AWL71 0
QuoteQuoteQuote
It's not a false argument in the Bay Area.
It is indeed a false argument. The claim is that the left is anti military. That's a very broad statement that is made in an effort to give the impression that the other party is pro military. I don't know why Daly doesn't want the airshow. Maybe he has a point about safety or maybe HE is indeed anti-militay (which I doubt but it's possible and if it's true then he's stupid). But the critical comments of a few people on specific circumstances does not paint an entire block of people.
geez, is it asking too much for you to have quoted past the first line of my post? I said the Bay Area is mostly in support of Fleet Week, but there is a significant minority that hates the military and all those within. Chris Daly is without a doubt in that category. (He also doesn't like sports much - he's a pencil neck geek from Duke - what can you expect?)
That explains it all. I graduated from UNC so I know first hand there is nothing worse than a "pencil neck geek from Duke."
The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote
Would you support the US moving to a subcontracted military such as Blackwater?
No.
Why not?
We would have a better trained, better equipped,soldier, which is what you said you wanted.
Why, when they're dipping out of the same pockets, are they better equipped? Why should our military train them and then pay them five times the salary when they go private? Why not make sure that the military gets the funds that are voted on in the name of "the troops"?
Are you contending that govt. programs are better than those of the private sector? Why do you expect a soldier to perform better at $30K per year than he would at $100K per year? Don't you think those who put their lives on the line should be paid much more than those who don't? Heck, look at what we pay NBA players just for knowing how to toss a ball through a hoop. We could certainly attract a better educated and more highly skilled soldier if the military was privatized.Quote
We would be able to phase out the costs of VA Hospitals, educational benefits, medical benefits, retirement benefits, the cost of maintaining military bases and equipment etc.
Are you proposing moving the entire military to a free market based defense system!?!?
Are you saying it would be better to leave it the way it is? All we hear are complaints about how poorly armed our soldiers are.Quote
We could also get competitive estimates on what it would cost to invade a country like Iran before we act. Then the American people could look over the costs and make a decision as to whether it's worth it.
We can get those estimates now. And something about bidding for war not only sounds smarmy, what do you do when your contractors go offshore and/or multinational? What happens when a Dubai based mercenary firm presents the most attractive bid?
So what. They would be working under a contract and be located in another country. Why should it be our guys dying if we can get someone from Africa or S. Amrica to take the risk? Our National Guard and Reservists could take care of things here.Quote
Private Armies like Blackwater have very good performance records. They have never lost a Diplomat or Politician they were hired to protect. Plus they are better equiped with more state of the art weapons than our current Govt. run Military.
They also have lousy track records elsewhere and apparently exist in a zone of legal and accountability ambiguity. Even their lives live in that ambiguous zone. Their deaths aren't counted in official tallies. My suggestion is that if they want to be soldiers, then let them re-enlist.
Can you cite any incident Blackwater has been involved in that our own soldiers haven't been accused of?
QuoteQuoteWhy not?
We would have a better trained, better equipped,soldier, which is what you said you wanted.
maybe, but you have also lost control of said soldier. Being able to control your soldier should come before arming them
Not if we subcontract our wars and invasions to Armies who fight in foreign lands. Let the National Guard etc. protect our homeland.
.
QuoteQuote
We could also get competitive estimates on what it would cost to invade a country like Iran before we act. Then the American people could look over the costs and make a decision as to whether it's worth it.
.
To make an informed decision you need the costs AND the benefits. As long as an administration lies or tells half truths about its intelligence, the benefits part of the equation is absent.
I'm assuming you are talking about the last two administrations. Having a private military wouldn't change that at all. But, your response really has nothing to do with the question anyway.
Maybe, maybe not. However, it has everything to do with your claim.
How so? When I purchase something I get competitive bids. I don't just lay down for some smooth talking salesman (politician). Don't you feel getting bids would help keep costs down and present a more realistic picture of what we can expect to spend? After all, hasn't one of your chief complaints been the cost of war? Are you saying the less we know about the true costs, the better?
.
.
kallend 2,148
QuoteQuoteQuote
We could also get competitive estimates on what it would cost to invade a country like Iran before we act. Then the American people could look over the costs and make a decision as to whether it's worth it.
.
To make an informed decision you need the costs AND the benefits. As long as an administration lies or tells half truths about its intelligence, the benefits part of the equation is absent.
I'm assuming you are talking about the last two administrations. Having a private military wouldn't change that at all. But, your response really has nothing to do with the question anyway.
Maybe, maybe not. However, it has everything to do with your claim.
How so? When I purchase something I get competitive bids. I don't just lay down for some smooth talking salesman (politician). Don't you feel getting bids would help keep costs down and present a more realistic picture of what we can expect to spend? After all, hasn't one of your chief complaints been the cost of war? Are you saying the less we know about the true costs, the better?
.
.
To make an informed decision you need the costs AND the benefits. As long as an administration lies or tells half truths about its intelligence, the benefits part of the equation is absent. Then the American people can't make an informed decision even IF they know the costs.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
geez, is it asking too much for you to have quoted past the first line of my post? I said the Bay Area is mostly in support of Fleet Week, but there is a significant minority that hates the military and all those within. Chris Daly is without a doubt in that category. (He also doesn't like sports much - he's a pencil neck geek from Duke - what can you expect?)
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites