BBE/IE: Greg Corombos

[BlameThe1st]

OBAMA AIMING FOR 'UNILATERAL DISARMAMENT'

Apparently, according to World Net Daily, spending $522 billion a year on "defense," which is more than three times as much as Russia and China put together, is "unilateral disarmament":

The Obama administration is proposing the biggest cuts to the military in generations, citing an end to the war in Afghanistan and the impact of sequestration, but critics allege the president and Pentagon officials are engaging in a deliberate and dangerous hollowing out of the U.S. Armed Forces.

Retired U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney also said the cuts will further erode already poor military readiness and signal the world that the U.S. will be in no position to defend national security threats on the scale it has in years past...

"There's no question that this administration has us on a path of unilateral disarmament," McInerney said. "[Let's] not confuse ourselves. He's got us on a path of disarmament...

"This was the administration's plan all along," he said. "They're the ones that came up with sequestration. Everybody on the Hill thought people are reasonable and won't let this happen. The fact is, it was (Senate Majority Leader) Harry Reid's intent to let it happen. It was clear the Democratic Party was not going to negotiate with the Republicans. So they drove it into sequestration, and they are very happy about sequestration. That's why the Defense budget is taking the bulk of the cuts.

Remind me again why Republicans are for limited government and fiscal responsibility?

[Dallas Wildman]

Really, what do you expect from the fine reporters at Daily Nut World?

[Ibrahim90]

OBAMA AIMING FOR 'UNILATERAL DISARMAMENT'

Apparently, according to World Net Daily, spending $522 billion a year on "defense," which is more than three times as much as Russia and China put together, is "unilateral disarmament":

Remind me again why Republicans are for limited government and fiscal responsibility?

well, when a bolt costs 20 million....

OK, seriously, if this is too little for the military, tough shit. their problem, not the people.

[Lord T Hawkeye]

I love when they go on about how it's putting the US at risk.

At risk from what?  Friendly neighbours to the north and south and over 1000 miles of ocean to the east and west.  Have these people not looked at a map?

[MrBogosity]

I love when they go on about how it's putting the US at risk.

At risk from what?  Friendly neighbours to the north and south and over 1000 miles of ocean to the east and west.  Have these people not looked at a map?

Bu-bu-but, Sarah Palin can see Russia from her back porch!

[evensgrey]

Bu-bu-but, Sarah Palin can see Russia from her back porch!

Never mind how Russia's most elite troops were easily munched by the local organized crime groups down in the Caucasus.  And little details like other soldiers were trying to get transferred to the units getting munched in that fighting because those were the units reliably getting paid and fed.

[Ibrahim90]

Never mind how Russia's most elite troops were easily munched by the local organized crime groups down in the Caucasus.  And little details like other soldiers were trying to get transferred to the units getting munched in that fighting because those were the units reliably getting paid and fed.

the story of the Russian armed forces....

[evensgrey]

the story of the Russian armed forces....

And theses same guys, some of whom are forced to sell their arms and ammunition to get money to buy FOOD because they get neither paid nor fed as part of the COMPULSORY military service, are the ones who are supposed to guard one of the larger stockpiles of nuclear weapons in the world.  (Never mind this is a country which, due to how completely fucked up the incentives were in the USSR, has no real idea how much weapons grade plutonium it actually HAS...)