US - China war inevitable?

[StLucieBengal]

(05-27-2015, 01:53 PM)bfine32 Wrote: There is not a country in the world that would last longer than 2 weeks in a conventional Air-Sea-Ground war against the US. The Iraqi Republican Guard tried in Bush War I; they lasted about 15 minutes.

If China, Russia, and North Korea all teamed up; it might take a month.

Yes I agree. Russia and China as building up their military quickly. Still about 10 years away. But obama keeps shrinking ours. Also will matter if some of these russian backed parties get power in europe. 2017 those dominoes will start falling.

[StLucieBengal]

(05-27-2015, 02:33 PM)Wyche Wrote: You referring to the TPP?

Yes

[Benton]

(05-27-2015, 05:16 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Yes I agree.  Russia and China as building up their military quickly.   Still about 10 years away.   But obama keeps shrinking ours.     Also will matter if some of these russian backed parties get power in europe.   2017 those dominoes will start falling.

Sooooo... we should massively continue to increase our national debt to be better prepared for something that hasn't happened?

[StLucieBengal]

(05-27-2015, 05:19 PM)Benton Wrote: Sooooo... we should massively continue to increase our national debt to be better prepared for something that hasn't happened?

No we should cut each department 5-10% each year. Maintain defense spending, pull back foreign aid to anyone who violates human rights... Cut off.

[Benton]

(05-27-2015, 05:29 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: No we should cut each department 5-10% each year.   Maintain defense spending, pull back foreign aid to anyone who violates human rights... Cut off.

To the bolded, they tried that. Defund immigration services and you get a massive immigration problem. Reduce education spending, now we're behind the rest of the world in math and sciences, where the only answer is testing so it doesn't look like we're that far behind the rest of the world. Mental illness costing too much, so defund federal aide to mental hospitals despite the fact that more than half those in mental hospitals in the 70s and 80s had a criminal record, which is believed to have been and still be a chunk of crime we can't seem to get rid of.

Problems don't go away when you stop dealing with them. They just get worse. You don't resolve immigration, crime, education, agriculture, energy, etc just by reducing the budgets of the departments that deal with that.

If you're hungry, do you reduce your grocery budget? If your car breaks down, do you reduce your maintenance spending?

Personally, I'd decrease defense spending by a significant amount. I'd also close bases not strategically significant or not there at the request — and financial support — of an ally. At the same time, I would increase spending for improved equipment. A service member should have the best equipment possible.

But I do agree on cutting foreign aide. Outside of helping countries during natural disasters or helping establish basic services in some parts — potable water, mainly — then we don't need to be there.

[GMDino]

(05-27-2015, 05:16 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Yes I agree.  Russia and China as building up their military quickly.   Still about 10 years away.   But obama keeps shrinking ours.     Also will matter if some of these russian backed parties get power in europe.   2017 those dominoes will start falling.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-budgets-boost-for-military-spending-points-to-brewing-national-security-debate/2015/02/01/914c5030-a967-11e4-a2b2-776095f393b2_story.html

Quote:The battle over the budget that President Obama will submit Monday is emerging as a preview of the 2016 presidential election debate on national security, an area that for now appears to be the greatest vulnerability of Obama and the Democrats.

The president will ask Congress to break through its own spending caps — commonly referred to as “sequestration” — and allocate about $561 billion for Pentagon expenditures, about $38 billion more than is currently allowed under the law.

[Bengalzona]

(05-27-2015, 01:53 PM)bfine32 Wrote: There is not a country in the world that would last longer than 2 weeks in a conventional Air-Sea-Ground war against the US. The Iraqi Republican Guard tried in Bush War I; they lasted about 15 minutes.

If China, Russia, and North Korea all teamed up; it might take a month.

^This

We've done as good as a country can do in these bush wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. But we are so bad ass at conventional war, ain't nobody want none of us.

As long as we don't try to invade Russia or China, we are in good shape.

[treee]

As global citizens connected by an internet, I feel we're responsible (on both sides) for keeping our government from starting unnecessary wars.

[*bfine32*]

(05-27-2015, 08:30 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: ^This

We've done as good as a country can do in these bush wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. But we are so bad ass at conventional war, ain't nobody want none of us.

As long as we don't try to invade Russia or China, we are in good shape.

We could send the Rhode Island National Guard into Russia and they'd be having a clam bake on Red Square within a week.

[StLucieBengal]

(05-27-2015, 05:48 PM)Benton Wrote: To the bolded, they tried that. Defund immigration services and you get a massive immigration problem. Reduce education spending, now we're behind the rest of the world in math and sciences, where the only answer is testing so it doesn't look like we're that far behind the rest of the world. Mental illness costing too much, so defund federal aide to mental hospitals despite the fact that more than half those in mental hospitals in the 70s and 80s had a criminal record, which is believed to have been and still be a chunk of crime we can't seem to get rid of.

Problems don't go away when you stop dealing with them. They just get worse. You don't resolve immigration, crime, education, agriculture, energy, etc just by reducing the budgets of the departments that deal with that.

If you're hungry, do you reduce your grocery budget? If your car breaks down, do you reduce your maintenance spending?

Personally, I'd decrease defense spending by a significant amount. I'd also close bases not strategically significant or not there at the request — and financial support — of an ally. At the same time, I would increase spending for improved equipment. A service member should have the best equipment possible.

But I do agree on cutting foreign aide. Outside of helping countries during natural disasters or helping establish basic services in some parts — potable water, mainly — then we don't need to be there.

We have so much government we could cut and not even miss it.   The gov shutdown level should be the norm .  We lose 15% of total gov and don't miss a beat unless it's obama blocking sight lines from parks.   


Loads of unecessary departments... Programs, etc.   Immigration is a mess because we do not close the border .  We can't allow any Mexicans or centnralized americans come here until we decide how we are going to handle our welfare state.    You can't have both open borders and a welfare state.    Obama tried to pull his shenanigans because he is h willing to debate and work with the GOP to get a solution.  He only wants his solution.   

At some point you have to willing to pay the piper.   

[Bengalzona]

(05-27-2015, 10:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: We could send the Rhode Island National Guard into Russia and they'd be having a clam bake on Red Square within a week.

Invading Russia is the easy part. Staying around or trying to get out again are the hard parts.

[GMDino]

(05-28-2015, 09:25 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: Invading Russia is the easy part. Staying around or trying to get out again are the hard parts.

Are you kidding?

They'd greet us as liberators and throw flowers at our feet.

[Ben Richards]

This thread is laughable when you think about ...


M.A.D.

[SteelCitySouth]

All of Ayn Rand's philosophy begins with her most basic Metaphysical value. God does not exist. We live in a solely objective world and man is at the top of that world and thus god.

Altruism to Ayn Rand is a concept more extreme than most would define it. To Ayn Rand altruism was the destruction of self for the benefit of others. You can not think of kindness and observations of rights for others as a part of altruism in Ayn's thoughts. Those are givens within the construct of the self as it relates to others. You must think of acts such as self immolation, giving without and end goal for the receiver. Destroying ones self for the good of others.

I always find it amusing when a stanch right winger with a heavy emphasis on Christian morals uses Ayn Rand "Who is John Galt?" in some way or fashion. Her philosophy is in stark contrast to those values in every way. I immediately assume they have either never read anything by Ayn Rand or have difficulties understanding philosophical writings. The scary thought though is that they know....but just don't care.

Ayn Rand's books were incredible works of fiction. I believe they were very undervalued. The Fountainhead in my opinion was a better book than Atlas Shrugged. However they were both wonderful examples of story telling and immaculate writing style. That being said, much like all philosophical writers that turn to fiction, the protagonists were always too perfect in their unwavering need to fulfill Ayns philosophy and the antagonists were always too perfect in portraying the morals of the wrong way to live. This makes for a wonderful read, but in the end requires very little education to understand that this cannot and does not happen in the real world and thus undermines her philosophy in the end.

[*rfaulk34*]

(05-29-2015, 10:08 AM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: All of Ayn Rand's philosophy begins with her most basic Metaphysical value.  God does not exist. We live in a solely objective world and man is at the top of that world and thus god.

Altruism to Ayn Rand is a concept more extreme than most would define it.  To Ayn Rand altruism was the destruction of self for the benefit of others.  You can not think of kindness and observations of rights for others as a part of altruism in Ayn's thoughts.  Those are givens within the construct of the self as it relates to others.  You must think of acts such as self immolation, giving without and end goal for the receiver.  Destroying ones self for the good of others.

I always find it amusing when a stanch right winger with a heavy emphasis on Christian morals uses Ayn Rand "Who is John Galt?" in some way or fashion.  Her philosophy is in stark contrast to those values in every way.  I immediately assume they have either never read anything by Ayn Rand or have difficulties understanding philosophical writings.  The scary thought though is that they know....but just don't care.

Ayn Rand's books were incredible works of fiction.  I believe they were very undervalued.  The Fountainhead in my opinion was a better book than Atlas Shrugged.  However they were both wonderful examples of story telling and immaculate writing style.  That being said, much like all philosophical writers that turn to fiction, the protagonists were always too perfect in their unwavering need to fulfill Ayns philosophy and the antagonists were always too perfect in portraying the morals of the wrong way to live.  This makes for a wonderful read, but in the end requires very little education to understand that this cannot and does not happen in the real world and thus undermines her philosophy in the end.

Dear Message Board Poster, 

Wrong thread.

Signed, Snickering Ninja

[Benton]

(05-28-2015, 09:12 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: We have so much government we could cut and not even miss it.1   The gov shutdown level should be the norm .  We lose 15% of total gov and don't miss a beat unless it's obama blocking sight lines from parks.   


Loads of unecessary departments... Programs, etc.   Immigration is a mess because we do not close the border .2  We can't allow any Mexicans or centnralized americans come here until we decide how we are going to handle our welfare state.3    You can't have both open borders and a welfare state.    Obama tried to pull his shenanigans4 because he is h willing to debate and work with the GOP5 to get a solution.  He only wants his solution.   

At some point you have to willing to pay the piper.   6

1- You just did not read any of the points made. I won't continue to through any more up there as you aren't really looking at them.
2- Incorrect. Immigration wasn't an issue until we stopped funding immigration controls. More than 200 years without a giant fence, no problem. 20 years without adequate funding, problem. Which makes more sense... funding it, or building a giant fence? 200 years, 20 years?
3- It's already resolved. They pay taxes, provide cheap labor and have minor access to the services for the taxes they pay.
4- I'm going to pistol whip the next guy that says shenanigans.
5- Work with the GOP? They've made it apparent it's not an issue they're going to deal with.
6- Agreed. Fund the laws already created, which worked for 200 years. Bam, solved.

[StLucieBengal]

(05-30-2015, 12:37 AM)Benton Wrote: 1- You just did not read any of the points made. I won't continue to through any more up there as you aren't really looking at them.
2- Incorrect. Immigration wasn't an issue until we stopped funding immigration controls. More than 200 years without a giant fence, no problem. 20 years without adequate funding, problem. Which makes more sense... funding it, or building a giant fence? 200 years, 20 years?
3- It's already resolved. They pay taxes, provide cheap labor and have minor access to the services for the taxes they pay.
4- I'm going to pistol whip the next guy that says shenanigans.
5- Work with the GOP? They've made it apparent it's not an issue they're going to deal with.
6- Agreed. Fund the laws already created, which worked for 200 years. Bam, solved.

No immigrants should get access to any benefits.   Nor their children.   

We should also be limiting immigration.   

Where do you live Benton?  I doubt its a place that deals with immigrants ....  Just speakong of Mexico and Central America....  They live in a seriously violent culture.   when we let the Cubans in Florida Miami went from a nobody town to a war zone.    That's what these people do....   They are just violent animals.    

I don't want those animals here.... Same reason I don't want anyone from the Middle East or Africa here ....  We start letting savages in here then we lose our sensibilities and start to accept their savage ways.

[Benton]

(05-30-2015, 05:17 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: No immigrants should get access to any benefits.   Nor their children.   

We should also be limiting immigration.   

Where do you live Benton?  I doubt its a place that deals with immigrants ....  Just speakong of Mexico and Central America....  They live in a seriously violent culture.   when we let the Cubans in Florida Miami went from a nobody town to a war zone.    That's what these people do....   They are just violent animals.    

I don't want those animals here.... Same reason I don't want anyone from the Middle East or Africa here ....  We start letting savages in here then we lose our sensibilities and start to accept their savage ways.

similar things were said about the Irish, Italians, Asians, blacks (after 1856), etc. If your community is incapable of integrating immigrants, it's not very logical to say "oh, but these guys from violent fascist countries aren't like all those guys from violent racist countries." What's different with this ethnic group than those? Find the answer and you've got your solution on why all of them could integrate. The first thing that comes to mind is that all of those groups had regulation controlling their staying, those who didn't have jobs or broke the law got deported, those who got acted tight got to stay.

[Beaker]

(05-30-2015, 05:17 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: No immigrants should get access to any benefits.   Nor their children.   

Do you mean ANY immigrants...or just illegals?

[GMDino]

(05-30-2015, 01:21 PM)Beaker Wrote: Do you mean ANY immigrants...or just illegals?

He means anyone off this scale: