The Obama war machine in full force

keeponrockin wrote:

usamamasan1 wrote:

It's spelled

Reagan

And HE WAS THE SHIT!!!!!!!!

Check yo self!

Woot

Best President EVA!

http://www.ronaldreagan.com/

Including arming al-Queda?

Reagan armed, funded and trained the Taliban and al Qaeda.
Obama signed off on the deal to supply 60 Billion dollars in weapons to our "friends and allies" the Saudis. Considering the fact that 15 of the 19 September 11, 2001 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia (a fact that doesn't seem to concern the administration when they make these "deals") and the fact that they conveniently turn a blind eye to the Saudis Human Rights violations, i'd say Obama has learnt well from Reagan.

sorry if this is a bit off from what you guys are talking about, but if we're talking war machine, this article gave me the hebegeebees thinking about the repercussions of a US - Iran conflict:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... 191694701/

"The Islamic regime in Iran also counts on Russia and China, with which it has close relations, to come to its help and facilitate an end to war in time to save the regime. China, which holds billions of dollars in contracts and is said to have more than 11,000 contractors, mostly of a military nature, in Iran, has the most to lose in the downfall of the Islamic regime, and its officials already have stated openly that China will aid the Iranian regime in case of war.

Though the Islamic regime never should have been allowed to continue with its suppression of its people, its terrorist activities worldwide and its continuation of its missile and nuclear programs despite U.N. sanctions, one cannot imagine a world with nuclear arms in the hands of the jihadists in Iran.

With officials from both Israel and the U.S. calling a nuclear-armed Iran a red line, leaving the possibility of a military option on the table, we must realize that the only possible solution to this dilemma is a regime change in Iran, which a majority of Iranians support. The price we pay today to save world peace and security will be minuscule to what the world will pay in the not-so-distant future."

Selling arms is always a tricky business...but one that has been done for hundreds of years. The F-15 has been retired for years. It's a horribly outdated jet. I believe it was developed in the late 70s and is a model-T compared to modern jets. I don't like the idea of selling arms to crazy volatile nations, but making money off something that is just going to rust apart and has little effect on anything as far as military might in any capacity....I don't have a problem with that.

Obama unveils plans for pared-down military

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/01/05/polit ... ?hpt=hp_t2

"Over the next 10 years, the growth in the defense budget will slow, but the fact of the matter is this: It will still grow, because we have global responsibilities that demand our leadership," Obama announced during a rare presidential visit to the Pentagon. "I firmly believe, and I think the American people understand, that we can keep our military strong -- and our nation secure -- with a defense budget that continues to be larger than roughly the next 10 countries combined."

"Republicans immediately blasted the plan, characterizing it as a retreat from the reality of America's global responsibilities."

Its always got to be a damned fight, R vs. D. :roll:
I would bet we will be fine...

Byrnzie wrote:

mca47 wrote:

Selling arms is always a tricky business...but one that has been done for hundreds of years. The F-15 has been retired for years. It's a horribly outdated jet. I believe it was developed in the late 70s and is a model-T compared to modern jets. I don't like the idea of selling arms to crazy volatile nations, but making money off something that is just going to rust apart and has little effect on anything as far as military might in any capacity....I don't have a problem with that.

Would you have a problem with it if you knew that these same arms were going to be used to kill civilians?


Is the arms industry so financially hard-up in your opinion that the pity you feel for them means that you'll willingly turn a blind eye to them selling weapons to crazy volatile nations?

Seeing as you have so much concern for the financial welfare of these arms dealers, have you considered maybe sending them a personal donation?

I see what you're saying but I was referring specifically to the F-15 and the US government selling outdated jets to countries willing to buy. In an ideal world the F-15 wouldn't even exist but in the f'ed up world we live it...it does. We've been selling outdated jets to countries since the 50s, this is no different. Once this jet was decommissioned and retired, a number were sold to India as well. The fact of the matter is, if these countries weren't purchasing our million dollar jets that are sitting in military "bone yards" waiting to rust, they'd just get retired Migs or equally comparable, from other countries.
We already own the jets, we aren't profiting off of them, we're just more or less selling our used cars to someone and trying to get something, anything for it.
Could they be used to kill civilians? Sure...but so could any other weapon...including their current fleet.
I don't like the idea of it either, but if you find some sucker willing to buy your used car that is old, crappy and breaks down all the time, and is willing to pay good money for it...you wouldn't sell it? Granted, he might just buy it to run people over, but you can't just assume that.

catefrances wrote:

i dont see them being outdated as an ok to sell them.

We're not using them (well, one flew an air support mission over Libya but crashed). We own them all - billions of dollars spent...why not get something back? The Saudi's would have gotten decommissioned jets from Russia had they not got our F-15s. So in the long run, they'd still have the same capacity to cause trouble...and we'd get nothing in return.
If they are seeking to buy jets anyways, why not ours that we are no longer or ever will use again?

mca47 wrote:

catefrances wrote:

i dont see them being outdated as an ok to sell them.

We're not using them (well, one flew an air support mission over Libya but crashed). We own them all - billions of dollars spent...why not get something back? The Saudi's would have gotten decommissioned jets from Russia had they not got our F-15s. So in the long run, they'd still have the same capacity to cause trouble...and we'd get nothing in return.
If they are seeking to buy jets anyways, why not ours that we are no longer or ever will use again?

i think you missed my point.

mca47 wrote:

Selling arms is always a tricky business...but one that has been done for hundreds of years. The F-15 has been retired for years. It's a horribly outdated jet. I believe it was developed in the late 70s and is a model-T compared to modern jets. I don't like the idea of selling arms to crazy volatile nations, but making money off something that is just going to rust apart and has little effect on anything as far as military might in any capacity....I don't have a problem with that.

It's not only the F-15s, there's also 200 Apache, Black Hawk and Long Bird helicopters.

fear4freedom wrote:

OBAMA ADMIN. continues to prove and show that BUSH ADMIN. wasnt all that bad after all!

dear GOD you can't be serious.