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

This thread is still going, STOP!!! LOL

Since you want to get personal on this, let's cover it.
First, I really don't think you even bothered to objectively read my latest post. I covered why a civilian shouldn't be on the top of that heirarchy. The main point of the subject was that there is inefficiency with having a civilian, who doesn't have first hand experience, at the top of that heirarchy. That worked back in when the founding fathers set it up that way because the military hadn't become more complex and technical than one entity could track, let alone having a non-specialized and inexperienced entity in that role. One thing you always have to remember is that the president controls the military but the congress controls the budget the president and the military gets. So your argument about there being no check in the system in the long run is fruitless. No money = no military. You would know some of this had you served, but you are some loud mouth candy ass looking to try and run your mouth regarding shit you have no idea about.
As far as the Crusader vs. the Paladin, let's cover that too. In 1998 there was talk of needing a long range non line-of-sight (NLOS) "Objective Force." The crusader is a 155MM Howitzer firing High Explosive (HEX) self propelled rounds over 40km delivering a maximum 10 rount payload of 15t of Armor Piercing High Explosive (APHEX) detonation at the point of impact per minute. Capabilities the the Paladin doesn't have. This unit can be resupplied under armor on the move with only a 3 man crew. Also, capabilities that the Paladin doesn't have. It also has a top speed of about 48MPH.
Versus the Paladin. Same 155MM Howitzer. Rate of Fire is 4 rounds per minute and 5.7t of HEX detonation at the point of impact. It has a top speed of 35MPH.
You can see the Crusader is a marked improvement coupled with new NLOS targetting capabilities the crusader is THE heavy artillary piece to have on the battlefield.
You make a good point in regards to the weight difference 32 tons (Paladin) versus 54 tons (Crusader). What you forgot was the the crusader is twice as armored, is faster, and can deliver over 3 times the detonation at the point of impact. Cost effective for design and production, probably not but I would feel much safer on the battlefield knowing the tools needed for certain jobs were available should they be needed.
As far as deployment, you don't need to deploy them fully loaded, they can load on the move using the added resupply vehicles. In short, you need fewer Crusaders deployed (Each crusader = 3 Paladins) and they can do one critical thing the Paladin cannot, load from resupply vehicles on the move. How's that for rapid deployment. Put those 3 Paladins on the same transport and you end up with 96 Tons versus the 54 tons of the 1 crusader.
As far as the generals, if they thought it was worth the cost and could prove to the sitting president they needed the thing, sure let them have it. As far as having a civilian make the decisions no, never run a man down until you have walked a few miles in his shoes. which means basically, since civies basically have no experience with the kinds of decision processes the military uses, they should never have a civilian presiding over them.
I still say the secretarty of defense should be prior military either way you slice it. Then at least he/she would understand shit.
As far as the argument, it is over as of right now. Now STFU and find a friend or some shit.

I already said the Crusader was an improvement over the Paladin but that it was not a good allocation of resources since the battlefield is changing.
Work on your reading comprehension.
As for SecDef's needing prior experience dealing with how the DoD works, many civilians do have that experience. Many SecDef's do have prior military experience including Rumsfeld. He was a Navy pilot. But it is not necessary. A congressman who has been on the Armed Services Committee or the National Security and Military Committee qualifies.
The military should always be under civilian control. Truman had it right, you have it wrong.

What do I care what Republicans believe in, I am not registered for either party.
I didn't say FDR, I said Truman. FDR certainly did implement many socialist programs in order to create jobs. Why do you think I didn't mention him? I didn't mention LBJ either, take a guess why.
A big "duh" for you on that one.
Yes, the socialists have co-opted the word liberal in America. Who do you think organizes those protests you "liberals" attend? The Workers World Party, International ANSWER, etc. Socialists, you idiot.

Maybe now you can see why you are nothing but a partisan, party-following sheep.
Stop being a lemming and vote for whoever you think is right, no matter the party.

They talked about this indepth on the Tony Snow talk radio program today. You think Rums knew the situation over there before it hit all the main stream media? Answer is no, im sure his advisers told him oh Don no everythings fine over there were getting lots more armor over there for them boys. Doubt he knows the whole story until recently and atcually they are working round the clock to beef up the armor up there.

True, he was too busy to sign condolence letters to the families of dead soldiers, so he was porbably too busy to follow up on little things like that.
In all seriousness, it's a shitty position to be in, cutting taxes (income) and increasing spending (expenses) is a tough act to continue indefinitely. When you or I do that, it is not called "running a deficit" it's called "going broke".
The public wants the troops to be wearing cyber-power 9000 suits which are impervious to direct RPG hits and cost $23 million apiece, but they don't want to pay a mountain of taxes to cover it. So we buy them cyber-power 7000 suits (only $18 million a piece) and put it on the national Visa card. Sooner or later you gotta pay that card. Or call Di-Tech, and get a 2nd mortgage on ..say New Mexico to pay off those bills.

you are a party-following sheep.
That's why you ran away from the argument and instead attacked me for respecting Truman and JFK which made you realize I don't fit into your Republican/Democrat party loyalty stereotype.
Now go get your talking points from the leftist blogs and come back when you have something to say.

allowed the families to be notified more quickly. So before you leftist idiots start calling him Hitler, maybe you should realize that Rumsfeld was doing what he thought was best for the families.
He was being practical, not a bleeding heart like you idiots.

you would believe it, and have it tatooed on your forehead as gospel? christs sakes you are not that gullible or stupid. If the guy said he saw the easter bunny you would believe him? I thought he had a hand cramp...no no no...he was saving ink, it was for the tax payers sake!...no no no...he only had a laser pointer for a power point presentation and no pen on him....
So how fast is that machine which signs compared to a person? I can do my signature in under 2 seconds.
Lets say he is a bit older, and it takes 7 seconds for a signature. The machine does it in 3 seconds. Time saved? 4 seconds!! I bet those 4 seconds were more important to the families than an honest signature ( a sign of respect towards the family). Not sure what the "loading time" is for the machine though.
Really if he was right to do that, then Bush was wrong not to?
Bush signs those himself, and I respect that. Call it "bleeding heart liberal" or whatever your blanket term is this week for anyone who does not agree completely with you, but I see it as a sign of disrespect.
So does Sue Neiderer who lost her son in Iraq, her statement was "Shows me how callous and unfeeling he is". Did you lose any kids over there? If not, then I'll take her word over yours, thanks, have a nice day.