIS is progress! Part Two!!
« Reply #19 on: June 09, 2004, 03:20:49 PM »
"The biggest pork is defending those countries capable of providing for their own defense."

Once again, that would be a start.  The problem is that no-one is calling for a correlating decrease in defence spending.  

We both have our sacred cows.  No Canadian can win an election that says, "Cut heathcare spending.".  No American can win an election that says, "Cut defence spending.".
Logged

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13313
THIS is progress! Part Two!!
« Reply #20 on: June 09, 2004, 03:25:13 PM »
The US benefits if we simply redirect the billions spent militarily on foreign shores to our own. Of course if/when we pull our troops home they will be more visible and no doubt more likely to be seen as unecessary by many. Maybe if the US eliminates it's military Canada and Mexico will step into the gap?
Logged
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.

Offline jamusta

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 846
THIS is progress! Part Two!!
« Reply #21 on: June 09, 2004, 04:14:42 PM »
The shift of units is not what everyone is thinking. If this were the case it would not be benificial to cut troops down in Korea. This is simply a move to be able to rotate soldiers to Iraq. At the present pace of deployments the draft is sure to come. The Army has run out of units to send. They are not trying to save money by bringing these soldiers home. My old unit the 11th ACR had a saying..."We get sent after the girlscouts." Pentagon is now considering closing Ft. Irwin and sending the 11th ACR to Iraq. We are truly depleted of troops. The inactive reserves are calling up its people as we speak. Until that pool of soldiers gets depleted they cant start the draft. Is the draft a rumor? Yes it is. But they sure are taking steps in that direction.
Logged

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
THIS is progress! Part Two!!
« Reply #22 on: June 09, 2004, 04:25:23 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by AKIron
Maybe if the US eliminates it's military Canada and Mexico will step into the gap?


What does Mexico have do with anything, they aren't even an ally?  And exactly which nation or nations is a threat to North America?
Logged

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13313
THIS is progress! Part Two!!
« Reply #23 on: June 09, 2004, 04:28:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Thrawn
What does Mexico have do with anything, they aren't even an ally?  And exactly which nation or nations is a threat to North America?


Mexico is on our border and could help you Canadians fight off a continental invasion.

We'd likely find out real quick if the US didn't have a powerful military.
Logged
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
THIS is progress! Part Two!!
« Reply #24 on: June 09, 2004, 04:32:59 PM »
Jamusta, any shift to "home basing" the troops is positive IMO.

I'm sure these units will do a tour in Iraq. I'm just as sure they will replace units that, in turn, will return stateside for a while.

I want them based at home and actually at home as much as possible.

***********

It isn't the Americas we have to defend, is it?

Thrawn, the point is everyone calls for the UN forces in time of crisis.

Canada can contribute max 8,000. Mexico probably none.


Point is, that without US forces involved, the UN doesn't have enough
manpower to stop... oh, say... the Serbs.

Without the US, what would the UN do if the NK's rolled South again? Answer: Not a thing; they don't have the military to oppose something like that.
Logged
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
THIS is progress! Part Two!!
« Reply #25 on: June 09, 2004, 04:40:39 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by AKIron
Mexico is on our border and could help you Canadians fight off a continental invasion.


Yeah but the contentient invasion from who?


Quote
We'd likely find out real quick if the US didn't have a powerful military.


Oh yeah, I'm sure that's "likely".  Countries have been chomping at the bit to see how they could possibly try to launch a sea bourne invasion of the second largest country in the world and work there way across it, while maintaining supply lines and occupying it.
Logged

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13313
THIS is progress! Part Two!!
« Reply #26 on: June 09, 2004, 04:42:18 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Thrawn
Oh yeah, I'm sure that's "likely".  Countries have been chomping at the bit to see how they could possibly try to launch a sea bourne invasion of the second largest country in the world and work there way across it, while maintaining supply lines and occupying it.


Why not? We've done it.
Logged
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
THIS is progress! Part Two!!
« Reply #27 on: June 09, 2004, 04:50:32 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Toad
It isn't the Americas we have to defend, is it?

Thrawn, the point is everyone calls for the UN forces in time of crisis.


...

Quote
Point is, that without US forces involved, the UN doesn't have enough
manpower to stop... oh, say... the Serbs.


Well, it depends on the level of crisis and the specific situation.


Quote
Without the US, what would the UN do if the NK's rolled South again? Answer: Not a thing; they don't have the military to oppose something like that.


It depends on the desire of and which countries are opposing it.  But granted, it certainly makes possibility of meeting some crises much more feasible, (and in some cases viable, period!) if the US is on board.


But let's not mistake ability to intervene in a crisis to mean the desire to.  Desire not to participte (or participate meaninfully) doesn't exist some nebulous body called "The United Nations", but within the member states themselves.  And every memberstate has express this desire at somepoint, Rwanada being the classic, and one of the most tragic examples.
Logged

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
THIS is progress! Part Two!!
« Reply #28 on: June 09, 2004, 04:53:39 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by AKIron
Why not? We've done it.


No you didn't and it was a much different situation.  If you mean "could do it".  If any nation in the world could, it would be the US.  But we were talking about contiental invasion.
Logged

Offline Pei

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1903
THIS is progress! Part Two!!
« Reply #29 on: June 09, 2004, 07:22:08 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by AKIron
Why not? We've done it.


Not by yourselves you haven't.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
« previous next »