The Hissing Butt posted:

The Hissing Butt posted:

Kyrie eleison posted:

Kyrie eleison posted:

Moridin920 posted:

take all the drones flying around pakistan blowing up maybe innocent people creating more terrorists and send them en masse at ISIS. at the very least drop munitions and arms for the Kurds (too late at this point though).

wit posted:

I'm pretty sure america's current foreign policy is "don't do stupid poo poo". That is why your pew pew shootmans fantasy isn't happening.

MegaGatts posted:

The reason is because the west likes to do nice wars. Nice wars don't really work unless you have someone to do the not nice parts of war for you. The best you can get are stalemates like Iraq under the occupation and Afghanistan. Like to win this war the west would have to round up every for sure non combatant Sunni in the region and take everything they own and dump them in a ghetto and murder the Sunnis who have any percentage chance of being sympathetic to IS. America and Europe have convinced themselves that wars can be won without systematic murder of vast sums of innocent people. I'm not saying we should murder them btw, I think we should stay the gently caress out of it. I'm just saying IF we are going into it and want to win we should be prepared to murder an entire culture worth of people.

wit posted:

I'm pretty sure america's current foreign policy is "don't do stupid poo poo".

Moridin920 posted:

it's not a pew pew shootmans fantasy. we're already loving bombing them. it's just that if we are going to do something do it right instead of half heartedly 'helping' the Kurds while ISIS rolls around doing whatever the gently caress they want. we should have more than enough air capability to help in a more substantial way and if we don't then someone has been lying through their teeth to get more sweet tax dollars.



we should stop pretending like the locals want to have anything to do with us in the places ISIS has already taken. best strategy at this point is to declare Kurdistan a legit state carved out of the parts of it in Iraq and Turkey, send in troops and supplies to help the Kurds keep ISIS out and establish their own borders, then let poo poo die down. The more we bomb and attack the more recruits ISIS gets.

Turkey would be super pissed but who really cares they are assholes. ISIS already controls large swathes of Iraq so it's not like the Iraqi government would be losing territory. The whole 'we will help the Kurds but only if they agree to be part of the Iraqi government' is idiotic.

Stop this blustering about with Iran and just let them do what they want. If we weren't threatening their asses constantly and invading poo poo all around them they probably wouldn't have such a beef with us anymore but it's like we just keep re-opening old wounds. That's why they want nukes, just to make Israel and the West leave them the gently caress alone. That's why any state wants nukes in 2014.

and gently caress Saudi Arabia too idk why the hell we're on their dicks so bad.

Moridin920 posted:

to the point that we have to cut social programs and infrastructure spending but when it comes down to it we can't beat some irregulars with soviet era technology into submission?

what is this pussyfooting around with ineffectual airstrikes send in a squadron of attack helicopters and clear kobani out, pentagon dildos. we pay you enough money for it. take all the drones flying around pakistan blowing up maybe innocent people creating more terrorists and send them en masse at ISIS. at the very least drop munitions and arms for the Kurds (too late at this point though).

what the gently caress where is my money going?

loving shithouse f35

Moridin920 posted:

the US' military expenditure accounts for over 36% of the entire world's military expenditure.

we spend as much as the next 9 countries down the list combined.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

and we have nothing to show for it

Moridin920 posted:

the fact that it is a jobs program is probably the funniest thing about it because not only is it true but a lot of conservatives will get really butthurt about it. it's the only defensible thing about the bloated budget really.

my question is why can't we restructure the jobs program into something more beneficial? there's plenty of work that needs doing that doesn't involve blowing the poo poo out of people (ineffectually). we could have probably colonized mars by now if we wanted to just piss money away at the same rate the military does.

plus there's the issue of the inefficiency in terms of job creation that the military really gives us. we could be doing so much better.

Wicker Man posted:

It always makes me poo poo myself when I hear the price tag for one or two missiles or a single load of bullets for a chopper or a jet.

Kyrie eleison posted:

Orkin Mang posted:

hahah explain the ship pls

quote:

In 2010, the Navy asked for an additional $5.3 million to correct problems found in the sea trials.[34] Galvanic corrosion caused by an aluminum hull in contact with the stainless steel propulsion system with sea water acting as an electrolyte, and electrical currents not fully isolated, caused "aggressive corrosion."[35][36] Prior to the discovery of corrosion, Austal and General Dynamics had both agreed to dissolve their relationship with each other and agree to act as competitors in March.[37] The cause of the split was due to the planned competition between Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics.[37] Prior to the split, General Dynamics was to continue maintenance on the ship after it entered service.[38] In 2011 the corrosion problem was found to be even worse than expected and repair would require time in a drydock to completely remove the water jets.[39] In response, Austal blamed the U.S. Navy for not properly maintaining the ship.[40][41] However the Navy replied that the electrical insulation had been improperly installed during construction.[42] Later Austal said it had found a fix for the problem that would be tested on the third Austal LCS ship.[43] In 2011, seven U.S. senators sent a letter to the Department of Defense questioning the management of the corrosion problems of Independence.[44] In July 2011, Navy Public Information Officer Christopher G. Johnson said that a "cathodic protection system" would be installed on the ship.[45] Such systems generally consist of strategically located deposits of "sacrificial metals" which act as an anode to reduce corrosion of the metal being protected.

Orkin Mang posted:

hahah explain the ship pls

quote:

There are technical terms for this kind of disintegration. Austal USA, Independence‘s Alabama-based builder, calls it “galvanic corrosion.” Civilian scientists know it as “electrolysis.” It’s what occurs when “two dissimilar metals, after being in electrical contact with one another, corrode at different rates,” Austal explained in a statement.

“That suggests to me the metal is completely gone, not rusted,” naval analyst Raymond Pritchett wrote of Independence‘s problem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galvanic_corrosion#Royal_Navy_and_HMS_Alarm posted:

The conclusion reported to the Admiralty in 1763, was that iron should not be allowed direct contact with copper in sea water to avoid corrosion.[5][6]

quote:

Earlier this year Army chief of staff Gen. Raymond T. Odierno told Congress that it would save taxpayers $3 billion if the Pentagon holds off repairing, refurbishing or making new M-1 Abrams tanks for three years until new technologies are developed.

There are currently more than 2,000 inactive M-1 Abrams tanks sitting at an Army depot in the California desert.

"Our tank fleet is in good shape and we don't need to [make repairs] because of the great support that we have gotten over the last two years," he told the House armed services committee.

But Congress set aside $181 million for tanks in the proposed congressional budget for next year and a bipartisan group of 173 House members sent a letter to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on April 20 that urged him to support their decision to produce more 60-plus-ton vehicles.

quote:

Despite the assurances from the Army's chief of staff, Rep. Silvestre Reyes—who has received $64,000 from General Dynamics since 2001—played the national security card, saying "we don't want to play Russian Roulette with the national security of this country."

MegaGatts posted:

The reason is because the west likes to do nice wars. Nice wars don't really work unless you have someone to do the not nice parts of war for you. The best you can get are stalemates like Iraq under the occupation and Afghanistan. Like to win this war the west would have to round up every for sure non combatant Sunni in the region and take everything they own and dump them in a ghetto and murder the Sunnis who have any percentage chance of being sympathetic to IS. America and Europe have convinced themselves that wars can be won without systematic murder of vast sums of innocent people. I'm not saying we should murder them btw, I think we should stay the gently caress out of it. I'm just saying IF we are going into it and want to win we should be prepared to murder an entire culture worth of people.

naem posted:

Presented without comment, the entirety of the movie "pentagon wars"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0rcHWN1n10&feature=youtube_gdata_player