Total Posts:11|Showing Posts:1-11
Jump to topic:

The 21st Century U.S. Military is a Failure

Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,070
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2015 11:42:41 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Whenever the Cold War ended, the biggest threat to the United States was gone. The United States had become the world's sole superpower, and its military was the best in the world. With a functioning nuclear arsenal and allies in NATO, U.S. leadership reasoned that there was no reason for the U.S. to be constantly prepared to fight a conventional war against another nation. At worst a weak nation (such as one of the rogue WMD states) would oppose the USA, or perhaps the U.S. would need to take part in an international coalition to do air strikes on a certain target (such as during Libya in 2011).
Instead, they figured, in the civilized 21st century the main threat to the United States would be terrorism, and groups like al-Qaeda. So, the U.S. military transitioned into a counter-insurgent force with bases scattered everywhere so that it could respond to terrorists and/or do a little bit of air strikes.
The U.S. military did, as a result, become "out of shape". We failed to sufficiently invest in IFV, tank, infantry, or cyber security, or nuclear technologies, and now it's turning to bite us in the @$$.
For instance, MBT currently used by the U.S. is the Abrams M1A2, first used in the Iraq War if I recall correctly. It's inferior to the Russian T-14, and according to some experts, the M1A3, when developed, will still be inferior to the T-14. And don't even get me started on our cybersecurity, anti-ballistic capabilities, or nuclear arsenal.
Whenever we finally invest in a technology, the resulting weapon is but a slight step up from its outdated counterpart, and still inferior to what Russia and China have. These nations may quite possibly be at war with us sometime in the next few years, and the U.S. Army is incapable of waging a successful conventional war against them.

How can we fix this?
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
lannan13
Posts: 23,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2015 12:18:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/16/2015 11:42:41 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Whenever the Cold War ended, the biggest threat to the United States was gone. The United States had become the world's sole superpower, and its military was the best in the world. With a functioning nuclear arsenal and allies in NATO, U.S. leadership reasoned that there was no reason for the U.S. to be constantly prepared to fight a conventional war against another nation. At worst a weak nation (such as one of the rogue WMD states) would oppose the USA, or perhaps the U.S. would need to take part in an international coalition to do air strikes on a certain target (such as during Libya in 2011).
Instead, they figured, in the civilized 21st century the main threat to the United States would be terrorism, and groups like al-Qaeda. So, the U.S. military transitioned into a counter-insurgent force with bases scattered everywhere so that it could respond to terrorists and/or do a little bit of air strikes.
The U.S. military did, as a result, become "out of shape". We failed to sufficiently invest in IFV, tank, infantry, or cyber security, or nuclear technologies, and now it's turning to bite us in the @$$.
For instance, MBT currently used by the U.S. is the Abrams M1A2, first used in the Iraq War if I recall correctly. It's inferior to the Russian T-14, and according to some experts, the M1A3, when developed, will still be inferior to the T-14. And don't even get me started on our cybersecurity, anti-ballistic capabilities, or nuclear arsenal.
Whenever we finally invest in a technology, the resulting weapon is but a slight step up from its outdated counterpart, and still inferior to what Russia and China have. These nations may quite possibly be at war with us sometime in the next few years, and the U.S. Army is incapable of waging a successful conventional war against them.

How can we fix this?

There's many problems to the US military. Though we're the most spread out it's our policy makers that are worsening the matter. You see we're actually digging ourselves a larger hole. This is due to the US topling of Secular Dictactors in the Middle East. After we toppled Sadaam we had no one to counter Iran and the vacuum was filled with terrorists and extremists. Col. Gadaffi did everything we wanted him to and he handed over his WMD's and we responding by topling him. Now, Lybia is a Jihadist wounderland because of it. Due to the Department of State desciding not to give 16 more guards to our embassy in Lybia, Clinton descided that we needed to pay $100,000 for an electrical car charger at our embassy in Italy and that we paid for for a commedian tour of India (Make Chai Not War) and a clown car costing the Department of the State $250,000. Then in Syria we tried to Topple Assad and as a result, Obama has been training "Moderate" Rebels with ties to ISIS and Al-Qaeda and arming them. I've always been against siding with the Syrian Rebels and now that ISIS has surfaced I hate to see the day we regreat it. Even if we defeat ISIS there will still be another extremist terror group to strike the US just as ISIS filled the void left by Al-Qaeda.

As for much of the Military issue we can see that the issue is funding. The Pentagon has refused past Audits and they just simply replied that they're too big to audit. We need to audit the Pentagon to see the major issues that they're mispending on. Just like the Millions that we're sending to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, because they meet Clinton's "They're Democratic Nation" status. We can end these fundings to nations that are anti-US and then spend it on strengthening the US and Israeli forces.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-Lannan13'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

If the sky's the limit then why do we have footprints on the Moon? I'm shooting my aspirations for the stars.

"If you are going through hell, keep going." "Sir Winston Churchill

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." "Eleanor Roosevelt

Topics I want to debate. (http://tinyurl.com...)
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,100
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2015 5:42:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Russia will not go to war with us because of the sheer opposition they will have - both from the US and perhaps every single western European country.

A war with China will not happen. Their economy is too dependent on exports to the US, and we are too reliant on their exports. That's not even saying that President Xi is rather willing to resolve differences between China and the US.

Besides, China's economic strength is unsustainable, and it will probably fall apart in the coming decades. As their population decreases, their labor force will follow.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,070
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2015 6:47:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/16/2015 5:42:57 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Russia will not go to war with us because of the sheer opposition they will have - both from the US and perhaps every single western European country.

A war with China will not happen. Their economy is too dependent on exports to the US, and we are too reliant on their exports. That's not even saying that President Xi is rather willing to resolve differences between China and the US.

Besides, China's economic strength is unsustainable, and it will probably fall apart in the coming decades. As their population decreases, their labor force will follow.

I have my doubts that the Chinese population will actually shrink; even if it does, itI'll likely be hundreds of years before it shrinks to below 1 billion.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,100
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2015 6:59:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/16/2015 6:47:26 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 6/16/2015 5:42:57 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Russia will not go to war with us because of the sheer opposition they will have - both from the US and perhaps every single western European country.

A war with China will not happen. Their economy is too dependent on exports to the US, and we are too reliant on their exports. That's not even saying that President Xi is rather willing to resolve differences between China and the US.

Besides, China's economic strength is unsustainable, and it will probably fall apart in the coming decades. As their population decreases, their labor force will follow.

I have my doubts that the Chinese population will actually shrink; even if it does, itI'll likely be hundreds of years before it shrinks to below 1 billion.

They're actually projected to shrink below 1 billion within the century, and as quickly as 50 years - but probably 60-80 years.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,070
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2015 7:00:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/16/2015 6:59:21 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 6/16/2015 6:47:26 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 6/16/2015 5:42:57 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Russia will not go to war with us because of the sheer opposition they will have - both from the US and perhaps every single western European country.

A war with China will not happen. Their economy is too dependent on exports to the US, and we are too reliant on their exports. That's not even saying that President Xi is rather willing to resolve differences between China and the US.

Besides, China's economic strength is unsustainable, and it will probably fall apart in the coming decades. As their population decreases, their labor force will follow.

I have my doubts that the Chinese population will actually shrink; even if it does, itI'll likely be hundreds of years before it shrinks to below 1 billion.

They're actually projected to shrink below 1 billion within the century, and as quickly as 50 years - but probably 60-80 years.

Wait...what? Link, please.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,100
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2015 7:01:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/16/2015 7:00:05 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 6/16/2015 6:59:21 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 6/16/2015 6:47:26 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 6/16/2015 5:42:57 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Russia will not go to war with us because of the sheer opposition they will have - both from the US and perhaps every single western European country.

A war with China will not happen. Their economy is too dependent on exports to the US, and we are too reliant on their exports. That's not even saying that President Xi is rather willing to resolve differences between China and the US.

Besides, China's economic strength is unsustainable, and it will probably fall apart in the coming decades. As their population decreases, their labor force will follow.

I have my doubts that the Chinese population will actually shrink; even if it does, itI'll likely be hundreds of years before it shrinks to below 1 billion.

They're actually projected to shrink below 1 billion within the century, and as quickly as 50 years - but probably 60-80 years.

Wait...what? Link, please.

http://www.china-profile.com...
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,070
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2015 7:02:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/16/2015 7:01:13 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 6/16/2015 7:00:05 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 6/16/2015 6:59:21 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 6/16/2015 6:47:26 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 6/16/2015 5:42:57 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Russia will not go to war with us because of the sheer opposition they will have - both from the US and perhaps every single western European country.

A war with China will not happen. Their economy is too dependent on exports to the US, and we are too reliant on their exports. That's not even saying that President Xi is rather willing to resolve differences between China and the US.

Besides, China's economic strength is unsustainable, and it will probably fall apart in the coming decades. As their population decreases, their labor force will follow.

I have my doubts that the Chinese population will actually shrink; even if it does, itI'll likely be hundreds of years before it shrinks to below 1 billion.

They're actually projected to shrink below 1 billion within the century, and as quickly as 50 years - but probably 60-80 years.

Wait...what? Link, please.

http://www.china-profile.com...

Well...I suppose that not all news is bad news. Hopefully that trends holds.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,070
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2015 7:02:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/16/2015 7:01:13 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 6/16/2015 7:00:05 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 6/16/2015 6:59:21 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 6/16/2015 6:47:26 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 6/16/2015 5:42:57 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Russia will not go to war with us because of the sheer opposition they will have - both from the US and perhaps every single western European country.

A war with China will not happen. Their economy is too dependent on exports to the US, and we are too reliant on their exports. That's not even saying that President Xi is rather willing to resolve differences between China and the US.

Besides, China's economic strength is unsustainable, and it will probably fall apart in the coming decades. As their population decreases, their labor force will follow.

I have my doubts that the Chinese population will actually shrink; even if it does, itI'll likely be hundreds of years before it shrinks to below 1 billion.

They're actually projected to shrink below 1 billion within the century, and as quickly as 50 years - but probably 60-80 years.

Wait...what? Link, please.

http://www.china-profile.com...

Well...I suppose that not all news is bad news. Hopefully that trends holds.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2015 10:59:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/16/2015 12:18:25 PM, lannan13 wrote:
At 6/16/2015 11:42:41 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Whenever the Cold War ended, the biggest threat to the United States was gone. The United States had become the world's sole superpower, and its military was the best in the world. With a functioning nuclear arsenal and allies in NATO, U.S. leadership reasoned that there was no reason for the U.S. to be constantly prepared to fight a conventional war against another nation. At worst a weak nation (such as one of the rogue WMD states) would oppose the USA, or perhaps the U.S. would need to take part in an international coalition to do air strikes on a certain target (such as during Libya in 2011).
Instead, they figured, in the civilized 21st century the main threat to the United States would be terrorism, and groups like al-Qaeda. So, the U.S. military transitioned into a counter-insurgent force with bases scattered everywhere so that it could respond to terrorists and/or do a little bit of air strikes.
The U.S. military did, as a result, become "out of shape". We failed to sufficiently invest in IFV, tank, infantry, or cyber security, or nuclear technologies, and now it's turning to bite us in the @$$.
For instance, MBT currently used by the U.S. is the Abrams M1A2, first used in the Iraq War if I recall correctly. It's inferior to the Russian T-14, and according to some experts, the M1A3, when developed, will still be inferior to the T-14. And don't even get me started on our cybersecurity, anti-ballistic capabilities, or nuclear arsenal.
Whenever we finally invest in a technology, the resulting weapon is but a slight step up from its outdated counterpart, and still inferior to what Russia and China have. These nations may quite possibly be at war with us sometime in the next few years, and the U.S. Army is incapable of waging a successful conventional war against them.

How can we fix this?

There's many problems to the US military. Though we're the most spread out it's our policy makers that are worsening the matter. You see we're actually digging ourselves a larger hole. This is due to the US topling of Secular Dictactors in the Middle East. After we toppled Sadaam we had no one to counter Iran and the vacuum was filled with terrorists and extremists. Col. Gadaffi did everything we wanted him to and he handed over his WMD's and we responding by topling him. Now, Lybia is a Jihadist wounderland because of it. Due to the Department of State desciding not to give 16 more guards to our embassy in Lybia, Clinton descided that we needed to pay $100,000 for an electrical car charger at our embassy in Italy and that we paid for for a commedian tour of India (Make Chai Not War) and a clown car costing the Department of the State $250,000. Then in Syria we tried to Topple Assad and as a result, Obama has been training "Moderate" Rebels with ties to ISIS and Al-Qaeda and arming them. I've always been against siding with the Syrian Rebels and now that ISIS has surfaced I hate to see the day we regreat it. Even if we defeat ISIS there will still be another extremist terror group to strike the US just as ISIS filled the void left by Al-Qaeda.

As for much of the Military issue we can see that the issue is funding. The Pentagon has refused past Audits and they just simply replied that they're too big to audit. We need to audit the Pentagon to see the major issues that they're mispending on

That's such a straightforward idea that is yet so potent.

Just like the Millions that we're sending to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, because they meet Clinton's "They're Democratic Nation" status. We can end these fundings to nations that are anti-US and then spend it on strengthening the US and Israeli forces.

We need to lay out what our foreign policy objectives and priorities are in the region and for the world as a whole, because right now we are lacking in both of these regards if we are going to be completely honest. And the consequences have ranged from inept leadership in Iraq, horrific militant infighting and jihad in different areas of the Middle East, the Chinese violating our intellectual property rights, and so on.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
THEBOMB
Posts: 2,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2015 12:38:19 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Whenever we finally invest in a technology, the resulting weapon is but a slight step up from its outdated counterpart, and still inferior to what Russia and China have. These nations may quite possibly be at war with us sometime in the next few years, and the U.S. Army is incapable of waging a successful conventional war against them.

1. The PLA has an inferior military. Where the US aims for a global projection of power -- the US military reflects that -- China wants a regional projection of power -- its military reflects that. They're built for two different things so a direct comparison is like trying to compare apples to oranges. Additionally, according to General Chen Bigde of the PLA: "Through my visit over the past couple of days in the United States, I am surprised by the sophistication of the U.S. military, including its weapons and equipment and doctrines and so on, I can tell you that China does not have the capability to challenge the United States. As a matter of fact, the reconnaissance activities along China"s coast by U.S. military aircraft and vessels are seen in China as deterrents." The PLA -- as of 2011 -- admits it can't match the capabilities of the US Military. It's not even close.

2. The People's Liberation Army is in shambles at the moment; it's racked by scandal. Military leaders in many instances within China only got to power by buying promotions. The organization is corrupt. President Xi is cracking down on the military which will only add to the confusion. They have a lot of reforming to do before they come close to the standards which the US puts in place for its military officers.