RTHKI wrote:
dont they have anything better to do
I accidentally maced myself once. I was in middle school and my mom the postal worker had a can on top of the fridge. Thought it was candy or something, hit the button, and boom, right in the face. Fun!Kmar wrote:
mace actually isnt a big deal.. tasers, clubs, and riot guns are.
Thats a big assumption.Jay wrote:
Not exactly just 'standing around' if they provoked the police into fencing them in...Macbeth wrote:
Well when you are just standing around and all of a sudden someone comes and maces you it seems like a big deal
I guess this is where I get it from ..lolDear Senator Nelson,
I'm a retired Navy Reserve Senior Chief and will start to receive benefits in May if there are any left with all the fiscal abuse that Washington is allowing. Our economy is in a terrible condition but we continue to send billions of dollars overseas to countries that hate us and do not want us there. Please explain to me why are we the world's police force that has to pay hostile countries to protect them and neglect our own country's severe problems and it's citizens. I love America and spent 26 years in the service protecting her and have seen this country go from a Super Power to a country in real trouble....
... I read in the news that we are going to leave vast amounts of military hardware in Iraq, why are we not transferring it to Afghanistan where it is needed and we can control it? Has anyone in Washington considered that once we leave Iraq that they may be defeated by our enemies and they will use our own weapons against us? ..
... Thanks for your time and I wish you luck in solving Americas's huge problems.
Slightly ironic that he's bitching about being the world's police force when that is precisely what allowed him to hold a job for the past 26 years, and now collect his pension in perpetuity...Kmar wrote:
A family member of mine gets letters from our Senator.. he finally wrote his office back.
He forward this to me. Just an excerpt.I guess this is where I get it from ..lolDear Senator Nelson,
I'm a retired Navy Reserve Senior Chief and will start to receive benefits in May if there are any left with all the fiscal abuse that Washington is allowing. Our economy is in a terrible condition but we continue to send billions of dollars overseas to countries that hate us and do not want us there. Please explain to me why are we the world's police force that has to pay hostile countries to protect them and neglect our own country's severe problems and it's citizens. I love America and spent 26 years in the service protecting her and have seen this country go from a Super Power to a country in real trouble....
... I read in the news that we are going to leave vast amounts of military hardware in Iraq, why are we not transferring it to Afghanistan where it is needed and we can control it? Has anyone in Washington considered that once we leave Iraq that they may be defeated by our enemies and they will use our own weapons against us? ..
... Thanks for your time and I wish you luck in solving Americas's huge problems.
Retired under 50 I bet, and will be collecting his pension for more than the 26 years he 'worked'.Jay wrote:
Slightly ironic that he's bitching about being the world's police force when that is precisely what allowed him to hold a job for the past 26 years, and now collect his pension in perpetuity...
you served ddin't you Jay?Jay wrote:
Slightly ironic that he's bitching about being the world's police force when that is precisely what allowed him to hold a job for the past 26 years, and now collect his pension in perpetuity...Kmar wrote:
A family member of mine gets letters from our Senator.. he finally wrote his office back.
He forward this to me. Just an excerpt.I guess this is where I get it from ..lolDear Senator Nelson,
I'm a retired Navy Reserve Senior Chief and will start to receive benefits in May if there are any left with all the fiscal abuse that Washington is allowing. Our economy is in a terrible condition but we continue to send billions of dollars overseas to countries that hate us and do not want us there. Please explain to me why are we the world's police force that has to pay hostile countries to protect them and neglect our own country's severe problems and it's citizens. I love America and spent 26 years in the service protecting her and have seen this country go from a Super Power to a country in real trouble....
... I read in the news that we are going to leave vast amounts of military hardware in Iraq, why are we not transferring it to Afghanistan where it is needed and we can control it? Has anyone in Washington considered that once we leave Iraq that they may be defeated by our enemies and they will use our own weapons against us? ..
... Thanks for your time and I wish you luck in solving Americas's huge problems.
Oh, I'm well aware. It just seemed like a case of biting the hand that fed you. If we realistically pared down our forces to just what we need to defend our borders, most of the navy would be mothballed and he wouldn't have had a job. It's not that I disagree with him, because I don't, I just found it mildly ironic.Kmar wrote:
Jay, he's bitching asking a legitimate question about the military/economic responsibility, how we allocate our forces, and the unjust burden. It's kind of written in plain English.
"world's police force that has to pay hostile countries to protect them and neglect our own country's severe problems and it's citizens."
It's awesome that he made the most of his time. I wish I could say the same. I took a few courses while I was in, but was never seriously committed to it.Kmar wrote:
Sure he would.. he was reserve for a lot of that time. He used the Navy to get through school, and he's got a ridiculous amount of education under his belt.
I don't see anything wrong with what he's saying.Jaekus wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqN3amj6AcE
Unless we did away with global trade and energy sources, we'd still need a sizable blue water navy. And if we did, we'd need a good-sized brown water navy for coastal defense (more than the coasties).Jay wrote:
Oh, I'm well aware. It just seemed like a case of biting the hand that fed you. If we realistically pared down our forces to just what we need to defend our borders, most of the navy would be mothballed and he wouldn't have had a job. It's not that I disagree with him, because I don't, I just found it mildly ironic.Kmar wrote:
Jay, he's bitching asking a legitimate question about the military/economic responsibility, how we allocate our forces, and the unjust burden. It's kind of written in plain English.
"world's police force that has to pay hostile countries to protect them and neglect our own country's severe problems and it's citizens."
Yeah? Because we have a lot to fear from the rest of the worlds navies, eh? Is Germany building another Bismarck?FEOS wrote:
Unless we did away with global trade and energy sources, we'd still need a sizable blue water navy. And if we did, we'd need a good-sized brown water navy for coastal defense (more than the coasties).Jay wrote:
Oh, I'm well aware. It just seemed like a case of biting the hand that fed you. If we realistically pared down our forces to just what we need to defend our borders, most of the navy would be mothballed and he wouldn't have had a job. It's not that I disagree with him, because I don't, I just found it mildly ironic.Kmar wrote:
Jay, he's bitching asking a legitimate question about the military/economic responsibility, how we allocate our forces, and the unjust burden. It's kind of written in plain English.
"world's police force that has to pay hostile countries to protect them and neglect our own country's severe problems and it's citizens."
Complete waste of resources.Macbeth wrote:
Uh well all of East Asia, the Pacific Islands, and the Australia would be at the mercy of the Chinese Navy if we drastically reduced our fleet size. It would suck for all none Chinese commerce in that area.
Pissing matches in the Indian Ocean between India, Pakistan and various other little regional powers would be fun to watch.
How much the Russians try to swing their cock in northern Europe would be interesting. Maybe Turkey and Russia will end up in a naval race for supremacy in the black sea.
It wouldn't surprise me if Brazil would start to use their economic boom to push around the rest of the SA countries.
hmm I think the status quo when it comes to the international system is fine.
Last edited by Jay (2011-10-01 08:51:01)
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/1 … g-forward/Beduin wrote:
occupy wallStreet? wtf is that all about?
there is no cohesive message to the 'occupation', even some tea baggers have made their way down there.Cybargs wrote:
dirty hippies want to change the way the world works.Beduin wrote:
occupy wallStreet? wtf is that all about?
Research piracy and the straits of malacca. Navies aren't always about fighting other navies.Jay wrote:
Yeah? Because we have a lot to fear from the rest of the worlds navies, eh? Is Germany building another Bismarck?FEOS wrote:
Unless we did away with global trade and energy sources, we'd still need a sizable blue water navy. And if we did, we'd need a good-sized brown water navy for coastal defense (more than the coasties).Jay wrote:
Oh, I'm well aware. It just seemed like a case of biting the hand that fed you. If we realistically pared down our forces to just what we need to defend our borders, most of the navy would be mothballed and he wouldn't have had a job. It's not that I disagree with him, because I don't, I just found it mildly ironic.
If those shipping companies want protection then they should sail under our flag. Until then, fuck em.FEOS wrote:
Research piracy and the straits of malacca. Navies aren't always about fighting other navies.Jay wrote:
Yeah? Because we have a lot to fear from the rest of the worlds navies, eh? Is Germany building another Bismarck?FEOS wrote:
Unless we did away with global trade and energy sources, we'd still need a sizable blue water navy. And if we did, we'd need a good-sized brown water navy for coastal defense (more than the coasties).
Protecting international trade is only a good thing really.Jay wrote:
If those shipping companies want protection then they should sail under our flag. Until then, fuck em.
We need aircraft carriers and heavy cruisers to fight pirates?Shocking wrote:
Protecting international trade is only a good thing really.Jay wrote:
If those shipping companies want protection then they should sail under our flag. Until then, fuck em.
Well, that's a point I can't argue.Jay wrote:
We need aircraft carriers and heavy cruisers to fight pirates?Shocking wrote:
Protecting international trade is only a good thing really.Jay wrote:
If those shipping companies want protection then they should sail under our flag. Until then, fuck em.
Last edited by Shocking (2011-10-01 11:40:38)
i don't actually know, and wiki'ing feels so dull, but who has nukes in south america?Jay wrote:
Complete waste of resources.Macbeth wrote:
Uh well all of East Asia, the Pacific Islands, and the Australia would be at the mercy of the Chinese Navy if we drastically reduced our fleet size. It would suck for all none Chinese commerce in that area.
Pissing matches in the Indian Ocean between India, Pakistan and various other little regional powers would be fun to watch.
How much the Russians try to swing their cock in northern Europe would be interesting. Maybe Turkey and Russia will end up in a naval race for supremacy in the black sea.
It wouldn't surprise me if Brazil would start to use their economic boom to push around the rest of the SA countries.
hmm I think the status quo when it comes to the international system is fine.
You forget that they all have nukes. No one is going to start a conventional naval war and open themself up to nuclear retaliation. Conventional military forces are outdated except when fighting third world shitholes.
