FYI: Obama has stated no troops will be hitting the ground. Just firing Tomahawk’s from across the pond from our Hoss Navy Cruisers.
The issue is the illeged chemical weapons attack on it’s own people. The UN has a standing that chemical weapons will not be tolerated so something unfortunately has to be done or Obama with his big mouth with no backing anything up will look like a fool. France appears to be on board, but this country does not need another war. So Obama will fire some missiles over there say he did something and be done with it.
i think the syrian civil war will be used as a distraction while he pushes some other bs through when nobody is paying attention (he has said recently he plans to use executive action again to curb “gun violence”)
Actually, I do (possible chemical warfare starting, civil unrest, etc.). I’m not, by any means, a Syrian expert but I know the gist of it. What exactly, about that picture, do you have an issue with? The point isn’t that we need to fix Syria’s economy like we need to fix Detroit’s (since that is the only issue with detroit, technically)…the point is that we need to focus on issues in our own country (Detroit) before we continue to play world police in places we don’t belong (Syria). As said above, unfortunately, we are the ONLY country in the world who can step in and fight for people (be it, ultimately, for our own gain or their gain). It is what it is. But, we could use a little more ‘effort’ here at home first…unfortunately, most of the ruling class in this country is too corrupt to care. So long as they have money in their pockets, and lobbyists…we will never have true dedication to resolution of issues on our own soil.
we have too many troops and not adequate funding to support all of them…i blame the troop surplus on shit like $20,000 sign on bonuses from the national guard, plenty of asswipes i know joined just to get that and injure themselves in basic to get out of the commitment.
Adequate funding? We have too BIG of a Navy/Army and give too MUCH funding, IMO.
Remember that picture somewhere on here comparing the size of America’s Aircraft carriers to the rest of the worlds? We have like 9 of the biggest, baddest, MoFo’s on the planet and the next country has like 3…that are half the size of one of ours. Like everything in America, there is too much of it and it’s too big. We could cut down on the size of our navy and army and still be EASILY the greatest military strength on the planet. While saving billions at the same time.
EDIT: This is the pic I’m talking about. I watched a NetGeo (Megastructures) episode about the biggest carrier the US has and that thing can be at sea for like 8 months, houses 4,500 sailors, and has many amenities like a grocery store, post office, etc. all on it. It’s literally a small city on water. And IIRC, we have a bunch of them. Why do we NEED that? If our standing military was smaller…I think the US would be less likely to get involved in pretty much damn near every conflict out there. We’d pick and choose much better, thus avoiding american casualties while also staying out of shit holes like Iraq and Afghanistan (maybe). I think it gives our government too much confidence in ‘converting’ the world because our military is so massive.
