Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1063615 Posts in 70735 Topics- by 18560 Members - Latest Member: Karen h
Jump to:  
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 554
61  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Wake Up, America: Take 3 on: Mar 03, 2016, 12:47PM
You are missing the point, Drillmeister.

How many ICBMs do we need?  Especially if one can turn Pyongyang and a 50 kilometer radius into a large radioactive hole.

How often are we in need of a supersonic bomber?  Do we really need several squadrons?

Incidentally, the original reason for our armed forces was for DEFENSE.  I would think that developing a system that can intercept missiles or suicide bombers is more DEFENSE than a B2 Bomber.
What if one doesn't work? What if some are sabotaged or taken out before we can launch? We need many.
Redundancy, like on an airplane, is necessary.
Several squadrons? So if they are all at one base and they are taken out. If some have mechanical issues? Do you think everything works 100% of the time?
So if Europe is attacked we just sit back and wait till we are attacked?
Remember the B52 is till in use over 50 years later.
62  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Wake Up, America: Take 3 on: Mar 03, 2016, 12:14PM
We already have possession of the "baddest weapons on the planet". They didn't cost that much, and don't fall to the deprecation problems of planes and missiles. Instead, they manage to use our own developments against us. And they are controlled by the CDC rather than the military.

So why shovel limitless money into the military again?

We could cut the military budget to a quarter of what it is now, and still have more than enough and still spend more than anyone else. And no, the private sector has nowhere near the level of waste as the military. They couldn't afford half that bad.



Seems a bit counter-productive to throw all the money away trying not to die, so much that you can't afford to live. Much more effective to build a good life and repair when needed, than to toil away in fear while planning for the worse.
I totally disagree. That is extremely far from realistic.
63  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Wake Up, America: Take 3 on: Mar 03, 2016, 12:12PM
Ron


"I want the baddest, weapon on the planet.  Whether it's a plane or a handgun."

The baddest, there you said it, weapons systems are a negative impact. You buy a Magnum .44 because it can make a negative impact on someone's lifestyle.
If you buy it for deterrence and don't use it what good has it done? You can argue it prevented a bad thing from happening but that's not a positive impact but a hypothetical lack of a negative one.

Like I said build a road and people can use it. It becomes a positive asset for the community. Build a weapons system and the best case is you don't use it, a zero sum game with no benefit. The worst case is having it becomes an excuse to use it which negates community assets.

DRB
Seola Creek.
Negative impact? Did our weapons have a negative impact on Germany Italy and Japan. Your dam right they did. That's what weapons are for. To kill or deter.
Buy it for deterrence and don't use it??? Then it was successful.  It deterred. It is a positive impact because it prevented a negative one. I'm not sure what you are talking about.
Do you think we need to get rid of all our weapons?
64  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Wake Up, America: Take 3 on: Mar 02, 2016, 08:52PM
The problem is that there is entirely incorrect toy buying by the Military.  It's going to bankrupt us.

If they wanted to invest in a dental drill that was able to remove all the decay in a cavity in 1/2 second before the patient even realized it, that's something that is useful.  Make it battery powered so it can be used in a field hospital and it's even more useful.  Then it even becomes useful to the civilian sector.  We have jet passenger planes because of jet bombers like the B-47, but what spinoffs can be useful from a B-2 Bomber?  Can't fly at supersonic speeds because of the sonic boom problem; nobody wants a plane that is invisible to radar since you can't properly route it using GCA.

How about robots that sniff out IEDs?  I bet those are in development and are useful.  How about color night vision goggles?  Probably be more useful than a supersonic fighter that is only useful in a dogfight with Russia.  But I bet the robots and night vision goggles don't have the profit margins the F-35 does so the lobbyists push for that.  I'd rather see the better dental drill, myself.
The F35 does everything that the eagle, the hornet, the growler, the fighting falcon, the harrier all do in one airplane. Snd it's stealthy.
Do you know what the profit margins are? I don't.
Let's not prepare. Let's just react when it's too late.
Of course there's a money problem. But it's in the civilian sector too. Does that bother you?
I want the baddest, weapon on the planet.  Whether it's a plane or a handgun.
65  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Wake Up, America: Take 3 on: Mar 02, 2016, 08:12PM

No t unpatriotic . Just ignorant. If you don't think the military has a purpose for the public good,  that's dilusional.
66  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Wake Up, America: Take 3 on: Mar 02, 2016, 08:10PM
The Military-Industrial Complex (and I worked in it for a while) consists of a collusion between the upper ranks of the Military working with private industry to provide tools for the Military.  Often tools with limited or no usefulness in the current context of military operations, but which siphon trillions of dollars in taxes to private industry pockets.

How important in the scheme of modern (i.e. current operations) warfare is a supersonic Stealth bomber?  Strategic nuclear missile?  Most of the tasks given to today's Military calls for tactical forces.  I remember an abortive program to develop a radar targeted antiarcraft gun that couldn't hit the broad side of a barn (literally).  Another one was a reconnaissance drone that was launched by a catapult from a jeep and after its job was done, you flew it into a huge butterfly net.

We don't need a lot of the "toys" the industry is creating but they fund the re-election campaigns of Congress and hence we keep buying them.
How important is a supersonic stealth bomber? Strategis nuclear missle? Very important. It's called deterrence and ha worked for over half a century.
Yes most military operations are tactical. Does that mean we don't prepare for the worst case scenario?
Toys are useless. Always being ahead of potential adversaries is important. Read  Sun Tzu. It still applies today.
Why are you against the military  same thing happens in the civilian sector?
67  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Wake Up, America: Take 3 on: Mar 02, 2016, 04:48PM
The connecting point is Bernays' world view that there was a natural intellectual elite which manipulates the opinions of the electorate so so that they vote "the right way".
The German experience demonstrated that this manipulation can be done to get the electorate to move against their own best interests. That the elite may act out of selfish or even evil intent to get the masses to commit acts they'd would normally find repugnant.
Bernays' theory of an elite which manipulates the masses is antithetical to the Jeffersonian ideal of a well informed electorate as the defenders of the Republic. This is why I'm pointing out this crossover.

No I don't take Eisenhower as infallible. He has many skeletons in his closet. But when a man makes a statement that's contrary to his training it makes me sit up and notice. A supporter of a strong military who choses to say in his " fairwell address" that the military industrial complex is a threat to the country to me means he must have had very strong evidence to say so.

Like I said the topic is "Wake Up America" but if you want to hit the snooze button and sleep while our country is going downhill that's up to you.

DRB
Seola Creek
Or you could ring the alarm button and alert the citizens to what? Downhill because of the military industrial complex? Not likely.
What is the military industrial complex and why do you think it's a problem?
68  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Wake Up, America: Take 3 on: Mar 02, 2016, 12:56PM
Ron, explain what you see as a "stretch."

"In his 1965 autobiography, Bernays recalls a dinner at his home in 1933 where Karl von Wiegand, foreign correspondent of the Hearst newspapers, an old hand at interpreting Europe and just returned from Germany, was telling us about Goebbels and his propaganda plans to consolidate Nazi power. Goebbels had shown Wiegand his propaganda library, the best Wiegand had ever seen. Goebbels, said Wiegand, was using my book Crystallizing Public Opinion as a basis for his destructive campaign against the Jews of Germany. This shocked me. ... Obviously the attack on the Jews of Germany was no emotional outburst of the Nazis, but a deliberate, planned campaign.[30]"

So here we have a nationally recognized reporter stating directly to to Bernays, the author, that Goebells is using his book in his propaganda campaigns and you say that saying Goebells used American Mass Marketing theory in the development of his propaganda system is a stretch?

"...in 1930, Hitler used fear of Communism to get support from Hugenberg, an industrialist who owned a chain of newspapers, and Thyssen, a steel manufacturer. They, and other industrialists, formed the Harzburg Front which helped finance the Nazi election campaigns in 1932-3"

Eisenhower was an Army Lifer. He was professionally aware of this rearmament of Germany and the industrialists behind it. He was even aware that German branches of American Companies were participating in this rearmament. Is it therefore a stretch to say that this knowledge plus his eight years as president impacted this strongly worded part of his "Fair Well Address"?

"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military–industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together."

To the founding fathers their two greatest fears were a State sanctioned church and a standing army. In Eisenhower's day he was trying to run the cold war and balance a budget. Now we live in a time of economic dominance and the super powers are reduced. Yet we continue a program of military interventionism funded by deficit spending. Should we forget the lessons of history and Eisenhower's warning and maintain the course or should we "take nothing for granted"?

Then again it may be as you that say supporters of Bernie and Hilary like von Wiegand, Bernays and Eisenhower are stretching the truth and there's nothing to worry about.

DRB
Seola creek



Your quote, " The German Propaganda machine was modeled after US mass marketing, radio and movies. These same techniques are employed in current US politics."  The dems and republicans use mass marketing radio and tv adds. It part of modernization and moving into the 21st century. If tv and radio were around 200 years ago it would have been used then. If the third reich modeled their rise using these modes, so what?

"The third Reich was based on its collusion with German military industry pumping up the military with deficit spending. Based on his experience fighting the Germans and serving as President Gen. Eisenhower stated that our "military Industrial Complex" was the greatest threat to our Republic."
Does Eisenhower speak infallibly? I don't agree with him first of all and secondly, the US has not inclination to take over the world like Hitler wanted.
69  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Wake Up, America: Take 3 on: Mar 02, 2016, 09:49AM
Actually, these are Cruz supporters.  Cruz gets the far right wing nut jobs and the Bible Thumpers.  If you look at Trump critically, he's actually a social Moderate.  Somebody described him as a Rockefeller Republican.
Yup.  Forgot about Cruz.
70  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Wake Up, America: Take 3 on: Mar 02, 2016, 09:26AM
The historical importance of the third Reich in US politics has two points to consider.
1. The German Propaganda machine was modeled after US mass marketing, radio and movies. These same techniques are employed in current US politics.
2. The third Reich was based on its collusion with German military industry pumping up the military with deficit spending. Based on his experience fighting the Germans and serving as President Gen. Eisenhower stated that our "military Industrial Complex" was the greatest threat to our Republic.

When you know these two parallels it's time to "Wake Up America".
Dismissing these facts as poorly informed is, at best, whistling in the dark and darned close to drinking the koolaid.

DRB
Seola Creek
I think it's a stretch. But then again if your're a bernie or hillary supporter I'm not surprised by the post.
I could compare Bernie to Chavez or Castro or Stalin in some ways. But I don't because it's a different world and whats the point? Trump won't become Hitler and Bernie won't become Chavez. Dismissing these parallels is like being high all the time and thinking everything is "cool".

Hillary gets votes mostly because of Bill and that she's a woman. That's reality whether you deny it or not. It may not be PC but I don't care.
Bernie gets the votes from those who feel oppressed and think everything is unfair, like they're spoiled children. ANd form the left stupid and pot smokers.
Trump gets the votes from the nuts who have underground bunkers and carry around AR15's because "it's their right" and the the racists and the lazy and the right stupid.
71  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Wake Up, America: Take 3 on: Mar 02, 2016, 08:26AM
I think the comparison of Trump's rise and that of Hitler should be able to be compared and contrasted without dumping the rest of Hitler's baggage onto Trump. In both cases, the populations of the countries appear to have been actively seeking an authoritarian "daddy- figure" to take care of them and "protect" them from all the "others" out there who were making their lives so difficult. It is possible to compare the rise to power of these two men at this point. It is not yet possible to compare the exercise of that power.
I think that's exactly what the Bernie supporters want. An authoritarian daddy figure to take care of them. It's ridiculous to compare anyone to Hitler. Just makes the opposition uneducated or miseducated, cheer.
72  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Cruz eligibilty to be determined by the court on: Feb 20, 2016, 10:36AM
I think the folks who will cheer loudest if Cruz is disqualified will be the Mainstream Republicans.  They hate him too.
Yeah. He's annoying.
73  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Wake Up, America: Take 3 on: Feb 20, 2016, 09:58AM

Sure, except of course for the fact that hyperbole is inaccurate by definition.
explain.
74  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Wake Up, America: Take 3 on: Feb 20, 2016, 08:30AM
That, well, it should, goes without saying. I have little doubt that anyone Obama nominates will be imminently qualified. No name calling of anyone participating in this discussion, just an accurate description of two leading public figures. And, one set of rules that both parties should play by. One party largely ignores them. And, the "extreme partisanship" has been forced onto the political arena in this countery by 30 years of right wing hate radio.

of course they will be qualified.
So I can describe Hillary as a lying witch and Bernie as a lunatic? Right. Because hey are accurate descriptions.
Which party ended the filibuster so they could win?
Extreme partisanship is on both sides. MSNBC, huffing ton post, daily Kos, move on.org. And so on.  Conservative speakers shouted down on college campuses. Do students shout down liberal speakers? Ever? Give me a break. Yeah, RIGHT.
75  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Wake Up, America: Take 3 on: Feb 20, 2016, 05:43AM
My plan would be to nominate someone who is a middle of the roader. Then, if that person is not confirmed, to nominate someone more liberal. If that person was not confirmed, then nominate someone even more liberal. THe GOP does not want this to be a voter tuernout driver for the left. All the demographics favor them for turnout in Presidential elections, and in thsi one especially when two of the top GOP candidates are such neanderthals.
i don't see anywhere in your post about nominating the best person for the job. And I als see name calling with I get my hand slapped for. So really it's extreme partisanship that is really what you want. No? Win at any cost? Two sets of rules. One for dens and one for repubs.
76  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Cruz eligibilty to be determined by the court on: Feb 19, 2016, 10:49PM
Those are the responses I expected from you two (Greg and Rob).  I suspect some of our other Texans may really like him.

I must confess on a Cruz vs. Sanders race I'm voting Bloomberg.
Me too.
77  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Wake Up, America: Take 3 on: Feb 19, 2016, 03:08PM
I totally understand if he nominates somebody they think is too far ideologically (like Eric Holder) that they would try to block him.  But give the guy a chance to name somebody before you jump  down his throat.
i agree.
78  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Wake Up, America: Take 3 on: Feb 19, 2016, 11:13AM
You've never heard recaps of SCOTUS hearings.  They are anything but asleep and often quite hostile to the attorneys.  Usually the Liberals will grill one side and the Conservatives will grill the other.  Alito was also a good joker.  Maybe Judge Judy would be a good replacement ;-)

Dusty's comment a few posts back about Democrats being the same as Communists strikes me as mean-spirited or ignorant (I don't know which).  Maybe he feels Ted Cruz is too Liberal?
He must have been joking. Not all dems are communist. Just the ones I don't like.  Evil
BTW
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/02/19/senate-republicans-easing-on-blockade-obama-court-pick.html?intcmp=hpbt1
79  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Wake Up, America: Take 3 on: Feb 19, 2016, 09:53AM

I agree, but in all seriousness she's also far too comfortable with presumption to be a very good actual judge (hopefully she applied more restraint when she was actually on the bench, but she didn't get her current gig for being a good judge--she got it for being who she is/the fact that she's an entertaining judge, although I expect it was a good deal of both in the eyes of those who recruited her).
Unfortunately you're probably right. I'd just love to hear her grill an attorney though. I've been in court for some law classes and most judges are half asleep and boring.
80  Practice Break / Purely Politics / Re: Wake Up, America: Take 3 on: Feb 19, 2016, 09:51AM
Coming from you, I find that very ironic
I was asked to be less confrontational.
You might want to try it too. Instead of being snarky. And you're a mod so I would expect more.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 554