this article has a powerful statism bias. a small army is fine. what's needed is more militias to protect the homeland. trying to make some progress towards that in the SF bay area but it's a tough slog.
How odd that there's no opportunity to comment on this opinion. We beat liberal websites about the head and shoulders when they do that; should we not do the same for so-called 'conservative' websites?
Mike,in all due respect, please don't fall for this! All these calls lately for a push to enlarge the Military and how dangerously stressed and small it is, is just a Pre-Conditioning of the American people, so they will more readily accept the Illegal Alien Mexican's who were just released from Prison's in the tens of thousands to come here, into the American Military!
These illegals,many of them Hardened Criminals and Murderers, are being Trained right now by our Treasonous government, in American uniforms and American Military equipment, to Try and Help Our government Try and commit Genocide against us, while the vast majority of our REAL Loyal American Military, is deployed overseas and unable to oppose the illegals in American uniforms back here in the United States!
Please do not forget,that according to actual eyewitness accounts,most of the illegals that have come over in the last wave, were not Children and their Mothers but males between the ages of 16 and 46 years old!...That is not an accident!
Our government brought all of those young males over here to be put into our Military and Try to do us Harm! That's what's at the heart of the call for the Enlarging of Our Military!
We live in a police state. Why would we want the standing army of that police state to be strong? The stronger they are, the weaker We The People are. America's founders understood that power is a zero-sum game, so they wanted armed force to be entrusted to the people as a whole, NOT to the servants of government.
But what about national defense, you might ask? Well, in modern times America needs few (if any) ground forces for its defense. Even if we got rid of the Army and Marines tomorrow, what hostile foreign force would invade us? We'd still have our Navy and Air Force, including the nuclear deterrent. We also have a heavily armed population, though it would never be needed to fend off an invasion because no country is going to try such a thing and risk getting nuked.
The main purpose of US ground forces today is to invade and occupy foreign countries in the context of our endless wars-for-profit. "Our" troops also serve as reinforcements for domestic law enforcement in case of a peasant revolt.
Real national defense is measured in ICBMs and aircraft carriers, not in "boots on the ground." US ground troops DO NOT secure our freedom -- they threaten it more than anyone else. (If they protected our freedom, we'd have no need for the Second Amendment.)
A comment regarding the proposal for the Scout SV- by breaking up the squad, you require 2x the vehicles. This is 2x the crew, 2x the maintenance. Pulling maintenance on tracked vehicles is an ongoing process. I am not convinced that the tradeoff is worth it. Size matters in that it generally means more space, more internal volume. Soldiers & Marines carry a LOT of stuff. That, and with a smaller vehicle, the probability of a K-Kill is that much more.
Its not the technology or the size of the army that wins its battles. It is the morality and dedication to cause of the soldiers and the same dedication of its leaders to its people that win. These days a standing army is wasteful and essentially useless. It is only good for aggression, pushing your citizens around and beating up of defenseless third world nations. The real required combination for winning wars is an armed populace and a strong economy. Neither of which is popular these days.
What a load of crap. If your default position is that the US government needs its fingers in every little conflict, yeah you need a gigantic army. Otherwise, what we really need is a militia, just as Comeau points out.
11 comments:
The American Army is deploying to the Dark Continent to fight Obola. Thank Gaia we have the DHS here to protect us!
this article has a powerful statism bias. a small army is fine. what's needed is more militias to protect the homeland. trying to make some progress towards that in the SF bay area but it's a tough slog.
How odd that there's no opportunity to comment on this opinion. We beat liberal websites about the head and shoulders when they do that; should we not do the same for so-called 'conservative' websites?
http://dispatchesfromheck.blogspot.com/2013/08/over-there.html
Mike,in all due respect, please don't fall for this! All these calls lately for a push to enlarge the Military and how dangerously stressed and small it is, is just a Pre-Conditioning of the American people, so they will more readily accept the Illegal Alien Mexican's who were just released from Prison's in the tens of thousands to come here, into the American Military!
These illegals,many of them Hardened Criminals and Murderers, are being Trained right now by our Treasonous government, in American uniforms and American Military equipment, to Try and Help Our government Try and commit Genocide against us, while the vast majority of our REAL Loyal American Military, is deployed overseas and unable to oppose the illegals in American uniforms back here in the United States!
Please do not forget,that according to actual eyewitness accounts,most of the illegals that have come over in the last wave, were not Children and their Mothers but males between the ages of 16 and 46 years old!...That is not an accident!
Our government brought all of those young males over here to be put into our Military and Try to do us Harm! That's what's at the heart of the call for the Enlarging of Our Military!
What about the freedom fighter army manned by 150 million gun enthusiasts with evil black rifles, semi-auto hand guns, shotguns and deer rifles?
We live in a police state. Why would we want the standing army of that police state to be strong? The stronger they are, the weaker We The People are. America's founders understood that power is a zero-sum game, so they wanted armed force to be entrusted to the people as a whole, NOT to the servants of government.
But what about national defense, you might ask? Well, in modern times America needs few (if any) ground forces for its defense. Even if we got rid of the Army and Marines tomorrow, what hostile foreign force would invade us? We'd still have our Navy and Air Force, including the nuclear deterrent. We also have a heavily armed population, though it would never be needed to fend off an invasion because no country is going to try such a thing and risk getting nuked.
The main purpose of US ground forces today is to invade and occupy foreign countries in the context of our endless wars-for-profit. "Our" troops also serve as reinforcements for domestic law enforcement in case of a peasant revolt.
Real national defense is measured in ICBMs and aircraft carriers, not in "boots on the ground." US ground troops DO NOT secure our freedom -- they threaten it more than anyone else. (If they protected our freedom, we'd have no need for the Second Amendment.)
Bo-Zo would love an army that answered "only" to him.
How many more dots need to be connected to see the cesspool we are headed for?
A comment regarding the proposal for the Scout SV- by breaking up the squad, you require 2x the vehicles. This is 2x the crew, 2x the maintenance. Pulling maintenance on tracked vehicles is an ongoing process. I am not convinced that the tradeoff is worth it. Size matters in that it generally means more space, more internal volume. Soldiers & Marines carry a LOT of stuff. That, and with a smaller vehicle, the probability of a K-Kill is that much more.
Its not the technology or the size of the army that wins its battles. It is the morality and dedication to cause of the soldiers and the same dedication of its leaders to its people that win.
These days a standing army is wasteful and essentially useless. It is only good for aggression, pushing your citizens around and beating up of defenseless third world nations. The real required combination for winning wars is an armed populace and a strong economy. Neither of which is popular these days.
"Bo-Zo would love an army that answered "only" to him.
How many more dots need to be connected to see the cesspool we are headed for?"
WHY, do think, they've essentially purged the general officer corps?
What a load of crap. If your default position is that the US government needs its fingers in every little conflict, yeah you need a gigantic army. Otherwise, what we really need is a militia, just as Comeau points out.
Post a Comment