Chew on this.

[JGREGORY]

Can You Name This Country?<br /><br />709,000 REGULAR (ACTIVE DUTY) PERSONNEL.<br /><br />293,000 RESERVE TROOPS.<br /><br />EIGHT STANDING ARMY DIVISIONS.<br /><br />20 AIR FORCE AND NAVY AIR WINGS WITH 2,000 COMBAT AIRCRAFT.<br /><br />232 STRATEGIC BOMBERS.<br /><br />19 STRATEGIC BALLISTIC MISSILE SUBMARINES WITH 3,114 NUCLEAR<br /><br />WARHEADS ON 232 MISSILES.<br /><br />500 ICBMs WITH 1,950 WARHEADS.<br /><br />FOUR AIRCRAFT CARRIERS AND 121 SURFACE COMBAT SHIPS AND<br /><br />SUBMARINES PLUS ALL THE SUPPORT BASES, SHIPYARDS, AND<br /><br />LOGISTICAL ASSETS NEEDED TO SUSTAIN SUCH A NAVAL FORCE.<br /><br />IS THIS COUNTRY :<br /><br />RUSSIA ? NO<br /><br />CHINA ? NO<br /><br />GREAT BRITAIN ? NO<br /><br />FRANCE ? WRONG AGAIN<br /><br />MUST BE USA ? STILL WRONG<br /><br />GIVE UP ?<br /><br />THESE ARE THE AMERICAN MILITARY FORCES THAT WERE ELIMINATED DURING THE<br />ADMINISTRATION OF BILL CLINTON AND AL GORE.<br /><br />SLEEP WELL!<br /><br />Also, keep this in mind as the political pundits spew their anti-Bush<br />propaganda. I've heard several claims that our servicemen are<br />deployed for too long, and serving longer tours. This kind of talk is sure to<br />continue as the election looms closer. If we still had all these military<br />personnel,troops could be rotated more frequently.

 

[Parrott_head]

Re: Chew on this.

U.S. Military Base Closures <br /><br />This is a link that lists when it was decided to close paticular military bases and when the bases were finally closed.<br /><br />The first list of recommended base closures was compiled in 1988, the next to last year of Ronald Reagans presidency. (1981-1989)<br /><br />During George Bush Sr's administration (1989-1983)there were more bases recommended by the commission for base closing and consolidation.<br /><br />This process continued during Bill Clintons administration. (1993-2001)<br /><br /> Can you name who is quoted below?<br /><br /> "Congress authorized a base realignment and closure (BRAC) round in 2005. At a minimum, BRAC 2005 must eliminate excess physical capacity; the operation, sustainment, and recapitalization of which diverts scarce resources from defense capability. However, BRAC 2005 can make an even more profound contribution to transforming the Department by rationalizing our infrastructure with defense strategy. BRAC 2005 should be the means by which we reconfigure our current infrastructure into one in which operational capacity maximizes both warfighting capability and efficiency.” <br /><br />For the answer go to Who said that? <br /><br />This is a process that has required congressional approval based on a recomendation by the Secretary of Defense.<br /><br />During the Reagan admin the post of SecDef was held by:<br />Casper Weinberger 1/21/81-11/23/87<br />Frank Carlucci 11/24/87-1/20/89<br /><br />During the Greorge Bush admin it was:<br />Richard Cheney 3/21/89-1/20/93<br /><br />During the Bill Clinton admin it was:<br />Les Aspin 1/21/93-2/3/94<br />William Perry 2/3/94-1/23/97<br />William Cohen 1/24/97-1/20/01<br /><br />Under the current admin it is:<br />Donald Rumsfield, who also was SecDef under Gerald Ford.<br /><br />Biographies of all our SecDef, from the first one, James Forrestal to the latest one go to:<br /><br /> SecDef Biographies<br /><br />The purpose of my post here is to get folks to do some research on the issues they feel strongly about. Do not relie on information cranked out by folks whose number one interest is where their show stands in the ratings.<br />There is a world of information out there for you to play detective with and get the complete story.<br /><br />A FALSE arguement could be made that all the military cutbacks are the result of the George Bush Sr adminastration. You could site the BRAC Act of 1990, Public Law 101-510 as the reason for this. But this legistlation was just a an updating of previous legislation and it has been changed since. This bill passed the Senate 80-17 with 3 not voting. Was signed into law by Bush on 11-5-1990. <br /><br />To research this the Public Law title tells you that this wat the 510 piece of legislation of the 101 Congress. This is the Senate bill.<br /> Keep track of your elected representative. <br /><br />The process used in keeping our military resources effective for our nations well being and safety is an ongoing, bi-partisan process. <br /><br />There was stong opposition to elimanating the Cavalry in the 1920's and '30's when it was decided to go to a mechanized deployment.

 

[POINTER94]

Re: Chew on this.

I can't confirm these numbers but if correct how will you be able to blame GW? Come on he had eight months to get that straightened out.<br /><br />If there was no way to prevent 9/11 then our existing measures won't even give the next group of terrorists pause. Hey GW, if half a millions aleins can illegally enter this country at the Mexican boarder, how tough will it be for a couple of terrorists to put on a swim suit? We have a future of deaths and destruction if we stop putting feel good measures in place and ignore the politically incorrect measures and fail to fess up to the failures of the policies of the past. Leaders of the past have been able to BUY votes and increase the dependant class at the expense of our nations security.<br /><br />The fourth estate is gone. William Huang has got more attention then the coverage of HOW we got to this condition. Pathetic.. Who had UBL in custody and who insisted he be released? The 9/11 hearings are nothing more than a political side show to cover each others butts. But that is reality, we would rather live the fantasy.<br /><br />Keep your boats folks. It is unlikely they will bomb the coastal waters. Those who think this wasn't inevitable remember the movie "The Seige"? I guess someone saw it coming. But of course the hero's were again misplaced in a movie out of Hollywood.<br /><br />If they did what is outline above to the standing military what do you think they did to the covert budgets? I am unintimidated by the likes of these cowards. (They just caught a 7 year old with a C4 vest) But I have confidence that this is not the last terrorist attack or the largest. We have yet to commit whole heartedly to the effort. I will say that we have bought some time by taking the fight to them in their own backyard, but it will show up here in the USA again. A bleak look but one that reflects the realities of where the world is going to. We must be vigilant and aggressive....

 

[18rabbit]

Re: Chew on this.

If there was no way to prevent 9/11 ...

There WAS a way to prevent it…but negligence got in the way…starting with the negligence of the previous administration and carried over to the negligence of the current administration. It’s not about shared blame…it is about the passing of responsibility…and the negligence of accepting and acting appropriately on that responsibility.<br /><br /> 9/11 WAS PREVENTABLE!!!

 

[JB]

Re: Chew on this.

I wonder why nobody has brought up Tom Clancy's novel, "Debt of Honor", published in 1995.<br /><br />In the novel, an airline pilot, bent on revenging the deaths of his brother and son in a brief war with Japan, crashes a 747 into the Capitol building, killing off most of our government.<br /><br />I have often wondered if OBL read the book,and it scares heck out of me to think that he might have read some other Clancy novels about ingenious terrorists.<br /><br />Any other Tom Clancy readers here?

 

[POINTER94]

Re: Chew on this.

Great stuff JB. I read alot of them, and if gas goes over $2 I will be reading the rest of them while anchored.

 

[JGREGORY]

Re: Chew on this.

Love to read Clancy, JB I also hope that OBL read the one where Pres. Ryan sent a guided missile into Dryabi(sp?) house when it was found out that he was the main cause of the terrorist bio plot. Or the new one called the teeth of the tiger. <br /><br />But like all Muslim extremist they only read what they want to read into things and interprete it to suit their needs.

 

[gaugeguy]

Re: Chew on this.

I read Clancy. He was actually questioned after 9/11 about that book because it was eerily similar. <br /><br />My favorite by far was The Hunt for Red October, I just couldn't put that book down. I have never read anyone that uses as much detail as he does.

 

[samagee]

Re: Chew on this.

I like his Splinter Cell game. <br /><br />I think that 9/11, and the TWA flight 800 were not preventable under the current U.S. thinking.<br /><br />The U.S. does not see security as a major concern. They cut corners where ever they can with security. Take a look at security companies themselves. You also have to look at what people are saying and doing now. For some unknown reason, people are going back to their lives as if nothing happened! Because of the lack of security practices in this country, 9/11 and the others that have been covered up, WILL HAPPEN AGAIN.<br /><br />If they saw security as something that had to be done, we would see a MAJOR shift in the way border control is done. We would see armed patrols at the airports. We would see student visas a memory of the past, and distant learning labs instituted. You would be able to raise questions about someone's motives without being labeled a bigot!<br /><br />Until we get the candy asses out of our government who play by politically correct guidelines, we will not be safe. And I feel padding votes by playing toward those who enter illegally, is border line treason. Selling out the American public's safety for your own means should not be allowed. Why are there no demonstrations about all this? Why do we have oranizations like PETA mailing dog doo to companies because they are concerned about some animal, when we have people trying to suicide bomb as many citizens as possible every day?<br /><br />The priorities are really screwed up, and it is going to take us normal citizens to get it fixed. Maybe we should all get together and write someone else in on the ballot in 2008.

 

[mattttt25]

Re: Chew on this.

your post is one-sided. which is fine, it shows your point well. the other side is that the military has constantly resized over time to adjust to the current and predicted world events. the soviet union collapsed, and we no longer needed such a robust military. makes perfect sense in my mind, and that's coming from a naval officer. we can't always predict what the world will look like in the future. times are tough, but the military is doing it's best to handle it (see my other recent post). our past few presidents have done the best they could under tremendous pressures from all sides.<br /><br />hindsight is always 20/20.

 

[Drowned Rat]

Re: Chew on this.

Talking about prophetic books, check out Nelson DeMille's "The Lion's Game" written in 2000. The similarities to 9/11 are frightening.

 

[18rabbit]

Re: Chew on this.

hindsight is always 20/20

There is no excuse for lack of foresight when the nation’s security is at issue.

 

[ob]

Re: Chew on this.

Foresight is attained from experience.As long as we live in a free and open society there will always be the possibility of isolated terrorist incidents.Homeland security is everyones responsibility.