Ron 10 #26 December 9, 2004 Quotemost Armies are prepared to invade... You still have not given one example."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #27 December 9, 2004 well when i get home i'll look up every reference to every army that has taken the time to make sure its soldiers had the proper training and equipment they needed to succeed.. but for starters you might read up on the Blitzkreig.....____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #28 December 9, 2004 Quotewell when i get home i'll look up every reference to every army that has taken the time to make sure its soldiers had the proper training and equipment they needed to succeed.. but for starters you might read up on the Blitzkreig..... Gee, didn't they lose? Seems like they were not prepared to me."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #29 December 9, 2004 They lost after the Blitzkrieg and they were in occupation mode. In other words they had a swift initial victory of objectives but couldn't sustain the occupation of foreign lands. Sound familiar? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #30 December 9, 2004 QuoteThey lost after the Blitzkrieg and they were in occupation mode. In other words they had a swift initial victory of objectives but couldn't sustain the occupation of foreign lands. Sound familiar? Looks like they were not prepared to invade then huh? Just proves my point."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #31 December 9, 2004 You're right, you're point is proven. Armies that are ill prepared eventually lose. Why is it again you're arguing against providing armor to our troops? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #32 December 9, 2004 QuoteQuoteThey lost after the Blitzkrieg and they were in occupation mode. In other words they had a swift initial victory of objectives but couldn't sustain the occupation of foreign lands. Sound familiar? Looks like they were not prepared to invade then huh? Just proves my point. not really... without the assistance the French received from outside they were doing quite well as an occupying force.. the French resistance was a joke comparatively..... (and still is...)____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #33 December 9, 2004 QuoteYou're right, you're point is proven. Armies that are ill prepared eventually lose No, my point was that no Army was ready for war. QuoteWhy is it again you're arguing against providing armor to our troops? Show me one place where I said that? I did say that you have to CM anyway. Might want to peep this post again: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1381307#1381307"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #34 December 9, 2004 Quotenot really... without the assistance the French received from outside they were doing quite well as an occupying force What, they were not PREPARED for that? Quote the French resistance was a joke comparatively Wow, thats twice today we have agreed.....Whats going on? Who are you? What have you done with Zen? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #35 December 9, 2004 Well, you didn't come out and say it, you said to show you an example of an army that was prepared. Seems to me you were trying to justify the lack of preparation because it is the norm. I'm ignoring that argument and conceding that point to you. True, most armies, I'll even say no army has ever been completely prepared for war. My question to you is, do you think that justifies us not being prepared now? Or should we do something to rectifty that? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #36 December 9, 2004 QuoteWell, you didn't come out and say it, you said to show you an example of an army that was prepared You really think I would not support the troops? I have friends there and I almost went myself. QuoteSeems to me you were trying to justify the lack of preparation because it is the norm. Well it is the norm. QuoteMy question to you is, do you think that justifies us not being prepared now? Or should we do something to rectifty that? We should of course try to make it so we are as pepared as we can be...But there is no way to be 100% prepared for war. The cost alone in giving every soldier a tank would not work. But I can't think of any military force that is better prepared than ours. Do we need more? Yes. But most times we are not allowed the budget that we would need."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #37 December 9, 2004 QuoteDo we need more? Yes. But most times we are not allowed the budget that we would need. Ahhh.....now we come to the crux of the matter. Do you think that could have anything to do with fiscal policies such as tax cuts? Do you think that the president could push for more funding instead of proclaiming that our troops have everything they need in order to paint a rosy picture? Do you think that maybe we could divert some money from producing new missle shields that are already obsolete, or from planned missions to mars, or space stations on the moon? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #38 December 9, 2004 QuoteAhhh.....now we come to the crux of the matter. Do you think that could have anything to do with fiscal policies such as tax cuts? Do you think that the president could push for more funding instead of proclaiming that our troops have everything they need in order to paint a rosy picture? Do you think that maybe we could divert some money from producing new missle shields that are already obsolete, or from planned missions to mars, or space stations on the moon? Do you think Congress will allow us to spend more on Defense? I don't. Many defense bills have died in Congress. Including the famous 87 billion one of Kerry's. Was it more important to equip the troops, or kill the tax cuts? Oh I know what you are saying...The tax cuts hurt the economy....Well maybe. But I would rather keep the kids safe even if that means putting it on my Discover card. Some in Congress don't feel that way. So what is more important to you....Equiping the troops, or killing the tax cuts?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #39 December 9, 2004 QuoteSo what is more important to you....Equiping the troops, or killing the tax cuts? Equipping the troops, even and especially if it means rolling back tax cuts, is more important. And by the way, that bill you are referring to was the FIRST brought up to increase the defense budget. But it was more important to republicans to retain the tax cuts, so they voted against it. And also by the way, that bill had nothing to do with equipping the troops with armor. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #40 December 9, 2004 QuoteEquipping the troops, even and especially if it means rolling back tax cuts, is more important So if you could only have one or the other? Either the equipment goes on the Discover Card. Or you watch your budget and they go without. Which do you choose? Quote And by the way, that bill you are referring to was the FIRST brought up to increase the defense budget. But it was more important to republicans to retain the tax cuts, so they voted against it. Kerry voted for it, then when the tax cuts were added, he voted against it....So we knew where both stood. Quote And also by the way, that bill had nothing to do with equipping the troops with armor. Maybe not armor, but it had to do with military spending...I used it to show that military spending has a hard time making it through Congress. So, while I may wish I could give every soldier a tank...Its not going to happen. Either way we will go to war, just like people have been going to war for thousands of years. Troops will not have the equipment or resources needed, but will make do. (Think Valley Forge). Good on them, but yes we need to give them the eqipment they need....However you have helped me show how hard it is to do just that. Either way wars will still be fought"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #41 December 9, 2004 QuoteSo if you could only have one or the other? Either the equipment goes on the Discover Card. Or you watch your budget and they go without. Which do you choose? It was pointed out to you earlier by Paul...the world is not black and white. You get the money to pay for it, however you have to. Borrowing should be the last resort, but if it's the only choice (which it isn't) you do that. A better option would be to cut spending somewhere else or increase income Now, let's review what was done. The money was borrowed and the troops don't have the armor. QuoteI used it to show that military spending has a hard time making it through Congress. Any spending should have trouble making it through congress when no one says where the money being spent is coming from. QuoteHowever you have helped me show how hard it is to do just that. It's only hard when you use unsound fiscal policy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #42 December 10, 2004 QuoteIt was pointed out to you earlier by Paul...the world is not black and white No but all choices come to black of white, you either do or do not do something. You can't "sorta" do anything. QuoteQuote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- However you have helped me show how hard it is to do just that. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It's only hard when you use unsound fiscal policy. ____ Its always been hard (Except for Ronnie days). Clinton could not do it either, and you guys seem to think he wrote the book on a good budget."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #43 December 10, 2004 QuoteNo but all choices come to black of white, you either do or do not do something. You can't "sorta" do anything. Bull. You either do, don't do, or do something else. I want to make a million dollars a year. But, I can't. So, I guess I shouldn't bother working, right? Can't have everything I want, so I'll take nothing. That's how 3 year olds act. Well, 3 year olds and congress QuoteIts always been hard (Except for Ronnie days). Clinton could not do it either, and you guys seem to think he wrote the book on a good budget. I do? For years now you've been telling me what I think of Clinton. And it's usually all wrong. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #44 December 10, 2004 QuoteNo but all choices come to black of white, you either do or do not do something. But what if you fail to act on your choice? Or you chose to walk, but stumble in stead? see, life really isn't that simple.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #45 December 10, 2004 QuoteBut what if you fail to act on your choice? Then you still made a choice not to act.... QuoteOr you chose to walk, but stumble in stead? Then you failed which is different than not making a choice. Quotesee, life really isn't that simple.... No, but the concept of a choice is."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #46 December 10, 2004 QuoteI want to make a million dollars a year. But, I can't. So, I guess I shouldn't bother working, right? See, you are a democrat."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #47 December 10, 2004 QuoteThen you still made a choice not to act.... Really? What if you were restrained? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #48 December 10, 2004 QuoteReally? What if you were restrained? Then you failed. But you still made the choice to try."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerrob 643 #49 December 10, 2004 This argument over budgets is getting silly. No army has ever had enough armour, etc. when it went to war, because any worthy opponent changes his tactics. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #50 December 10, 2004 QuoteThis argument over budgets is getting silly. No army has ever had enough armour, etc. when it went to war, because any worthy opponent changes his tactics. And that is the point I am trying to make."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
