Maybe the United States has 18 maybe 24 months to

[Joe for Clark]

reestablish a dominant military - maybe.

We sure made some enemies since 1945 - maybe a lot of enemies, but they were always held in check because they feared the US military. Well, they know we are weak now.

This is not acceptable.

You - Bush administration - you get those kids home and you bring them back to full strength - and then double the army - and then you can speak about future wars - and until you do that - you threaten our security. You are the problem.

I always understood the best way to fight a war is to scare off people that may start one - what don't you Bush people understand about that - you really think you are following the Reagun principle - what you do you people think he was doing????

Carter, Reagun, Bush Sr - he beat the USSR with a checkbook - it was brilliant.

Joe

[gateley]

1. We don't even have the checkbook anymore. nt

[shadowknows69]

2. or the research scientists, or the industry, etc etc

[terisan]

3. The USSR was down and out before Bush Sr. Fact is we were bombarded by cold war propaganda for years

after the USSR was having its internal meltdown.

Also the late 70s I knew people who traveled there when tours to Russia started becoming fashionable. People came back with stories of how it there empire was cracking due to ethnic region pulling away.
We may be in the beginning of our empire cracking.

I would like to hear analysis by Russians and eastern bloc countries re end of their empire.

[Joe for Clark]

4. Oh it is absolutely clear that the USSR cracked because

we could simply outspend them- Carter started that - and Bush Sr finished it.

That clear. Reagun was just in the middle.

Joe

[terisan]

5. I don't think it is absolutely clear. I think the massive amounts we spent on our

military-industrial complex were in spite of the internal breakdown. We were spending huge sums for a long time after the soviet Union was no longer a threat. I believe they rotted from within. The Communist party became the equivalent of a ruling class, corruption was rampart, and the people no longer believed in the system.

I used to take not of the newspaper stories in the US press giving the CIA ( I imagine) line about the monolithic Soviet threat, while people who were traveling there were seeing a very different picture.

I think we are in a situation now were it is hard to end the mess in the Middle East because too many people are making too much money on it.

It 's like prisons for profit--once an industry gets fattened it is hard to take away the feast and make it skinny again---they are in business to make money, they make money through people being sentenced to prison therefore there is a powerful incentive against alternative sentences, or reducing crime or decriminalizing some behaviors.

I

[Joe for Clark]

6. Oh we can beat the middle east - take their money.

What are they gonna do??

As to the USSR - It took four straight administrations to do what we did. Not overnight at all.It is not the ability of any one administration - but all four together - that is different.

We are very strong when we all pull the same way - very strong.

Joe

[dysfunctional press]

13. take their money? how exactly?

:shrug:

[Joe for Clark]

18. Don't give them our money.

I have no problem giving money for fuel to Ohio workers - PA workers - I have a big problem giving money to people I think may use it against us.

And we can do that.

Joe

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. Not according to internal CIA papers that were relased after

the fall of the USSR

They were spot on exactly when the USSR was going to fail

And these Intel Papers are the reason for Team B, Rummy et al were part of it, if you may an early PNAC plan to protect their budies in the weapons industry

[texanshatingbush]

7. ...and the USSR was gutting its military might, just as we are today....

the long war in Afghanistan was to the USSR what the war in Iraq/Afghanistan is to the US today--an entanglement which ultimately bled its military to death and drained its treasury.

In the midst of the USSR's war in Afghanistan, I read in The New York Review of Books (I think it was) a very interesting story about Russian troops who so dreaded returning to the economic privations of life in Moscow that they were deserting in order to remain in the good-by-comparison life of Afghanistan.

[alfredo]

10. We knew back in the late 60's that they were on their way down. All

we needed was to keep the pressure on and let them implode. Reagan didn't need to do what he did, but he wanted them to fall on his watch.

[Joe for Clark]

11. It wasn't him - he was just in the right place at the right time.

He doesn't deserve any more credit than that.

A long time ago - they took (and dad was one of them) pilots and stick them in a bomber or fighter bomber in gear and wait for a Russian attack. Thet did that. But after a while, the guys that did war - they spoke out. "They ain't comming" - that is what they said. The guys that really knew war - that is what they said. They were right. They knew better.

Joe

[alfredo]

12. Strategic Air Command. That's what it sounds like.

I was Army.

The USSR didn't have the infrastructure to support an extended war. They would have collapsed in a couple months of sustained warfare.

[Joe for Clark]

16. I guess -

Yeah - he was in the air force by then - wasn't his first war either.

He was a black and white guy - like - he didn't think they weren't coming - he knew.

He really did.

I don't know about Russia collapsing too fast- they didn't when Germany invaded them.

I don't have a lot of good things to say about the Russians and when I say what I really think about them I get deleted.

But I'll say this - they had really good fighter planes - would have given us a lot of crap back then. Enough to hurt us.

Joe

[alfredo]

20. They didn't have the capacity to replace destroyed equipment at

the pace that would be needed. They didn't have enough roads, and rail roads. They were in worse shape than the American people were led to believe.

They did some things very well, but other important things they did, they did horribly. It gave us a big advantage. They knew it and we knew it. A lot of their bluster was for the domestic market. A scary enemy served them well, just like the scary enemy serves bush.

[Joe for Clark]

21. I'd also remember - they took 3 million KIA just to hold

Moscow - you think we would???

Joe

[alfredo]

24. That campaign was a monumental blunder by Hitler. According to

historian John Toland, if he had gone into Russia as a liberator instead of conqueror they may have succeeded. they acted with brutality against the people as they swept across the country. Big mistake.

Also Hitler's army was stretched thin, supply lines were spotty at best. the German soldiers did not have the clothes and equipment to handle the brutal Russian winter.

[Mr Rabble]

8. Joe, you are insane.

Double the size of the military?

Even if we didn't have a $10 trillion debt, we would still know this:

We spend more on our military per year than all other countries on Earth COMBINED.

COMBINED.

Just get a grasp of that. More than everyone else combined.

Now, what were you saying?

[Joe for Clark]

9. I understand - make the standing army a million and double

the reserves to two million.

Very cheap price compared to the likely threats.

I know exactly what I was saying. And I am violently opposed to war.

You know - a good and credible threat is worth a thousand times a real war.

I understand one thing - the threat is better than actually doing it.

Double the force structure - and do it now. You people do not have a lot of time.

Joe

[dysfunctional press]

14. to what end? and WHAT "threats"?

military spending in this country needs to be SLASHED, DRASTICALLY

[Joe for Clark]

17. When we did end up fighting Japan - it was over natural

resources. I think we should be looking over our shoulder at China right now. They could really fuck us. I'd keep in mind, at best we are 1-1-1 in asia - and I don't think we want to test that. Not against them. Not now.

SO - build the military up - a lot - enough to scare them.

It is a good investment.

Joe

[dysfunctional press]

25. china is making deals for resources all around the globe...

are you saying that we should go to war with them to steal aquire that which they have legally purchased/contracted?

instead of another insane military build-up, wouldn't the money be better spent on research for alternative fuels and technologies?

according to most estimates, the iraq war is going to cost us at least $1trillion- and that money is being spent in what will most likely end up being a futile effort to control iraq's oil...$1trillion can buy A LOT of research/development/and maybe even some social GOOD.

[cherokeeprogressive]

15. I stopped taking your posts seriously months ago. n/t

[Joe for Clark]

23. Then why the hell are you postsing here??

If you think I am an asshole -at least be true to what you believe.

You can do that-right??

Joe

[Greyhound]

19. Too bad we let the DOD piss away all those trillions of dollars over the last few decades.

They made all their buddies richer than anybody since the gilded age, but sucked the core out of the military in the process.

[shimmergal]

22. You're right, Joe for Clark, fear of

the mighty US military IS another casualty of the Iraq misadventures. One that you don't hear much about. But you're absolutely right about its deterrent effect. I doubt it exists anymore.

As for our spending so much more than anyone else on our "defense" budget. That's true, but it's mostly because we're buying all that weapons technology. Which doesn't seem to be all that useful in the kind of war Bush has pushed us into. The other thing is all the money that's going out to no-bid contractors. No need to mention, here, what a fiasco that's been.

OTOH, there are several countries that have a vastly larger military than ours in sheer numbers.
North Korea for one, China also--I don't know; there may be others. Not only do we need to add numbers, we need to give our present military a chance to recuperate and rebuild.

[ruiner4u]

27. K&R Joe!

DU's sage...

[robertpaulsen]

28. And if, in 18 to 24 months we don't?

What do you think will happen to us by then?

[ruiner4u]

29. Is it 18-24 business months?

[Lasher]

30. Funny you should mention the USSR and then say we need to spend even more on defense.

Most of the Soviets' military might had to be used to make sure its allies in the Warsaw Pact and subjects along the South Asian front didn't revolt. They just couldn't keep the empire propped up forever.

It's kinda like the way we currently have about 700 military bases in approximately 130 other countries. Yet we ignore the lesson of the Soviet Union's collapse and continue to spend more on defense than the entire rest of the world combined.

"Brilliant" is the very last word I would think of using to describe this behavior.