Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Can liberals be blamed for America's military?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
onebigbadwulf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-03 06:11 AM
Original message
Can liberals be blamed for America's military?
Can liberals be blamed for america's 'deteriorated' military when it was Republican Powell who was secretary of defense for those 8 years of unprecedented peace and prosperity?

And can liberals be blamed for america's 'deteriorated' military when it is Republican Rummy Rum who is trying to close 100 of our 425 military bases?

http://www.bayarea.com/mld/cctimes/news/7009359.htm

...interesting hypocrisy isnt it?

I guess to Rumsfield, support the troops means close their bases. Go figure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-03 06:13 AM
Response to Original message
1. it was Reagen and Bush 1 that slashed the Military
Edited on Thu Oct-16-03 06:14 AM by ElsewheresDaughter
to give the wealthy their "voodoo" tax cuts back then....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DealsGapRider Donating Member (650 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-03 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #1
14. Um, not really.
Whatever we think of Reagan, I think we can agree that he dramatically increased defense spending.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
La_Serpiente Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-03 06:13 AM
Response to Original message
2. Wasn't Cohen the Secretary of Defense?
I thought he was the chairman on the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-03 07:03 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. William J. Perry was Clinton's first Sec of Defense followed by Cohen...
...in 1996.

Here's a list of previous Chairman of the JCS:

UNDER CLINTON:
GEN Colin L. Powell, USA 01 Oct 89 30 Sep 93
ADM David E. Jeremiah, USN (acting) 01 Oct 93 24 Oct 93
GEN John M. Shalikashvili, USA 25 Oct 93 30 Sep 97

UNDER CLINTON and DUBYA:
GEN Henry H. Shelton, USA 1 Oct 97 30 Sep 2001

UNDER DUBYA:
GEN Richard B. Myers, USAF 1 October 2001 present
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Silverhair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-03 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. You are mistaken. Les Aspin was.
Here is the official biography of his tenure as SecDef:

http://www.defenselink.mil/specials/secdef_histories/bios/aspin.htm

Plus most of us who weren't too young can remember Les Aspin being SecDef and his decision not to allow U.S. Soldier to have tanks in Somolia because he didn't want to appear provocative. The result was the incidence seen in the movie, "Blackhawk Down" in which 18 soldiers were killed, 75 wounded, and three chopters downed. Clinton denied the WH had been involved in that decison and fired Les Aspin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snippy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-03 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. Don't forget that Poppy Bush promised that the troops in Somalia
would be withdrawn before Clinton took office. Once Clinton decided to proceed with withdrawing the troops it was a mistake not to do it immediately and completely. The decision not to send additional equipment was a result of that mistake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quaker bill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-03 06:22 AM
Response to Original message
3. Liberals can't be blamed for much of anything.
There has not been a working liberal majority in government since the 60's.

Yes "democrats" ran congress in name. But remember that "dixiecrats" and conservative repubs actually ruled the roost.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
youngred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-03 06:25 AM
Response to Original message
4. Not likely
Not with Bush pushing for extended tours and cutting of combat pay, on top of making wounded soldiers pay for their food in the hospital, and have their family members have to ship them new uniforms because the army won't provide. This is ridiculous. Didn't Bush promise to raise pay for soldiers? Didn't he promise to undo the 'damage' Clinton did to the military.

This man is a hypocritical joke
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
imax2268 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-03 06:27 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. second that...
you know it's bad when families of soldiers have to buy and send body armor to their sons when the Pentagon won't...

This administration needs to be ousted and then held accountable for war crimes...just my honest opinion...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izzie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-03 06:43 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Where is 'submariner' when we need him
GOP never never were for the troops but for the tanks and planes, They are for capital and what the profits are.I was marrige to a sailor and we knew the GOP would give us nothing but w e may get a little more things with the Dem. Do you recall that the old GOP were for smaller gov. and that was the base belief of that party. What we have to day is the War party. Or the Flag party?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sweetheart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-03 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #5
15. war crimes for bush and his cronys
absolutely. Those felons should not see daylight without being dressed in dayglow orange with bracelets for the rest of their natural lives... however short that is... once those prison paedophiles get a whiff of those giant assholes, they will probably be so busy bearing children in thier behinds that nobody will remember they once used to commit more heinous crimes than housing pregnant turds in their bums.... sure, male prison rape is no laughing matter... and i'm not laughing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Superfly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-03 07:03 AM
Response to Original message
8. Ummmm...you better check your facts
Powell has never been the SecDef.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Devils Advocate NZ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-03 07:18 AM
Response to Original message
9. What deterioration?
I sure don't see a deteriorated US military!

Sure there are shortages at the front in Iraq, but that is NOT a problem related to funding, but a problem related to privatisation. The US military budget is bigger than it's ever been, and thus should be easily able to cope, but what is REALLY going on is that the privatisation of military logisitics has turned into a monumental failure.

These private companies were more than willing to take the money for peacetime work, but when a war rolled around the majority of the civillian employees refused to enter the war zone (lack of insurance being a major reason) and thus the military has struggled to to provide the bare minimum needed for the campaign.

We know who we have to thank for the privatisation of military logistics, and he certainly isn't liberal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-03 07:23 AM
Response to Original message
10. I'll take that blame, thanks
There's an old saying that a President fights wars with the last President's army. Nice work, Bill. World-class fighting force.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brian Sweat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-03 09:24 AM
Response to Original message
11. Even if Colin Powell had been Clinton's Sec. of Defense,
Edited on Thu Oct-16-03 09:26 AM by Brian Sweat
which he was not, the Sec. of Defense does not make the ultimate policy decisions on how much money the military receives or what weapons systems will be developed. Congress and the president make these decisions. The Sec. of Defense only advises them.

However, most of the base closings and troop reductions implemented under Clinton were planned during Poppy administration. Clinton actually increased defense spending.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-03 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Actually the base closings were so controversial that a bipartison
committee was established to make all base closing decisions and NO ONE could counter what they proposed. It came from neither a Republican or Democratic Administration. Base closings can not be blamed on the Republicans or the Democrats if one is honest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC