ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
For the amount of money we pay towards it, our military is pretty weak. I just don't get how in the middle of what everyone agrees is a need to get more conventional - with boots on the ground- we instead throw good money after bad and buy a bunch of technologically wonderous crap that makes virtually no difference in TWAT.
Oh, and why can't we have the Israeli anti-RPG system?? That would save lives! But no. Alas, the US military industrial complex is one hungry fat, inefficient beast that won't be ignored, but can't be touched either.
I would love to see the per capita defense expenditure of the US vs. China. It would be interesting to see what kind of "bang" we get for our buck.
Good day, mates.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
If we faught a conventional war against China I'd take our military 150 times out of 100.
The problem with out military is that we had the concept of a smaller, more technically advanced, rapid moving force right, but then decided to go fight a long, arduous, ground war, that entailed a 10 year occupation. Had we acted as we usually do, as a defender of freedom and not an invader, we'd be ok.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him." Leo Tolstoy, 1897
It is interesting to note on Wiki that the money for Iraq and Afghanistan is NOT counted as part of the federal military budget, but rather through supplemental spending bills, so the per-capita number is actually much higher than the x35 I sad.
Wiki:
"Finally, it must be stressed that the recent invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan are funded outside the Federal Budget (i.e. are paid for through supplementary spending bills) and are therefore external to the military budget figures listed above.[6] In addition, the United States has long had a history of black budget military spending which is not listed as Federal spending and is not included in published military spending figures. Thus, the true amount spent by the United States on military spending is significantly higher than the given budgetary figures."
Last edited by maverick4; 02-12-2007 at 03:34 PM..
If we faught a conventional war against China I'd take our military 150 times out of 100.
No ***** sherlock. We spend more than anyone else in the world by far on war. We rule the world through rule of might, not rule of right as we may like to think.
Last edited by maverick4; 02-12-2007 at 03:39 PM..
It is interesting to note on Wiki that the money for Iraq and Afghanistan is NOT counted as part of the federal military budget, but rather through supplemental spending bills, so the per-capita number is actually much higher than the x35 I sad.
Wiki:
"Finally, it must be stressed that the recent invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan are funded outside the Federal Budget (i.e. are paid for through supplementary spending bills) and are therefore external to the military budget figures listed above.[6] In addition, the United States has long had a history of black budget military spending which is not listed as Federal spending and is not included in published military spending figures. Thus, the true amount spent by the United States on military spending is significantly higher than the given budgetary figures."
Obviously, they are not part of their annual budget. You don't budget in a war ahead of time, as you would only be budgeting in operating costs. During war you have combat pay, loss of equipment, the need of additional equipment for combat operations, replacement munitions, fuel, etc...
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him." Leo Tolstoy, 1897
Obviously, they are not part of their annual budget. You don't budget in a war ahead of time, as you would only be budgeting in operating costs. During war you have combat pay, loss of equipment, the need of additional equipment for combat operations, replacement munitions, fuel, etc...
I don't think he's saying there's something sketchy about that, only that you have to add those things if you want to get a true cost.
Lets Face It
Linear Mode
