Lords of Death Forums Lords of Death Forums LoD General Discussion Physics lesson for Rummy

I would have said you don't go to war with the president you want...but I like the Secty of Def version better.

I don't give a shit if you don't like it. That's the system we have and we're keeping it.
If you want to make military service a prerequisite, do it in your own country.
We have the #1 military. Obviously our way has been working.

Dude, STFU, we have the #1 military because we have the #1 economy and arguably the richest resource base of any nation in the world.
Resources + Wealth = BIG FUCKING STICK.
BIG FUCKING STICK = Superior #1 Military. It has nothing to do with the manner in which it is run. He is right though, civilians have little experience in the scale of the operation, losses, and time frame milieu scales. The current system in place worked fine back in the day when the professional military didn't have to number of components or the specialization it has today. So your argument of "We are #1 so it must be working fine" is just fucking stupid.
Try to come in here next time with a worthwhile argument.

You think it's peachy, because "your boys" are in the seats. During Clintons tenure, I heard the same shit as I'm spouting from wanna-be conservatives like you.
My take is that a 3-4 year stint including bootcamp = some for of qualification (no need to be a 70 star general). Going through boot and finishing means you understand the meaning of military teamwork, military sacrifice.
Do you think 6 months of boot is too much to ask of the guy who will run the show? Note: I don't care what party the guy leans towards.
Anyone who has been in the military care to give a thought here? I have not been through it (thus not qualified to say my thoughts are 100%, Jobu has not either, he is certain he is 100% correct even with no first hand experience. But he does that with everything, he's a wannabe expert on everything).

unless you have the right people in charge.
For example, Rumsfeld cancelled the Crusader artillery system because we really won't be needing something like that in future wars/conflicts. That's why we have civilian control of the military. If we let the generals decide how the money gets spent, they will only pad their own capabilities at the expense of the other branches or specialties.
Try to come in here next time with something that actually refutes my argument, not something which only makes my point more valid. You can have all the money in the world; if you don't spend it right, your military can suck ass.

Jesus christ, you really aren't that dumb are you? Come on man, stop playing around, sometimes you kid too much. No one can be that stupid, right?
Rumsfeld is an idiot, are you telling me right now the Crusader wouldn't be a key tool as far as hitting key targets without having to wait for air cover to hit a target? The Crusader has its purpose and taking a useful tool out of the box is just not the way to run your shop, metaphorically.
It is obvious to me you have never served military time. If you had served and been involved in the process you would not even have tried to make this argument and be getting owned in rebuttal.
You make the argument that the GENERALS shouldn't decide what they need? What the hell? Civilians can fucking oversee shit sure but as far as anyone knowing what they need at the point of impact THERE SHOULD NEVER BE A CIVILIAN IN THAT ROLE. See, I really don't think you thought about what the fuck you just said, or if you did you are running on about a 32 IQ becaus 'jack' that was plain fucking stupid. Here is how the heirarchy should work:
____________________________________________________
Congressional Committee <------------Non Committal Entity
|------------Head of Military (NON CIVILIAN)---------------|
.......... Airforce Head | Navy Head | Army Head...........
____________________________________________________
Now, how in the fuck would that constitute one commander or branch soaking up all the resources? Simple, IT WOULDN'T because if the overall head padded his agenda THE WHOLE FUCKING MILITARY WOULD GET PADDED.
Having lots of money for equipment, training the proper personel for usage, and making sure the system runs efficiently = superior military. With a civilian head to the military structure things aren't efficient because that person has no fucking idea of the reasoning behind the requests. All the civilian side needs to know is why money was spent for this purpose, not have the pen that writes the checks. Your argument on this point was pure bullshit and my argument lends absolutely no validity to your own.
Does that refute the god damn argument well enough or do you need me to draw you a picture?
Class dismissed!

we already have your idea in place, it's called the Joint Chiefs. They answer to Rumsfeld who answers to Bush as Commander-in-Chief.
Generals do not call the shots, they give their requests to the SecDef, he calls the shots. You want to take the head of Defense out of the cabinet and have it purely militarily controlled? You are asking for a military coup in the future you moron.
You clearly have not thought this through very well have you?
The founding fathers knew what they were doing.
As for the Crusader, it is no more accurate than the current Paladin system. It simply has a higher rate of fire. In the future when we will need rapid deployment, the Crusader would have been an enormous problem. It weighs 60 tons not fully loaded down. Add the ammo and armor and you are talking upwards of 100 tons.
When Rumsfeld cancelled the Crusader he made a good point. When he asked how many C-17's it would take to move 18 Crusaders into place, the answer was 60. It would take half the c-17 fleet to move 18 Crusaders. You want to spend $9 billion on the 100-ton gorilla?
The generals would have and it would have been a bad allocation of resources. Good thing we have a civilian in charge. Those air strikes you complained about are more accurate and can be anywhere in the world in a few hours. The Crusader cannot. And it's not like the Paladin doesn't work, so don't pretend like there is no artillery capability right now. Of course there is, it's just not as advanced as the Crusader would have been.
Now tell me again how you don't want civilian control over the military. I need another good laugh.

What do you call making the President Commander in Chief if not the founding fathers making a statement on civilian control of the military?
Running the DoD is a full-time job. In order to keep it civilian controlled we needed a SecDef. The President simply does not have enough time per day to make every decision, that's what a cabinet is for.
Civilian control of the military is an absolute necessity. Not only because military control leads to coups but because generals often under or overestimate our own capabilities or needs. If the generals were calling the shots in 1962, we would have had a nuclear exchange over Cuba. It was McNamara and Kennedy who made the final decisions, thankfully. It is Rumsfeld and Bush who make the final decisions now as well, and I am equally thankful.
Truman got it dead solid perfect when he said

I have read the Constitution, and apparently Truman has as well. I suggest you re-read it.
<img src="/~stretch/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

"It was McNamara and Kennedy who made the final decisions, thankfully."
Spoken like a true liberal <img src="/~stretch/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> Welcome to the left.

I respect Truman, he was a liberal before that word was co-opted by the socialists.
Truman, JFK, Scoop Jackson, these were what liberals used to be. People you could respect. The meaning has changed obviously. Liberal now is Jesse "rent-a-riot" Jackson and Noam "hate America first" Chomsky.
Nice to see you have no answer to that spanking you just took other than "liberal activist".
Now run away like you always do since you know you can't hang with me. I know more than you and it bothers you.
<img src="/~stretch/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />