I see no reason why a specialist in the army should not be making 40k a year. When you raise the money you attract better people. And for defence you want the best so start paying well. Take the foreign aid and the aid we give to illegals and boost the troops pay. Use the money cut from the bases and pay down the debt.
Some of that foreign aid you’d be talking away John might prevent some countries for creating reasons to be invaded which would require less standing troops(in theory of course)
Thats why they have they U.N. a contribution of soldiers from smaller countries, majority of the countries in the world couldn’t defend from a invasion without the help of allies. Since the U.S. has the largest and most sophisticated military we are involved in every major “conflict” or war.
A couple of weeks back I was talking to a Japanese woman who was going on and on about how the US shouldn’t be policing the world and how the US should pull out of Japan. She went on and on about how bad it was to have a base in Okinawa.
After I let her finish, I asked, “If the US pulled out of Okinawa tomorrow, would China invade Taiwan the next day?”
She stopped, thought for a second, and then said, something like, “yeah, They US has to stay in Japan, don’t they.”
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I’d like to see them pay the current guys a bit more too. Cut the morons and get an intelligent fighting force and pay them well enough that maybe people who have other options join the military instead of only those with few other choices.[/quote]
We currently have the most educated military in the history of Earth…
Just say’in.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
A couple of weeks back I was talking to a Japanese woman who was going on and on about how the US shouldn’t be policing the world and how the US should pull out of Japan. She went on and on about how bad it was to have a base in Okinawa.
After I let her finish, I asked, “If the US pulled out of Okinawa tomorrow, would China invade Taiwan the next day?”
She stopped, thought for a second, and then said, something like, “yeah, They US has to stay in Japan, don’t they.”
[/quote]
My response would be it’s not our job to protect Taiwan.
[quote]Valor wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I’d like to see them pay the current guys a bit more too. Cut the morons and get an intelligent fighting force and pay them well enough that maybe people who have other options join the military instead of only those with few other choices.[/quote]
We currently have the most educated military in the history of Earth…
Just say’in.[/quote]
What’s that statement based on?
John,
I dont disagree with you in theory. I think we both know any money this congress has to spend is going to pork.
I think we also both know that a strong military is vital for the U.S.
Lots of good ideas.
[quote]Valor wrote:
John,
I dont disagree with you in theory. I think we both know any money this congress has to spend is going to pork.
I think we also both know that a strong military is vital for the U.S.
Lots of good ideas.[/quote]
Well as Ron Paul said he would like to cut 4-500 billion, that still leaves 600+ billion a year for the military, I woud say without the bases and that money going to fund research for better missles,gear,tanks,planes,defencive missles would be much better for our saftey. And you can take the other 4-500 billion and pay down the debt. Sounds like a win win to me.
Oh and also get out of the UN that thing gets us in way to much trouble.
[quote]Spartiates wrote:
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
A couple of weeks back I was talking to a Japanese woman who was going on and on about how the US shouldn’t be policing the world and how the US should pull out of Japan. She went on and on about how bad it was to have a base in Okinawa.
After I let her finish, I asked, “If the US pulled out of Okinawa tomorrow, would China invade Taiwan the next day?”
She stopped, thought for a second, and then said, something like, “yeah, They US has to stay in Japan, don’t they.”
[/quote]
My response would be it’s not our job to protect Taiwan.
[/quote]
That is the heart of the matter.
America plays world police and goes bankrupt.
[quote]Valor wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I’d like to see them pay the current guys a bit more too. Cut the morons and get an intelligent fighting force and pay them well enough that maybe people who have other options join the military instead of only those with few other choices.[/quote]
We currently have the most educated military in the history of Earth…
Just say’in.[/quote]
Wow, I bet those dead Iraqi babies are impressed.
I think they are too. Educated military yes thats kind of a non factor in some of these 3rd world countries to them its not the most powerful people who are educated its the ones who have the most guns.
[quote]Spartiates wrote:
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
A couple of weeks back I was talking to a Japanese woman who was going on and on about how the US shouldn’t be policing the world and how the US should pull out of Japan. She went on and on about how bad it was to have a base in Okinawa.
After I let her finish, I asked, “If the US pulled out of Okinawa tomorrow, would China invade Taiwan the next day?”
She stopped, thought for a second, and then said, something like, “yeah, They US has to stay in Japan, don’t they.”
[/quote]
My response would be it’s not our job to protect Taiwan.
[/quote]
My response would be, how does that affect me? I know how spending a bunch of money over there affects me.
And also, if China invaded Taiwan, would we really want to go fight the Chinese?
Without the US Navy, the world’s oceans would soon resemble the ocean off the coast of Somalia, with piracy and plunder running rampant.
Civilised parts of the world should be on their own – Germany, Japan, and like that. Bring those troops home.
The developed world should pay a 1% wealth tax to fund our military, since they benefit from the order provided by the United States, for free.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Without the US Navy, the world’s oceans would soon resemble the ocean off the coast of Somalia, with piracy and plunder running rampant.[/quote]
I would agree with this 100%. We could maintain the worlds most sophisticated, bad ass navy, patroling all over the world in international waters, without being interventionists. It drives the Islamic world crazy when we have bases and troops in their holy lands, so why do it? Can’t we maintain a strong military presence world wide, without actually having bases/boots on the ground?
“Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations - entangling alliances with none.” ~ Thomas Jefferson
[quote]John S. wrote:
Just think if we cut the bases and used that money on the debt, and by getting out of the wars and by cutting useless departments we would also have a balanced budget. The economic boom that would follow would dwarf the roaring 20’s.[/quote]
I say bring them home and re-open the crapload of bases Clinton closed in the US. Expand special Ops.
We still need a large military and reserve, but with CIA in DROVES across the world. Small operations in key sectors where CIA reports issues and we act accordingly in special ops would be the key to lowering our spending in the military branches.
Oh yeah and “We have no knowledge of such occurrences where any US military personnel were involved in said act.” Should be the order of the decade.
You are aware of what the CIA does and their history Rockscar?
Dude there are operational forces in the CIA and the army that do whatever whenever they want. Im not talking about 1st SFOD aka delta now CAG or the CIA’s SAD (special activities division) dam i think i just violated opsec.
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
[quote]John S. wrote:
Just think if we cut the bases and used that money on the debt, and by getting out of the wars and by cutting useless departments we would also have a balanced budget. The economic boom that would follow would dwarf the roaring 20’s.[/quote]
I say bring them home and re-open the crapload of bases Clinton closed in the US. Expand special Ops.
We still need a large military and reserve, but with CIA in DROVES across the world. Small operations in key sectors where CIA reports issues and we act accordingly in special ops would be the key to lowering our spending in the military branches.
Oh yeah and “We have no knowledge of such occurrences where any US military personnel were involved in said act.” Should be the order of the decade.[/quote]
why would we have a bunch of bases reopened and pay people to stand around? defeats the whole purpose of moving out of europe and japan and korea.
[quote]PB-Crawl wrote:
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
[quote]John S. wrote:
Just think if we cut the bases and used that money on the debt, and by getting out of the wars and by cutting useless departments we would also have a balanced budget. The economic boom that would follow would dwarf the roaring 20’s.[/quote]
I say bring them home and re-open the crapload of bases Clinton closed in the US. Expand special Ops.
We still need a large military and reserve, but with CIA in DROVES across the world. Small operations in key sectors where CIA reports issues and we act accordingly in special ops would be the key to lowering our spending in the military branches.
Oh yeah and “We have no knowledge of such occurrences where any US military personnel were involved in said act.” Should be the order of the decade.[/quote]
why would we have a bunch of bases reopened and pay people to stand around? defeats the whole purpose of moving out of europe and japan and korea. [/quote]
Yes.
The government is not a jobs program.