We Need to Strengthen Our Military. Thoughts?

We need a new military to meet the new threats of the 21st Century. Today's American military is the best in the world, but tomorrow's military must be even better. It must be stronger, faster, better armed.

Expand America's active duty forces.

Add 40,000 new soldiers to sustain our overseas deployments and prevent and prepare for other possible conflicts.

We need to create a "New Total Force," a military prepared to defeat any enemy, at any time, in any place.

We also need more military police, because public order is critical to establishing the conditions that allow peace to take hold.

We need the best possible equipment. We can't have a 21st century military unless we're using 21st century technology and preparing our forces for 21st century threats. That means educating, training, and arming every soldier with state-of-the-art equipment, whether body armor or weapons. It also means employing the most sophisticated communications to help our troops prevail and protect themselves in battle. Every soldier in every unit should have access to technology that can mean the difference between life and death.

Build and train new forces equipped with the most-sophisticated technology to specialize in finding, securing, and destroying weapons of mass destruction and the facilities that build them.

---

Thoughts?

EDIT: See my post below on who really wrote what I posted above.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

bookerdana · M

The 200 billion is not enough to sate our blood lust?

beckyromero · 36-40, F

@bookerdana So you'd oppose a candidate calling for all that? (Not out to debate. Just want to hear what people have to say)

bookerdana · M

@beckyromero I would as have many responsible military in the US.When is enough enough. "Beware entangling foreign involvement" and "Beware the military industrial complex" have been thrown under the bus. Those quotes aren't exact but they both came from major generals who were president

beckyromero · 36-40, F

@bookerdana Washington was president when the country was very young and foreign entanglements were best avoided due to our weak standing militarily.

It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.
- George Washington

Of course, there were how many democracies back then? I think Washington would be pleased today to see how many nations have embraced freedom instead of monarchical rule.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
Dwight Eisenhower

Yet, it was his administration which thought a vast build-up of nuclear weapons was the way to defend the country while planning for an invasion of Cuba and overthrowing governments around the world.

You can also thank Ike for nuclear North Korea and nuclear Iran.

bookerdana · M

@beckyromero I'll leave the party affiliation tags to Fox and MSNBC,thee is a time when "defense" becomes offensive,we are the armorer to the world

beckyromero · 36-40, F

@bookerdana I'd rather we cut or outright eliminate arms sales to certain nations. I think if we did that with just Saudi Arabia and the UAE then Russia would actually become the number one exporter of arms. They aren't that far behind us and those two nations make up about 30% of our current exports.

bookerdana · M

Washingtons ideas were followed by Jefferson's buttressing of the idea
Outlined by Jefferson in his 1801 inaugural address, the Washington Doctrine of Unstable Alliances asserted that the U.S. should consider its external m

ilitary alliances temporary arrangements of convenience and freely abandon (or reverse) them as indicated by the national interest.[9][10] Citing Washington's Farewell Address as his inspiration, Jefferson described the doctrine as "peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations—entangling alliances with none."[11]

Until Wilson kept us out of war..hmm.
Now we have an endless series of war that makes Orwell a prophet

beckyromero · 36-40, F

@bookerdana

Until Wilson kept us out of war..hmm.

Wilson was far from the first president to wage war against a foreign power, and that's without even bringing up westward expansion at the cost of Native American tribes that started with the earliest administrations. And, besides, there were legitimate reasons to declare war on Germany.

bookerdana · M

Yeah,The Brit propaganda was more effective

[image/video deleted]

beckyromero · 36-40, F

@bookerdana