President Dwight D. Eisenhower famous warnings about the growing power of the "military-industrial complex, he preaches to us from 50 years ago!
No fear, the US has enough military spending. Your hatred for Obama is a non sequitur. We spend more on defense than the next 8 largest country expenditures combined. Do you propose keeping wasteful programs such as the F22 fighter jet? Redundant bureaucracy?No fear, Obama is dismantling our military as fast as possible. Too bad we are in another World War with the Russian and Chinese jackals waiting for their move.
No fear, the US has enough military spending. Your hatred for Obama is a non sequitur. We spend more on defense than the next 8 largest country expenditures combined. Do you propose keeping wasteful programs such as the F22 fighter jet?
Then why do you bitterly criticize Omama on something you know nothing about.I know next to nothing about the F-22 or other military assets.
A stock piling “redundancy” is not the same problem as a bureaucracy redundancy. The F-22 is not a redundancy problem. Mr. Gates adamantly opposed buying more F-22s, which he says have little relevance to today's conflicts, and would rather upgrade F35s that have more relevance.I guess any inventory can be called a redundancy until you run out of them when needed.
Wheel-spinning is always a waste. Over $80 billion was spent on the world's most expensive F-22 Raptor. It has never been in combat despite the U.S. Air Force's involvement in simultaneous major combat operations.I'm also aware that the so called "military complex" employs, has employed a lot of American workers over the years and we probably have benefited a great deal because of them in other areas, like technology.
Then why do you bitterly criticize Omama on something you know nothing about.
Why are you trying to hijack thread concerning Eisenhower's warning into a "I-hate-Obama” denunciation? And now you are trying to hijack it into a stimulus denunciation. Yes, we get it. You hate Obama and can't help yourself from spewing that every chance you get.What are you talking about? If your so worried about the F-22, how about telling us what we got for the 800 billion Obama spent with the stimulus package and how many jobs that created.[/thread to a I-hate-Obama QUOTE]
I know next to nothing about the F-22 or other military assets. I guess any inventory can be called a redundancy until you run out of them when needed. I'm also aware that the so called "military complex" employs, has employed a lot of American workers over the years and we probably have benefited a great deal because of them in other areas, like technology.
No fear, the US has enough military spending. Your hatred for Obama is a non sequitur. We spend more on defense than the next 8 largest country expenditures combined. Do you propose keeping wasteful programs such as the F22 fighter jet? Redundant bureaucracy?
They have already spent over 1 Trillion dollars on the F35, and it still won't fly as planned. However, since none of the military wants the damn thing, Congress, in all of its unholy wisdom, allotted 500 Billion more to the project. Wasn't it the DOD that lost some 8.5 trillion dollars a while back, or could not account for where it went? And yet somehow it is Obama that is decimating the military.
That 1 trillion dollars is over a 55 year period. They have not "already spent that". And you are entirely right that there is waste, fraud, and abuse in the military and military bureaucracy. So, let's root it out and get rid of it.
However, not adequately accounting for 8.5 trillion since 1996 has noting to do with the comment about Obama's military force decisions.
Sorry, the F35 is not 55 years old. And they have spent over 1.5 Trillion dollars on it alone:
You haven't said if you agree with the comment, or not.
However, one point I am in slight disagreement with is the power the President has over war determinations. Properly read, the President is Commander in Chief only AFTER a declaration of war, and the calling up of the troops. (Article 2, section 2) In the world the Founders declared it was the job of Congress to make such decisions. Then too, like most everything else, the Constitution is irrelevant to either political party unless it actually addresses something they want it to address, and even then they will make something up if needed.
The F-35 project has a lifetime estimate cost of roughly $1.5 trillion. That lifetime of the program is over a 50 year period. You are claiming that the lifetime cost of a program has already been spent. It hasn't. You are simply incorrect here.
We can agree the program is going over budget and is years behind schedule at this point. But $1.5 trillion has not been spent.
The Constitution clearly gives the President the power of Commander in Chief - and the President has clear authority to engage in limited actions outside of Congressional authorization.
That said, nowhere in the Constitution will you find what a "declaration of war" must look like. I would contend that Congressional authorizations to use force, as passed by Congress, amount to a declaration of war and give the President clear authority to conduct that war.
That said, in terms of budgeting for the military. The military is essentially a bureaucratic organization, same as other governmental agencies. There are clear political fights over budgeting for these agencies and budgeting for the military often is subject to political pressures. The President has a lot of sway in the political fight over the budget of the military, and there are some programs I think the President cut that are detrimental to our national security. There are others that he has improved on. It is all a political tug of war.
OK, so we can now see you do not read articles on a subject when presented.
Now we can see you have never read the Constitution. Article 1, section 8, clauses 11-16 grants Congress, and ONLY Congress, the authority to declare war, and arm the military. NOT the President. Article 2, section 2, clause 1, clearly declares that the President shall be CIC AFTER the military has been military "called into the actual service of the United States". No where in the Constitution does it say that the President has the power to declare war, or to finance a war, or to even call the military into action. Remember now, we are speaking of the Constitution, not the extra-Constitutional powers of the war Powers Act.
Notice that you are saying "Congressional authorization".
No, it is just political hype since the programs Obama cut were under the BRAC program of 2005 which he requested a new committee to look into, and the Sequester the GOP authorized which Obama is now seeking to get rid of.