Obama Guts US Defense

by **J.B.** on Wed 10 Jun 2009, 3:40 pm

I thought it would be interesting to take a look at what US Defense systems and programs have been cut so far, in order to pay for social welfare programs.

I did a search on which programs have been cut, or completely canceled, and I was surprised to find out just what has already been done.

Boeing Airborne Laser Missile Defense System: canceled

Space Based "Multiple Kill Vehicle" Missile Defense system: canceled

F-22 Raptor: canceled (Meanwhile, the Chinese J-12 will be operational in 2020, and the Russian 5th generation fighter will be operational by as early as late 2016)

V-22 Osprey Next Gen. VTOL troop transport: canceled

B-52 Strategic Bomber upgrade program: canceled (while Russia expands their Tu-160 bomber program)

US Army Future Combat System: canceled

FCS Modernization program for M-1 Abrams: canceled

FCS Modernization program for Paladin: canceled

FCS Modernization program for Bradly Fighting Vehicle: canceled

Secretary Gates has proposed that 2 Carriers be retired, and that the Navy be reduced to less than 300 vessels total

In light of North Korean and Iranian nuclear missile advances, as well as the instability of Pakistan, Chinese ambition for reclaiming Taiwan, and recent Russian advances on its Democratic neighbors, I am wondering if our defensive systems should be cut to pay for the historic $11 trillion that has already been committed to paying for Socialized medicine, business, banking, and other things.

by yankeessuck123 on Wed 10 Jun 2009, 3:43 pm

GUTTED!!!

Er, not really. You wonder why hardly any liberals post here, it might be because the conservatives are so viciously stupid.

by **J.B.** on Wed 10 Jun 2009, 3:45 pm

Or perhaps it is because every time they open their mouths they are viciously PWND.

by yankeessuck123 on Wed 10 Jun 2009, 4:49 pm

Good grief!

by cheese and whine on Wed 10 Jun 2009, 5:00 pm

lol, YS, Liberals have a hard time backing up much with facts, more opinions, but again, most republicans are not conservatives either.

by Chen on Wed 10 Jun 2009, 6:20 pm

We don't need all of that crap when we have nukes. No one in their right mind is going to fuck with us and if they do, the weapon will be delivered in such a way that an airborn lazer won't do shit. It will be smuggled into this country and set off in a major city. The only way to stop that is to secure borders better. We don't need to invest 1/3 of our budget or whatever we invest into ways to kill people. Russia and China aren't our enemy either - they need us for their economy to be successful. Pouring all this money into weapons we're never going to use is a huge scam that Americans somehow find acceptable.

Though I disagree with where Obama's allocated the money saved from these cuts. He should just save it to paid down the debt.

by voodooprophet on Wed 10 Jun 2009, 7:05 pm

J.B. wrote:Iranian nuclear missile advances

until proven otherwise.

by **J.B.** on Wed 10 Jun 2009, 10:12 pm

http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2001/dec_2001/rafsanjani_nuke_threats_141201.htm

by **PhunkyPhishStyle** on Thu 11 Jun 2009, 12:18 am

Wait...I thought Obama increased the defense budget?

by patom on Thu 11 Jun 2009, 1:26 am

I just read in the paper that he has started the deployment of 21,000 fresh troops to Afghanistan. I don't suppose Bush would have approved of this.

by voodooprophet on Thu 11 Jun 2009, 2:01 am

J.B. wrote:http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2001/dec_2001/rafsanjani_nuke_threats_141201.htm

Yep, that's undeniable evidence of an imminent attempt to build a bomb. Rolling Eyes

by I'm better than you on Thu 11 Jun 2009, 2:22 am

No more toys for baby killers is a good idea.

by **J.B.** on Thu 11 Jun 2009, 3:00 am

voodooprophet wrote:
J.B. wrote:http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2001/dec_2001/rafsanjani_nuke_threats_141201.htm

Yep, that's undeniable evidence of an imminent attempt to build a bomb.

Who the hell said anything about undeniable imminent attempts to build a bomb?

What we do know is that Iran has threatened to wipe Israel off the map, and has repeatedly called for the Islamic world to "nuke Israel".

At the same time, we have incontrovertible proof that they are developing nuclear capabilities and claiming that they are for "peaceful purposes".

As I said in the opening post, these are developments in the field. DEVELOPMENTS.

Development + demonstrated and openly voiced desire to employ = dangerous at some point in the future.

by voodooprophet on Thu 11 Jun 2009, 4:24 am

J.B. wrote:
What we do know is that Iran has threatened to wipe Israel off the map, and has repeatedly called for the Islamic world to "nuke Israel".

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=69866&sectionid=3510302

"Press TV: So you did not threaten to wipe Israel off the map as an Iranian leader? That we will wipe Israel off the map?

Ahmadinejad: No. We say that the people of Palestine should have rights and when the people of Palestine exercise this right, this will happen. Where is the Soviet Union? The Soviet Union has been wiped off the map. What happened to the Soviet Union? The decision of the people, the vote of the people. When the people of the Soviet Union, the Russian people, were allowed to decide to take charge of their destiny, the Soviet Union disappeared.

The Zionist regime is an artificial regime… a fictitious regime. You brought people from different parts of the world and you have built this state. No, that cannot last, it is not sustainable. If they do not listen to our solution, this will happen one day."

J.B. wrote:
At the same time, we have incontrovertible proof that they are developing nuclear capabilities and claiming that they are for "peaceful purposes".

yep, lots of countries have nuclear technology and don't develop a bomb.

by **J.B.** on Thu 11 Jun 2009, 4:47 am

Glad to see you believe everything Amadinejead tells you.

...But translators in Tehran who work for the president's office and the
foreign ministry disagree with them. All official translations of Mr.
Ahmadinejad's statement, including a description of it on his website,
refer to wiping Israel away. Sohrab Mahdavi, one of Iran’s most
prominent translators, and Siamak Namazi, managing director of a Tehran
consulting firm, who is bilingual, both say “wipe off” or “wipe away”
is more accurate than "vanish" because the Persian verb is active and
transitive.

by voodooprophet on Thu 11 Jun 2009, 6:39 am

J.B. wrote:Glad to see you believe everything Amadinejead tells you.

...But translators in Tehran who work for the president's office and the
foreign ministry disagree with them. All official translations of Mr.
Ahmadinejad's statement, including a description of it on his website,
refer to wiping Israel away. Sohrab Mahdavi, one of Iran’s most
prominent translators, and Siamak Namazi, managing director of a Tehran
consulting firm, who is bilingual, both say “wipe off” or “wipe away”
is more accurate than "vanish" because the Persian verb is active and
transitive.

the quote i provided used the phrase "wiped off the map", so i don't understand your counter-argument.

You believe his quote to be literal, i believe it to be metaphorical.

If Iran possessed nukes, and they fired those nukes at Israel, 2 very bad things would happen for Iran.

1. Their nukes would not only destroy Israel, but would wipe out most, if not all of the Palestinians, whom Iran supports.

2. Israel would launch their nukes on Iran as soon as the missiles are detected and flatten the country.

We know this, Israel knows this, and Iran knows this. Do you think ANYONE in Iran wants that to happen?

Therefore, using common sense, it is painfully obvious that Iran's beef is with the Government of Israel. Amadinejead has made statements to the fact that, in a free and fair election, if the Palestinians overwhelming supported a two state solution, that solution was agreed upon by Israel, and that solution was enacted, then Iran would recognize Israel as a legitimate country.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/sep/29/iran.israel.ahmadinejad

Ahmadinejad was asked: "If the Palestinian leaders agree to a two-state solution, could Iran live with an Israeli state?"

This was his astonishing reply:

If they [the Palestinians] want to keep the Zionists, they can stay ... Whatever the people decide, we will respect it. I mean, it's very much in correspondence with our proposal to allow Palestinian people to decide through free referendums.

Since most Palestinians are willing to accept a two-state solution, the Iranian president is, in effect, agreeing to Israel's right to exist and opening the door to a peace deal that Iran will endorse.

by mexicantornado on Thu 11 Jun 2009, 5:19 pm

We don't need all of that crap when we have nukes.

So horribly false. We need a missile defense system if we want to essentially take away the threats that a madman in Pyongyang or Tehran can make. The missile defense system was never ment to be able to stop the entirety of a missile attack from Russia, it was ment to stop 1 or 2 missiles, about what North Korea and Iran can build.

Or would you really piss your pants in 15 years when Kims youngest son is finally able to prove that North Korea can hit the west coast the united states with a nuclear weapon?

by **PhunkyPhishStyle** on Thu 11 Jun 2009, 6:25 pm

I agree. An advanced missile defense shield should be our #1 top priority if we ever hope to "just need nukes". We should consider cutting unnecessary overseas military spending to help fund the buffing up of our defenses. Once we are settled and protected to the best of our abilities, then we can consider having 'just nukes' as a deterrent and a retaliatory weapon when necessary. We should still have the ability to put boots on the ground, but we could cut the numbers drastically. Push for hardcore selection, increased money spent per soldier, and make them all elite troops. Bring back the gadsden flag to fly under our stars and bars so would-be aggressors get the picture.

by voodooprophet on Thu 11 Jun 2009, 7:28 pm

agreed with MT and PPS. Missile defense is a huge necessity.

by master P on Fri 12 Jun 2009, 3:14 am

That sucks that they cut the F-22 raptor program, those jets are SWEET (though likely unneccicary)

I agree with everyone else. Other then the missle defenses, I don't really care about anything else

Obama Guts US Defense

Obama Guts US Defense

Re: Obama Guts US Defense

Re: Obama Guts US Defense

Re: Obama Guts US Defense

Re: Obama Guts US Defense

Re: Obama Guts US Defense

Re: Obama Guts US Defense

Re: Obama Guts US Defense

Re: Obama Guts US Defense

Re: Obama Guts US Defense

Re: Obama Guts US Defense

Re: Obama Guts US Defense

Re: Obama Guts US Defense

Re: Obama Guts US Defense

Re: Obama Guts US Defense

Re: Obama Guts US Defense

Re: Obama Guts US Defense

Re: Obama Guts US Defense

Re: Obama Guts US Defense

Re: Obama Guts US Defense