{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by Ghost4201990:
4/4/2016 12:03:04 PM
48
Our military is at pre-WWII levels!
https://youtu.be/R6tivDJIzpQ
Many of you have laughed at this and linked some bs chart of what our military budget Is and then this special came on TV last night.
https://media.nationalpriorities.org/uploads/total_spending_pie%2C__2015_enacted.png
English
#Offtopic
-
-
Think of it as being post WWI levels
-
8 Replies>military is at pre World War II levels >likely because we're not in a world war >spending money on defense is worthless and wasted money when there is nothing to defend against >a conventional war with a large country like Russia would end in a nuclear conflict anyway >conclusion: stop spending like 3-4% of the entire gdp on a worthless military that does nothing
-
3 RepliesActually I believe we are at pre WWIII levels.
-
2 RepliesOh yeah I know that, I'm writing a essay on it
-
1 ReplyWhat about all the black money ?
-
1 ReplyThat's [b]UNACCEPTABLE!!![/b] We should be at World War XVII levels!!!
-
2 RepliesYes we need to keep our military strong... it's currently very strong though. We also are investing in it... New long range bombers and state of the art aircraft carriers are on the way. If you think it's about raw numbers you're again just misinformed. Look up "force multipliers" and modern military planning. We count on being more effective than the enemy. "Pre WWII levels" is a meaningless statement as technology and the type of warfare has changed so drastically.
-
Numbers are irrelevant, we could level the entire globe if we felt like it, and if a major war breaks out we could easily redirect our industrial capacity toward building more tanks and whatnot. What we should be doing is focusing more on science, so that when we actually need to fight we'll have rail guns and lasers.
-
11 RepliesFor starters the U.S. military is comprised of around 1 million members including reservists and national guard units. Secondly we do not need a massive amount of soldiers, modern wars are not won by sheer numbers.
-
5 Replies>pre wwii >we have nukes K.
-
14 RepliesI mean.. You do notice that that's still six hundred [i]billion[/i] dollars, right?
-
12 RepliesBullshit. Did we have nuclear ICBMs pre WW2? America class aircraft carriers? Nuclear subs? Drones? Bases and airstrips in literally hundreds of countries around the world? I think you get the point.
-
1 ReplyThe US deserves to lose its military after all the shit they've caused.
-
9 Replies[quote]Education: 3%[/quote] Well that explains a lot.
-
Good fishing?
-
-
Ted cruz is the zodiac killer.
-
9 RepliesThe numbers of our military don't really matter that much. We have vastly Superior military Tech that allows for smaller forces to dominate far larger ones in any conventional fight with any country on earth. Any thing that ever rose to the level of a World War would be settled with nuclear weapons all the ither weapons/manpower make no difference on that scale. Going forward what military engagements we do get in will be smaller ones. Likly iraq size or smaller. In this size we have enough forces to do this to a couple countries at a time, more than we need. Which even that isn't due for another 20 or 30 years would people forget how hard it is to invade and rebuild a country again.
-
Yeah, it's really important to keep shit from thirty years ago or having a massive army when we're not even at war, and the stuff we're doing in the middle east hardly counts as a war. Since you're so worried go sign up.
-
12 RepliesI would like to have this conversation with you, but for the lack of just wanting to not have someone slander me in return of my opinion I'll keep it short. Because I'm sure you'll find some way to call me an idiot for this. I am actually going to go serve my country, your country, when I graduate from college. I intend on going to bid for my operations contract with the navy in just less than two years. I have several friends in the operations community. While yes it looks like the military is getting smaller from the outside, which it is. I'm not arguing with that, mainly because the operations community is starting to get much larger. They are spending more time putting our people, my brothers and sisters through higher levels of training. Because at the end of the day, a fully trained operator from any branch, that being SEALs, SWIC, Delta, Rangers, etc. is going to be far more effective than your base level GI. Not that there's anything wrong with that, they are trained to be better. That's why it's getting smaller, were training more people to be even more effective in the battlefield. Also, at the time, we had no intentions of taking part in WWII. It was not until we intercepted the letter to Mexico from Germany that we entered the war. Which was 1 year into the war. So our military wasn't ready for war then, all we were doing was supplying our allies. Once we entered the theatre of war, we went full scale development of military and bringing people in. Which changed the tide greatly. It's called war time effort for a reason. But hey man that's just my opinion. Just like you have yours.
-
2 RepliesIn terms of spending I can see where you are coming from but we are no where near pre WWII levels in terms of firepower and obviously technology.
-
2 RepliesWhy is science so low?
-
1 ReplyWhy Is education at only 3%?
-
13 RepliesScience 1% ;-;
-
