America's Woke & Obese Military

What exactly do you think happens to us and our country if we stop incentivizing the military and then we have no military? Some of you need to step out of your self righteous rabbit hole insecurity coping mechanism bubble and come back to the real world, you've lost your minds.

No nothing is perfect and there are things which need to be corrected for sure but don't pollute your mind so badly that you think delusion is some kind of noble virtuous strength.
Dude: I will tell you what would happen. Our leaders would be forced to act like men: They would have to state that any attack on American soil perpetrated by a nuclear power will be met with nuclear force. There you go. Simple as that. We have nuke's, deliverable by 3 methods, which cannot be stopped. And guess what: Any attacks perpetrated by non-nuclear powers are easily dealt with via drones and special forces. There ya go! Problem solved. There is simply no excuse for the continuation of the military welfare state.

Many scientists who developed nuclear weapons only did so because they thought it would ensure less wars and more peace. And they were correct, but our politicians are too cynical to admit this, and have used the patriotic spirit of our country as a means of getting more power and wealth for themselves.

Like Ronald Reagan once said, there are no easy solutions, but there are simple ones.

Your argument is kaput. With serious leadership, our problems are easily solved. No, we don't need to have a massive, beaurocratic, fat, gay, female (to sum the adjectives up : "politicized") standing army sucking trillions of resources form productive citizens. Sorry, but you are wrong on this one.
 
Last edited:
Dude: I will tell you what would happen. Our leaders would be forced to act like men: They would have to state that any attack on American soil perpetrated by a nuclear power will be met with nuclear force. There you go. Simple as that. We have nuke's, deliverable by 3 methods, which cannot be stopped. And guess what: Any attacks perpetrated by non-nuclear powers are easily dealt with via drones and special forces. There ya go! Problem solved. There is simply no excuse for the continuation of the military welfare state.

Many scientists who developed nuclear weapons only did so because they thought it would ensure less wars and more peace. And they were correct, but our politicians are too cynical to admit this, and have used the patriotic spirit of our country as a means of getting more power and wealth for themselves.

Like Ronald Reagan once said, there are no easy solutions, but there are simple ones.

Your argument is kaput. With serious leadership, our problems are easily solved. No, we don't need to have a massive, beaurocratic, fat, gay, female (to sum the adjectives up : "politicized") standing army sucking trillions of resources form productive citizens. Sorry, but you are wrong on this one.

You realize that we need a military to operate and protect those things right?

I did not say that we need a massive fat gay military but we do need a military.
 
I hear your point, but I have to disagree with the premise that we should vest the power with elites to write blank checks as "incentives" for people serving. That argument doesn't hold water: Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of our constitution lays out how this nation is supposed to declare and wage war, ensuring that our nation fights popular, defensive wars.
That specifies how we declare wars. I agree we shouldn't be fighting wars for Israel and all that.

Not sure what you're saying that I said the Elites should have power to declare wars. My point is philosophically I believe only male veterans should be able to vote. Obviously I would also want an ethnic homogeneous society that is in line with the Heritage American make up as well. But we don't live in that world anymore.
Trust me, if China landed on the beaches of WPB tomorrow, you wouldn't need to offer lifetime checks/healthcare to get people to join the military; they would have the incentive and the will to join out of their sense of necessity and survival, and they'd do se en masse. And that is the whole point. This country was never meant to have a standing army whereby the state has the authority to spend other people's money perpetrating their welfare system.
That's kinda retarded. With 4th gen warfare you have to have a current trained force. You don't have the time to "stand up" and army during an Invasion or conflict with a neer peer or peer force.

I hear your general point and I have agreed many times that many who receive va Claims are disingenuous. Like I said, I saw a soldier claiming PTSD (which is like a 50 percent rating) who was getting medicinally discharged from his post boot camp training. This should not be the case. The VA disability should be for those who've served and have a verifiable medical injury as a result of service.

This "calculation" you speak of is exactly the problem... Like you proved my point. Kids are deciding between going into the military, whereby they will get wealthy with guaranteed income / healthcare / tax breaks the rest of their lives, or doing something productive like becoming a welder or other trade. All part of the same problem.

I've got kids who are going into the Trades. And kids who will be going into the military.

Many kids go into the military and then go on to the Trades after.

You're not guaranteed to get wealthy by going into the military. You just get exposed and training in a way that facilitates success for those who desiring success
We should be incentivizing people to NOT join the military. Only do so if you are willing to sacrifice for your duty to nation, your family, and God.
I agree with the last sentence for sure...and it's my position anytime ive had people reach out about this for their kids or kids reaching out to me.
In summary, I will admit that your argument may be based on altruistic grounds, but it fails to understand how our country was supposed to function and the basic reality of ignoring that fact.
I could and have literally made the same argument back to you. Your anti military rhetorical Appeal is ignoring the fact that the country is an Empire.

You don't seem to understand reality. We are an empire and we will continue to need military enforcement when political agreements don't align.

We don't have to like that reality....but it is indeed our reality.

You benefit from this every day with your Standard of life being vastly superior to any country or time in history.
I do understand the mind of the 18 year old. I was once 18, coming from a poor family on EBT, and spent time in the service as well. So I totally get it.
It becomes a self licking ice cream cone. These are the people who serve in a majority of the .mil that's always been that way.
Your final argument is so preposterous that I hesitate to address it: If the founding fathers set up a system whereby they got free health care, monthly checks, and didn't have to pay property tax the rest of their lives, they would have been tarred and feathered by our patriotic forefathers the same way they tarred and feathered their former masters.

By that logic the Founders would have considered it preposterous that non-white land owning men were allowed to vote. They didn't believe the nations decisions should be made by people simply because you existed here...

As far as saying they would be tarred and feathered... Stop being cute.
There's tons of things the founding fathers would not agree with about our country.

They didn't allow for senators to be directly elected either.... So that's a little bit contradictory to the statement earlier about the Elites.

They also didn't believe the supreme Court has Judicial review. Which is another deviation....
 
Last edited:
Wouldn't it be more efficient and cost effective to utilize volunteer militias and part-time state guards?
As far as I understand it, the founding fathers never intended to have a standing, federal army, so this would be more than in line with what they intended. Levying troops from local areas will by nature keep the irrelevant wars and adventures to a minimum... Talk about a quick feedback loop, if every county in the nation has to send 5 to 10 guys for xyz conflict.
 
Wouldn't it be more efficient and cost effective to utilize volunteer militias and part-time state guards?
As far as I understand it, the founding fathers never intended to have a standing, federal army, so this would be more than in line with what they intended. Levying troops from local areas will by nature keep the irrelevant wars and adventures to a minimum... Talk about a quick feedback loop, if every county in the nation has to send 5 to 10 guys for xyz conflict.
You can't train a local militia for 4th gen warfare, or artillery, or jet fighting or naval/amphibious assaults.

That model went out the window when Lt. Presley O'Bannon stormed Tripoli with 8 Marines post Battle of Derna as a result of Barbary Pirates enslaving American and European sailors.
 
You can't train a local militia for 4th gen warfare, or artillery, or jet fighting or naval/amphibious assaults.

That model went out the window when Lt. Presley O'Bannon stormed Tripoli with 8 Marines post Battle of Derna as a result of Barbary Pirates enslaving American and European sailors.
Sure, there are some full-time jobs but couldn't those just be run through a state guard?
Russia seems to be doing a good job with mobilization of regular 'Ivans' from the Donbass, etc for everything short of fighter pilots.
 
Sure, there are some full-time jobs but couldn't those just be run through a state guard?
Russia seems to be doing a good job with mobilization of regular 'Ivans' from the Donbass, etc for everything short of fighter pilots.
I'm not sure how good of a job they are doing or not.

They are not using a model of Regular Ivans. Rather a mix of conscripts and professional soldiers... But their supporting Arms forces are professional soldiers.

That goes for both sides really.
 
I'm not sure how good of a job they are doing or not.

They are not using a model of Regular Ivans. Rather a mix of conscripts and professional soldiers... But their supporting Arms forces are professional soldiers.

That goes for both sides really.
Right, that makes sense.

So do you think a smaller corps of professional soldiers could be maintained by America and then activate state guards/militias and call them up for full time service in times of need?
Obviously that option is not going to be favored by the bloated general officer structure currently or the MIC, but is it feasible in your opinion?
 
That specifies how we declare wars. I agree we shouldn't be fighting wars for Israel and all that.

Not sure what you're saying that I said the Elites should have power to declare wars. My point is philosophically I believe only male veterans should be able to vote. Obviously I would also want an ethnic homogeneous society that is in line with the Heritage American make up as well. But we don't live in that world anymore.

That's kinda retarded. With 4th gen warfare you have to have a current trained force. You don't have the time to "stand up" and army during an Invasion or conflict with a neer peer or peer force.

I hear your general point and I have agreed many times that many who receive va Claims are disingenuous. Like I said, I saw a soldier claiming PTSD (which is like a 50 percent rating) who was getting medicinally discharged from his post boot camp training. This should not be the case. The VA disability should be for those who've served and have a verifiable medical injury as a result of service.



I've got kids who are going into the Trades. And kids who will be going into the military.

Many kids go into the military and then go on to the Trades after.

You're not guaranteed to get wealthy by going into the military. You just get exposed and training in a way that facilitates success for those who desiring success

I agree with the last sentence for sure...and it's my position anytime ive had people reach out about this for their kids or kids reaching out to me.

I could and have literally made the same argument back to you. Your anti military rhetorical Appeal is ignoring the fact that the country is an Empire.

You don't seem to understand reality. We are an empire and we will continue to need military enforcement when political agreements don't align.

We don't have to like that reality....but it is indeed our reality.

You benefit from this every day with your Standard of life being vastly superior to any country or time in history.

It becomes a self licking ice cream cone. These are the people who serve in a majority of the .mil that's always been that way.


By that logic the Founders would have considered it preposterous that non-white land owning men were allowed to vote. They didn't believe the nations decisions should be made by people simply because you existed here...

As far as saying they would be tarred and feathered... Stop being cute.
There's tons of things the founding fathers would not agree with about our country.

They didn't allow for senators to be directly elected either.... So that's a little bit contradictory to the statement earlier about the Elites.

They also didn't believe the supreme Court has Judicial review. Which is another deviation....
You make good counterpoints, most important of which is that reality is reality is that we’re an empire. 100% agree. In which case, those wielding the sword for the state will increasingly hold positions of privilege and power, living by a different set of rules. This will undermine the meaning of “citizen”.

But I’d agree that’s what our military has turned into. It is what it is and it isn’t going to change. But then all I ask is let’s not pretend these are honorable hero’s who's only goal in life is “serving” their fellow countrymen. It’s a grift.

I will point out one thing you mentioned about 4th generation warfare. See my other reply whereby I stated that with the proliferation of nuclear weapons and drone warfare, you really only need a highly specialized professional class of warfighter, think pilots and navy SEALs. And then a few submarine officers. Everything else is no longer needed once Mutually Assured Destruction via the nuclear triad enters the equation.

Would it take the leadership of a man to see this? Yes.
 
Respectfully, conceptually you can have an idea of what it's like from the movies, but not a full appreciation.
Well, I saw enough war movies to know not to sign up (though I came close a few times due to economic desperation). I saw enough in the movies to know that 9 out of 10 wars are unnecessary and for profit and that the people making the decisions to go to war won't be the ones fighting and dying in the war but they will be the ones getting rich off of the war. I saw Hamburger Hill and countless other suicide missions initiated by the top brass that every grunt knew was a waste of life suicide mission that would not be attended by the men calling the shots. It's easy to send others to die, but the US Military should have a "You go first" policy for the top brass and politicians calling the shots. Let's see how important the war/mission is when (((they))) have to go first.

When was the last time an American involved war was decisively won? That would be World War 2, and we won for the wrong side. We won for the jews. And so then you sit there and watch Korea go by in the early 1950's, and then Vietnam go by in the late 60's and early 1970's and all the horrible decisions made that put an unnecessary end to countless American men's lives and you sit there and think, "Now this is an institution that I can trust!"?

I get the comraderie and legacy and skills training and all that, but is it worth getting your legs blown off for nothing?

America has nukes, and there is thus very little need for a large standing army as nobody in the 21st Century has even thought about a land invasion onto American shores (except for unarmed Mexican and Latin American civilians). Work on the nuclear arsenal and it's corresponding technology and bring our boys home. We need them here to be deployed on the south side of Chicago and at our southern border. Enough with the illegal foreign adventures (except for black ops into Mexico to eradicate the cartels).
 
Well, I saw enough war movies to know not to sign up (though I came close a few times due to economic desperation). I saw enough in the movies to know that 9 out of 10 wars are unnecessary and for profit and that the people making the decisions to go to war won't be the ones fighting and dying in the war but they will be the ones getting rich off of the war. I saw Hamburger Hill and countless other suicide missions initiated by the top brass that every grunt knew was a waste of life suicide mission that would not be attended by the men calling the shots. It's easy to send others to die, but the US Military should have a "You go first" policy for the top brass and politicians calling the shots. Let's see how important the war/mission is when (((they))) have to go first.
That's the difference between people who join the Marines and those who join the Air Force and say " I almost joined thr Marines once. There's something different about how people are wired and it's just the way it is.

When was the last time an American involved war was decisively won? That would be World War 2, and we won for the wrong side. We won for the jews. And so then you sit there and watch Korea go by in the early 1950's, and then Vietnam go by in the late 60's and early 1970's and all the horrible decisions made that put an unnecessary end to countless American men's lives and you sit there and think, "Now this is an institution that I can trust!"?
Meh I dunno if we were on the wrong Side. We were on our side. The argument would be that we came out the ultimate benefits of the war.
I get the comraderie and legacy and skills training and all that, but is it worth getting your legs blown off for nothing?
you'd have to ask the vet that.

America has nukes, and there is thus very little need for a large standing army as nobody in the 21st Century has even thought about a land invasion onto American shores (except for unarmed Mexican and Latin American civilians). Work on the nuclear arsenal and it's corresponding technology and bring our boys home. We need them here to be deployed on the south side of Chicago and at our southern border. Enough with the illegal foreign adventures (except for black ops into Mexico to eradicate the cartels).
I agree. But the way we have structured the current dollar economy system it's a requirement to have a military that can enforce politics by orher means.

That's the world we are in.
 
You make good counterpoints, most important of which is that reality is reality is that we’re an empire. 100% agree. In which case, those wielding the sword for the state will increasingly hold positions of privilege and power, living by a different set of rules. This will undermine the meaning of “citizen”.

But I’d agree that’s what our military has turned into. It is what it is and it isn’t going to change. But then all I ask is let’s not pretend these are honorable hero’s who's only goal in life is “serving” their fellow countrymen. It’s a grift.

I will point out one thing you mentioned about 4th generation warfare. See my other reply whereby I stated that with the proliferation of nuclear weapons and drone warfare, you really only need a highly specialized professional class of warfighter, think pilots and navy SEALs. And then a few submarine officers. Everything else is no longer needed once Mutually Assured Destruction via the nuclear triad enters the equation.

Would it take the leadership of a man to see this? Yes.
The military is a spear.
The pointy end of the spear is the "warfighters", the shaft of the spear is required to put the pointy end in the enemy.
Planes requires maintenance, the planes bombs require maintenance and safe storage, the planes requires airbases, the airbases require ground personnel, security, airtraffic control, gardeners, the airbase personnel require feeding, the pilots require feeding, the pilots require training, all the personnel require housing etc, etc, etc.
 
Back
Top