America, the strongest military on earth? What a laugh! America was defeated in short order by a bunch of Rag Heads armed with light pickup trucks and small arms. The Rag Heads took BILLIONS of dollars worth of toys away from the Americans. Just goes to show that; "It is not the dog in the fight, it is the fight in the dog." It has recently been shown that America is the weakest nation in the world. Let's hope that no nation steps up and faces America and says "lets fight".
Feckless leaders lead to feckless results. The American Rifleman is still the backbone of the infantry. There is no dispute.
Hug wrote:
America, the strongest military on earth? What a laugh! America was defeated in short order by a bunch of Rag Heads armed with light pickup trucks and small arms. The Rag Heads took BILLIONS of dollars worth of toys away from the Americans. Just goes to show that; "It is not the dog in the fight, it is the fight in the dog." It has recently been shown that America is the weakest nation in the world. Let's hope that no nation steps up and faces America and says "lets fight".
America, the strongest military on earth? What a ... (
show quote)
Hello Hug,,,, not to start a bad day for you, but you have several wrong assumptions in your post..
The Taliban did not take equipment from the US.. the US gave this equipment to the Afghan government for the fight they claimed they would do.. they did not.. most did not fight at all.. lay down the gear and run like a stripped a** native.. to coin a phrase..
20 years.. for most of that time, the Taliban simply waited for the troops to leave.. every one knew that, it is perhaps the main problem I have with the poorly done exit.. They did not beat us in battle, they simply waited for our commitment to leave us..
The US military has never ever been "gutted" we have been and remain to this day the strongest military force the world has ever seen. No administration has reduced us to anything near a depleted force..
And no country or terrorist group in the world will go one on one with American forces. We will see the bombing, ambushes, sniping and sudden attacks to k**l mostly unwary civilians.. and if opportune also our active troops..
That is why they are called terrorist.. will China become the big boy in the yard and start a fight? I do not think so... very much for them to lose and they are doing very well fighting and economic war.. in which they have made enormous progress of the the last generation..
And yet some guard the helpless...
permafrost wrote:
Hello Hug,,,, not to start a bad day for you, but you have several wrong assumptions in your post..
The Taliban did not take equipment from the US.. the US gave this equipment to the Afghan government for the fight they claimed they would do.. they did not.. most did not fight at all.. lay down the gear and run like a stripped a** native.. to coin a phrase..
20 years.. for most of that time, the Taliban simply waited for the troops to leave.. every one knew that, it is perhaps the main problem I have with the poorly done exit.. They did not beat us in battle, they simply waited for our commitment to leave us..
The US military has never ever been "gutted" we have been and remain to this day the strongest military force the world has ever seen. No administration has reduced us to anything near a depleted force..
And no country or terrorist group in the world will go one on one with American forces. We will see the bombing, ambushes, sniping and sudden attacks to k**l mostly unwary civilians.. and if opportune also our active troops..
That is why they are called terrorist.. will China become the big boy in the yard and start a fight? I do not think so... very much for them to lose and they are doing very well fighting and economic war.. in which they have made enormous progress of the the last generation..
Hello Hug,,,, not to start a bad day for you, but ... (
show quote)
Nice try there Perm. BUT, your ilk remains the party of “defund the police” and have been known to DEFUND THE MILITARY EVERY TIME YOU HAVE A FECKLESS PRESIDENT IN POWER!
steve66613 wrote:
Nice try there Perm. BUT, your ilk remains the party of “defund the police” and have been known to DEFUND THE MILITARY EVERY TIME YOU HAVE A FECKLESS PRESIDENT IN POWER!
You still have no understanding what "defund the police" is about do you... not at all what you imagine..
Cutting military funding is a long long way from gutting the military. Which has never been done.. ever...
I will say that the se******n of Defund the Police. must be the dumbest name se******n ever made for any political agenda..
I know you wish the you could name Obama for stripping the military.. but that is impossible when he funded the modernization of our nuclear program and a cost of trillions..
steve66613 wrote:
Nice try there Perm. BUT, your ilk remains the party of “defund the police” and have been known to DEFUND THE MILITARY EVERY TIME YOU HAVE A FECKLESS PRESIDENT IN POWER!
***The Taliban did not take equipment from the US.. the US gave this equipment to the Afghan government for the fight they claimed they would do.. they did not.. most did not fight at all.. lay down the gear and run like a stripped a** native.. to coin a phrase..
>>>Something about America not backing up the Afgan Army with air support and such they trained them to fight with. HMMM! We left them there to die. your president failed them and 20 years of our efforts and many lives to give them freedom. But you keep pretending in your little half t***h world. Biden failed yet again,
permafrost wrote:
You still have no understanding what "defund the police" is about do you... not at all what you imagine..
Cutting military funding is a long long way from gutting the military. Which has never been done.. ever...
I will say that the se******n of Defund the Police. must be the dumbest name se******n ever made for any political agenda..
I know you wish the you could name Obama for stripping the military.. but that is impossible when he funded the modernization of our nuclear program and a cost of trillions..
You still have no understanding what "defund ... (
show quote)
You have no idea regarding MY understanding of “defunding the police”.
Are you sure Oblather “modernized” our nuclear arsenal? You certainly don’t have a clue what “modernization” meant.
steve66613 wrote:
You have no idea regarding MY understanding of “defunding the police”.
Are you sure Oblather “modernized” our nuclear arsenal? You certainly don’t have a clue what “modernization” meant.
Pay attention to the last excerpt..
https://www.npr.org/2016/04/29/476048024/fact-check-has-president-obama-depleted-the-militaryPresident Obama has slashed defense spending and will leave his successor with a weaker military force — or so Republican p**********l candidates, led by Donald Trump, charge.
THE CLAIM:
"Our military is depleted," Trump said in his foreign-policy address on Wednesday, "and we're asking our generals and military leaders to worry about g****l w*****g."
In the past, Trump has claimed the U.S. military under Obama has become "a disaster," and other Republicans have described it as "gutted" since Obama took office.
THE SHORT ANSWER:
The Air Force has 12 entire fleets of aircraft that qualify for antique license plates in Virginia.
It's complicated.
Pentagon leaders bristle at the idea their force has been "gutted" or is a "disaster." The U.S. remains far and away the world's foremost military power.
THE LONG ANSWER:
Condemning a Democratic president for lavishing money on social programs at the expense of national defense is red meat for Republican v**ers. And compared to the peak of war-time spending at the height of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan — and the expectations that Pentagon planners once had for how much spending would grow — the defense budget is down. So is the American troop presence in both countries, necessitating far less funding than was needed at the peak of the war.
But Obama, notwithstanding his own opposition to nuclear weapons, has committed to modernizing the U.S. arsenal. He supports the Air Force's new bomber, a new ballistic missile submarine for the Navy, revitalizing a fleet of nuclear bombs, a potential new nuclear cruise missile and other commitments. Some estimates put the cost for the program Obama supports at around $1 trillion over the next 30 years.
coelacanth wrote:
Feckless leaders lead to feckless results. The American Rifleman is still the backbone of the infantry. There is no dispute.
Purge the political ones at the top and the few ingrained thru out you have the best strong hearted fighting force in the world. America's problem are not so much the people as it is the top brass making decisions for the rest of us.
permafrost wrote:
Pay attention to the last excerpt..
https://www.npr.org/2016/04/29/476048024/fact-check-has-president-obama-depleted-the-militaryPresident Obama has slashed defense spending and will leave his successor with a weaker military force — or so Republican p**********l candidates, led by Donald Trump, charge.
THE CLAIM:
"Our military is depleted," Trump said in his foreign-policy address on Wednesday, "and we're asking our generals and military leaders to worry about g****l w*****g."
In the past, Trump has claimed the U.S. military under Obama has become "a disaster," and other Republicans have described it as "gutted" since Obama took office.
THE SHORT ANSWER:
The Air Force has 12 entire fleets of aircraft that qualify for antique license plates in Virginia.
It's complicated.
Pentagon leaders bristle at the idea their force has been "gutted" or is a "disaster." The U.S. remains far and away the world's foremost military power.
THE LONG ANSWER:
Condemning a Democratic president for lavishing money on social programs at the expense of national defense is red meat for Republican v**ers. And compared to the peak of war-time spending at the height of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan — and the expectations that Pentagon planners once had for how much spending would grow — the defense budget is down. So is the American troop presence in both countries, necessitating far less funding than was needed at the peak of the war.
But Obama, notwithstanding his own opposition to nuclear weapons, has committed to modernizing the U.S. arsenal. He supports the Air Force's new bomber, a new ballistic missile submarine for the Navy, revitalizing a fleet of nuclear bombs, a potential new nuclear cruise missile and other commitments. Some estimates put the cost for the program Obama supports at around $1 trillion over the next 30 years.
Pay attention to the last excerpt.. br br https:... (
show quote)
It appears that your feckless president left $82 billion worth of equipment to arm the Taliban. This figure would equate to approximately 10% of our current military budget. Nice. Real nice.
Evidently, you believe Odumba is still in charge. You may be correct.
steve66613 wrote:
It appears that your feckless president left $82 billion worth of equipment to arm the Taliban. This figure would equate to approximately 10% of our current military budget. Nice. Real nice.
Evidently, you believe Odumba is still in charge. You may be correct.
Did you have a bad night Steve.. you are very slow today.. America left nothing for the Taliban, the materials which were left were for the Afghan government, which had an army which did not even bother to pretend a battle. The tossed equipment down and ran for the hills.
also should point out that your $$ figure is for the 20 years of stupidity.. Joe Biden was not in charge for more then 7 months of that time..
try and express reality,, Biden has indeed P****** me off. and that is the t***h of the situation.. your lying about things only makes me remember how hopeless the nation would be if trumpeters ran the country..
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.