Thread: Stop Believing US Military Invasions Have Noble Intentions

Originally Posted by havnfun

PH, if i'm wrong tell me, that the US taxpayer pays the service men and women that are stationed OS

True

Originally Posted by havnfun

It would make no difference if they are OS or at home,(no need to retire anyone)

They get paid more for being stationed overseas and even more for being in a combat zone. Point is, though, that they don't need that number.

Originally Posted by havnfun

might even make a strong emergency response force in cases like Ida and flooding and tornadoes.

National Guard is already there.

Point is, the money wasted on so many of them overseas forces, and the corrupt military contractors, and the wads of banknotes paid to prop up corrupt regimes, or be left on the tarmac because the plane cannot carry any more, could be sooooo much better spent on so many things in your own poor country. Things that actually benefit people.

Originally Posted by panama hat

They get paid more for being stationed overseas and even more for being in a combat zone. Point is, though, that they don't need that number.

Now you are getting my drift, It would be cheaper to have them all and even more of them stationed at home.

Originally Posted by panama hat

National Guard is already there.

National guardsman are taken off their jobs to be deployed, it would make more sense to have a ready to go military to assist.

I rather think that if we looked upon our "Defence Forces" as being primarily that, it would be a much better World for it.

Originally Posted by panama hat

There are roughly 170.000 Americans stationed outside the US.

Imagine being that thick . . . it's almost chico-esque

While some say 200,000, and perhaps they did not count all who belong to them - and the civil contractors...
and the "clerks" at home who care for them, (and the "agents")...

Despite Vow to End ‘Endless Wars,’ Here’s Where About 200,000 Troops Remain
Under President Trump, there are now more troops in the Middle East than when he took office, and he has continued the mission for tens of thousands of others far from the wars of 9/11.
Despite Vow to End ‘Endless Wars,’ Here’s Where About 200,000 Troops Remain - The New York Times

(when during Vietnam were there at one time some 500,000...)

Answer to all the problems was laid out in 1961.

Originally Posted by havnfun

Now you are getting my drift, It would be cheaper to have them all and even more of them stationed at home.

Nope, they would be decommissioned. Yes, it would be cheaper. No, they wouldn't have a job.

Originally Posted by Klondyke

While some say 200,000, and perhaps they did not count all who belong to them - and the civil contractors...
and the "clerks" at home who care for them, (and the "agents")...

Yes, good point as they also get paid by the government . . . but the 'clerks' work at home, so they might keep their jobs.


(That's twice I've agreed and supported your point - enough)

Originally Posted by panama hat

Yes, good point as they also get paid by the government . . . but the 'clerks' work at home, so they might keep their jobs.

And what the "clerks" at home will work, when no soldiers? (what to do with Pentagon? - perhaps hostel for homeless?)

If you're looking at corrupt military contractors and utterly superflous O/S forces, it would be much cheaper if they were on the dole anyway.

Originally Posted by panama hat

Nope, they would be decommissioned. Yes, it would be cheaper. No, they wouldn't have a job.

Maybe they could "learn to code" or make solar panels.

Originally Posted by havnfun

Maybe they could "learn to code" or make solar panels.

They're called 'Grunts' for a reason (a group of them)

Originally Posted by Klondyke

And what the "clerks" at home will work, when no soldiers? (what to do with Pentagon? - perhaps hostel for homeless?)

They're skilled in other things and can be used elsewhere - use your imagination.

Originally Posted by havnfun

Answer to all the problems was laid out in 1961.

Do not refer to one of my personal heroes to push your cancerous views. Eisenhower would find you and your orange god reprehensible to say the least.

Hit a nerve did I?

Originally Posted by panama hat

And added to a moron's view of history we have a moron's view of the EU and NATO


You do realise who wants the troops stationed there more . . . yes, it's the US.




Trying to make sense of this but there isn't any to be made. What do you think the US will do with the 100s of thousands of troops back on home soil? Decommission. Great, 100s of thousands of trained killers roaming the streets unemployed. Good thinking.

Originally Posted by panama hat

They're skilled in other things and can be used elsewhere - use your imagination.

Good, good, so why their skill is not made use of? (I doubt that they made use of their skill when retiring in Thailand)...

Had no idea we had so many military experts right here behind the teak doors.
Sort it guys.

Originally Posted by panama hat

Grunt

Ground Replacement Untrained

I can not believe that the one thing I felt everyone would agree with is reducing the USA footprint OS by withdrawing all of the troops and equipment. I have a suspicion that maybe because Klon and Havn like the idea, your Trump derangement syndrome has kicked in,. Just can't agree with anything that someone who may agree with some of Trumps policy's supports.

Nice work Mr. President

Aerospace & Defense

"Planes, guns, night-vision goggles: The Taliban's new U.S.-made war chest

"WASHINGTON, Aug 19 (Reuters) - About a month ago, Afghanistan's ministry of defense posted on social media photographs of seven brand new helicopters arriving in Kabul delivered by the United States."They'll continue to see a steady drumbeat of that kind of support, going forward," U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin told reporters a few days later at the Pentagon.
In a matter of weeks, however, the Taliban had seized most of the country, as well as any weapons and equipment left behind by fleeing Afghan forces.
loading

Video showed the advancing insurgents inspecting long lines of vehicles and opening crates of new firearms, communications gear and even military drones.
"Everything that hasn't been destroyed is the Taliban's now," one U.S. official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told Reuters.
Current and former U.S. officials say there is concern those weapons could be used to kill civilians, be seized by other militant groups such as Islamic State to attack U.S.-interests in the region, or even potentially be handed over to adversaries including China and Russia.
(For a graphic on the airport chaos at Kabul, click here: Chaos at Kabul airport)




President Joe Biden's administration is so concerned about the weapons that it is considering a number of options to pursue.
The officials said launching airstrikes against the larger equipment, such as helicopters, has not been ruled out, but there is concern that would antagonize the Taliban at a time the United States' main goal is evacuating people.
loading

Another official said that while there are no definitive numbers yet, the current intelligence assessment was that the Taliban are believed to control more than 2,000 armored vehicles, including U.S. Humvees, and up to 40 aircraft potentially including UH-60 Black Hawks, scout attack helicopters, and ScanEagle military drones.




"We have already seen Taliban fighters armed with U.S.-made weapons they seized from the Afghan forces. This poses a significant threat to the United States and our allies," Representative Michael McCaul, the top Republican on the U.S. House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee, told Reuters in an email.
'MORE LIKE TROPHIES'
The speed with which the Taliban swept across Afghanistan is reminiscent of Islamic State militants taking weapons from U.S.-supplied Iraqi forces who offered little resistance in 2014.
Between 2002 and 2017, the United States gave the Afghan military an estimated $28 billion in weaponry, including guns, rockets, night-vision goggles and even small drones for intelligence gathering.




But aircraft like the Blackhawk helicopters have been the most visible sign of U.S. military assistance, and were supposed to be the Afghan military' biggest advantage over the Taliban.
Between 2003 and 2016 the United States provided Afghan forces with 208 aircraft, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO).
In the last week, many of those aircraft were most useful for Afghan pilots to escape the Taliban.
One of the U.S. officials said that between 40 and 50 aircraft had been flown to Uzbekistan by Afghan pilots seeking refuge. Even before taking power in Kabul over the weekend, the Taliban had started a campaign of assassinating pilots.




Some planes were in the United States for maintenance and will stay. Those en route to Afghan forces will instead be used by the U.S. military to help in the evacuation from Kabul.
Current and former officials say that while they are concerned about the Taliban having access to the helicopters, the aircraft require frequent maintenance and many are complicated to fly without extensive training.
"Ironically, the fact that our equipment breaks down so often is a life-saver here," a third official said.
Retired U.S. Army General Joseph Votel, who oversaw U.S. military operations in Afghanistan as head of U.S. Central Command from 2016 to 2019, said most of the high-end hardware captured by the Taliban, including the aircraft, was not equipped with sensitive U.S. technology.




"In some cases, some of these will be more like trophies," Votel said.
FIGHTING AT NIGHT
There is a more immediate concern about some of the easier- to-use weapons and equipment, such as night-vision goggles.
Since 2003 the United States has provided Afghan forces with at least 600,000 infantry weapons including M16 assault rifles, 162,000 pieces of communication equipment, and 16,000 night-vision goggle devices.




"The ability to operate at night is a real game-changer," one congressional aide told Reuters.
Votel and others said smalls arms seized by the insurgents such as machine guns, mortars, as well as artillery pieces including howitzers, could give the Taliban an advantage against any resistance that could surface in historic anti-Taliban strongholds such as the Panjshir Valley northeast of Kabul.
U.S. officials said the expectation was that most of the weapons would be used by the Taliban themselves, but it was far too early to tell what they planned to do - including possibly sharing the equipment with rival states such as China.
Andrew Small, a Chinese foreign policy expert at the German Marshall Fund of the United States, said the Taliban was likely to grant Beijing access to any U.S. weapons they may now have control over.




One of the U.S. officials said it was not likely China would gain much, because Beijing likely already has access to the weapons and equipment.
The situation, experts say, shows the United States needs a better way to monitor equipment it gives to allies. It could have done much more to ensure those supplies to Afghan forces were closely monitored and inventoried, said Justine Fleischner of UK-based Conflict Armament Research.
"But the time has passed for these efforts to have any impact in Afghanistan," Fleischner said.
Reporting by Idrees Ali, Patricia Zengerle and Jonathan Landay; Additional reporting by Michael Martina; Editing by Mary Milliken and Daniel Wallis

Originally Posted by havnfun

Just can't agree with anything that someone who may agree with some of Trumps policy's supports.

Trump was the worst president that America ever had. He did more damage in 4 years than any other president, with the end result being an insurrection against a government body (congress) something that never happened in America's entire history. If the founding fathers were alive, they would have had your orange god swinging from an oak tree on the White House lawn.

You know nothing about American history at all, and you continue to make comments about things you do not understand and seemingly can not comprehend. Do yourself a favor and bugger out of attempting to conversate on topics that are over your head.

Originally Posted by sabang

Point is, the money wasted on so many of them overseas forces, and the corrupt military contractors, and the wads of banknotes paid to prop up corrupt regimes, or be left on the tarmac because the plane cannot carry any more, could be sooooo much better spent on so many things in your own poor country. Things that actually benefit people.

That's quite near what I think . And getting our people out from there. is a priority then prolly air superiority amd drones

^^^ Well here's hoping that they can make use of them to eliminate Isis filth in Afghanistan. Some cold comfort.
Not sure you know, but there were actually more Taliban fighters killed in them blasts than US military.

Originally Posted by DC101

Hit a nerve did I?

Well, you have no brains, so . . .

Originally Posted by Norton

Ground Replacement Untrained

Grunt fairly well describes it.

Originally Posted by Klondyke

Good, good, so why their skill is not made use of?

It is . . . are you drunk or simply too stupid to follow a train of thought/discussion?

Originally Posted by bsnub

Quote Originally Posted by havnfun View Post
Answer to all the problems was laid out in 1961.
Do not refer to one of my personal heroes to push your cancerous views. Eisenhower would find you and your orange god reprehensible to say the least.

Originally Posted by bsnub

Quote Originally Posted by havnfun View Post
Just can't agree with anything that someone who may agree with some of Trumps policy's supports.
Trump was the worst president that America ever had. He did more damage in 4 years than any other president, with the end result being an insurrection against a government body (congress) something that never happened in America's entire history. If the founding fathers were alive, they would have had your orange god swinging from an oak tree on the White House lawn.

You know nothing about American history at all, and you continue to make comments about things you do not understand and seemingly can not comprehend. Do yourself a favor and bugger out of attempting to conversate on topics that are over your head.

I did start a thread specifically for you haters to attack on, instead of ruining other members threads. It's called Havnfun and the Mutt Pack.

^When the UK will get another such a decent man who would dare to call the things by their right names?