If your military hadn't won a war in 72 years

[rocketray]

And you spent more on it than the next 12 countries combined....maybe as the Founders warned against  a standing army...so you like a grunt catching a $70  can of Coke at the PX in Afghanistan....after 18 years of our longest conflict....all war are bankers wars..Smedley Butler

[scooperhsd]

Ray -  there are other factors playing here.

Our military has no equal, in any branch and any type of operation you could think of. Operationally, planning, no problem.

However, to effectively USE a military takes political insight and determination and a few other traits that we as a nation (and especially not our political leadership) are not good at. It's the POLITICIANS job to define the goals and supply the resources to the military to accomplish the job and its the POLITICIANS job to back the military doing that job .

There have been some President's who did understand this - both Bush's, Ford, Reagan. Obama did not have this ingrained into his bones, although he at least intelectually understood it.

[Robert]

And you spent more on it than the next 12 countries combined....maybe as the Founders warned against  a standing army...so you like a grunt catching a $70  can of Coke at the PX in Afghanistan....after 18 years of our longest conflict....all war are bankers wars..Smedley Butler

Yep men should not die and we should not be spending money on an action.

[rocketray]

yes...the factor playing against our standing Army our Forefathers warned against is the military industrial complex Eisenhower warned against...and who owns that?? the same bankers that own the Fed and everything else..

[Savago]

Eisenhower warned the American public about it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY

[Willow]

Before we too far down this discussion perhaps the accuser should define what it means for one's armed forces to "win" and then give a few examples of countries that have experienced a win in the past 72 years.   

[Serk]

If you wanna get technical about it, we haven't HAD a war since 1942, since that was the last time Congress formally declared war.

[Rams]

If you wanna get technical about it, we haven't HAD a war since 1942, since that was the last time Congress formally declared war.

Technically, correct.

Seems a little misplaced blamed to me though.   A lack of political commitment gets the military blamed?       

Give our military permission to win and watch what happens..............

Rams

[Bighead]

Too many spineless bastards in power for that.

[old2soon]

Too many spineless bastards in power for that.

                   I served under a spineless yellow bellied poser. The potus at the time I served. My service dates are in my avatar. RIDE SAFE.

[Robert]

Because of the current POTUS policy we can say this



BAGHDAD — Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi of Iraq declared victory over the Islamic State on Saturday, announcing the end of more than three years of battles to regain control over nearly one-third of the country that had been under the terrorist group’s dominion.

[solo1]

I disagree. Quote    
If your military hadn't won a war in 72 years

The "Forgotten War" Korea, was won in that South Korea was not taken over by North Korea and China.

Yeah, you can point out that it was a United Nations action but the US had the most troops and support engaged. You can also point out that a Truce was signed but technically we are still at war.  However, the results show that South Korea is now thriving with a vast economy. North Korea is not, due to a dictatorship.

Our founders made the president the commander-in-chief.  The Korea War, IMO, was handled well by Eisenhower and Truman.  Truman fired MacArthur because of what MacArthur wanted to do and the results are still debated.   However the results worked out (back then).

The Vietnam War was a perfect example of a POTUS who had no clue and a staff who had a huge ego. Micromanaging a war by civilians 8,000 miles way, doesn't work very well.

Now if you want to throw industrialists into a complicated mix, then it gets even more complicated.  However, for the most part, the Armed Services,with good officers, can't be blamed for not winning.

[G-Man]

Let's ALSO not forget........

Without the strength of the U.S.:

China would own all of Southeast Asia and Australia
Russia would own all of Europe
Islam would own all of North Africa, if not all of Africa and Israel would be history.

And in this hemisphere, let's see who do we protect,..... ALL OF IT.

[Gavin_Sons]

I vote to put all the military haters on the front lines. Bet they wish we would have spent that extra 500 million on new and better weapons. I also vote to take care of our veterans instead of all these illegal immigrants. It make me sick to think we take better care of a worthless illegal instead of someone who fought for this country.

[old2soon]

I vote to put all the military haters on the front lines. Bet they wish we would have spent that extra 500 million on new and better weapons. I also vote to take care of our veterans instead of all these illegal immigrants. It make me sick to think we take better care of a worthless illegal instead of someone who fought for this country.

                    Yet AGAIN my friend ya duz make sense. I atated my piece BUT I will ad this-last potus cursed near killed Our Military. You do remember he riffed all the Warriors in the lead positions. RIDE SAFE.

[rocketray]

good points all...my point is if we just defended our own borders we would be many trillions less in debt and a lot of young men would have had full loving lives and maybe the world would be a safer place w/o our foreign involvement which frequently leads to us stealing another countries resources..of course my son is in the Army and the headlines bother me

[Raider]

And you spent more on it than the next 12 countries combined....maybe as the Founders warned against  a standing army...so you like a grunt catching a $70  can of Coke at the PX in Afghanistan....after 18 years of our longest conflict....all war are bankers wars..Smedley Butler

Fell hook, line, and sinker for the liberal talking points.  Congrats.  If you're interested in learning, start by making the comparison based on percentage of GDP.  You'll see a drastically different picture.

Next, look at the percentage of GDP over time.  You'll see that our adversaries are rapidly increasing while we have been decreasing.

Next, consider how much more things cost in our economy compared to say, Russia.  We are concerned that our military uses ordnance that functions properly while some other countries are willing to accept failure rates that may even cost training deaths if they save money (again, think Russia).  This means that even when they do spend less, they get more for it.  Thank your unions for driving up the cost of production.

Finally, consider that the militart is an extension of foreign policy; an arm of politics.  The military can "win" every engagement and still fail to "win" a war when the politicians lack clear objectives and fortitude to enable the military.

[Willow]

... which frequently leads to us stealing another countries resources...

What an ignorant thing to say.  I'd ask for just one example but I have no respect for your ability to do so with integrity.  (Country's, by the way.)