Has Klinton destroyed the strategic capabilities of US military?

I

Ivan8883

New member
Has Our Leader, in 7 years, basically eliminated the strategic capabilities(nuclear strike forces) of the Us combined force? Stats have proven he has cut conventional divisions to 10 from 20 and 2 of the 10 are unfit according to US Army. But it is strategic or nuclear forces that the stats show the biggest decline. The Navy is cut in half and attack ships have crew shortages including pilots. The B-52 's no longer patrol in the air ,ready to strike. Our rocket land based forces have been cut drastically. Major shortages of pilots in Air force and navy. Nuclear cruise missiles seem to have disappeared form the inventory. Our Leader refused to build a anti missile system. Russia, with her powerful sub fleet bracketing both oceans and her big edge in total missiles and manuverable land based missile, has a official alliance with China. Both ,in public statements, are worried about Us hegemony and Us attacks on many nations under Our Leader's regime. Both nations are coperating in many military fields. Klinton has transformed the Us military into global policemen in 80 nations,but has either eliminated or destroyed our strategic forces. WWIII has been prevented because we had the most powerful offensive nuclear forces ever seen. THese forces on land sea, and air seem to have disappeared for all intents and purposes. And ,here is the kicker. Our Leader haas issued a directive that our forces must tkae a first strike before any retaliation! Is it possible that the biggest mole the commies put into our system is Bill himself? If so, his job has been a tremendous success as far as his handlers in Moscow and Biejing are concerned. Short of a miracle which would include anothere Reagan in power to undo 8 years of treachery, we are behind the eight ball. I dont see anothere Reagan comming along. What do you all think? Its your military too and it dont look good. Could a "Red Dawn" be on the way and not with a happy ending?
 
I pray to God we don't have to find out the answer.
But, to answer your question....I'm afraid so.

Benedict Arnold did have an honorable and respectable record until he turned coat. William Jefferson Clinton never has.

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
 
Hmmm.....let's see if the U.S. Military were sent all over the world on "Peace Corp" missions while our defense complex was starved of funding and the proverbial excrement really did hit the blades in the form of a major conflict would that mean we might have to surrender our wealth and sovereignty to a multi-national force to survive? Naw,that couldn't happen we're America!

------------------
"When guns are outlawed;I will be an outlaw."
 
Klinton has done more damage to our military than the Japs AND Germans did to it in that little skirmish that happened between '41 and '45!
You can find out many details of Klinton's military at http://www.hackworth.com
and click on the Defending America column.
Did y'all know that in the late '60s WJ Klinton was in a London parade marching with NORTH Vietnamese soldiers?!!! Suddenly "Hanoi" Jane don't look so bad. :(

This is serious stuff folks, and this Hackworth guy is a genuine decorated war hero, who shares our feelings about the state of our defense forces.


------------------
Happiness is a tight group!
 
Outlaw,
That's not slicks fault, jane has always had a better ass.

We can only hope that are next "chauffeur to hell" will arm us back up before WWIII, but if not I guess we can always open pandora's box and let fly the chemical and biological stuff.

Worst case all of us have to defend a land invasion, we'll use the liberals to sight in on. Who says a CHI-COM invasion would be all bad?

Keep buying gear were gonna need it.
 
Maybe not destroyed, but he has weakened it to the point where it will fail if used.

------------------
CCW for Ohio action site.
http://www.ofcc.net
Do what you C.A.N.
http://thematrix.acmecity.com/digital/237/can.html
 
Ivan,

I suggest you review the language of the Public Laws regarding Defense spending that were enacted in the years before Clinton was elected. If you are persistent in your research, you'll find that Clinton only jumped on a bandwagon that was already rolling. You are guilty of giving way too much credit for original action to his administration.
 
I cant really say I told you so because I dont believe I ever mentioned it on tfl, but I'm sure I told someone, if I could only remember who! I've been worried about a Red Dawn senario happening ever since I saw the movie the first time.What I read here only makes it seem more likely. Thanks to Klinton, he has
drastically weakened the US Military and if that isn't bad enough, wants to disarm the American population as well.Klenton wants us in the position of being caught with all our
pants down , bent over & just waiting to be ~~ck~d up the ~ss. And he has damed well near
achieved it. How far is too far? When is enough ,enough? Americia lives the life of the proverbial grasshoper and winter is comming with no ant to help.

do what you C.A.N. http://thematrix.acmecity.com/digital/237/cansite/can.html
ernest2
Conn.CAN opperator
 
This is just normal US policy between wars. Every conflict we have entered in this century has found us woefully unprepared (with the exception of Desert Storm). We as a Nation have to relearn the lessons of history the hard way. Unless we can find another Ronald Reagan and get him elected we will continue to see our military degraded.

I find it interesting that the soccer moms and sheeple who put the present administration in power will see their sons and daughters pay the price in the next war.

Geoff Ross
 
Our Military is in the same condition that it was in 1939 strung out and undersupplied ready for someone to chop it up. Lets hear it for Bill!
 
In 1941, neither Germany or Japan had any thoughts or the ability to attack our homeland. Today, we would not have a chance to build up our strategic forces. Because Russia for sure, and China, probably, could hit us at a moments notice. I didnt even bring up Col. Lunev, KGB defector of a few years a go, who has testified before Congress about Russian spies who have scooped out our powwer grid facilities and nuclear facilities over the years. I think he has stated that the Soviets have weapons systems cached now in various parts of our country. I have only heard second hand that the FBI is frantically looking for thses weapons. If true we could easily guess what kind of weapons they are. And these weapons would be strategic also and just as devestating as Soviest sub attacks. Yes, MYkl, I agree that this weakening of our military started before our present Leader. But he has done the major damage and gets most of the "acalades". Staying at the best hotel in Moscow was no coincedence years ago. Communists are patient and will wait for years to get their "ducks on the pond". The fake end of the Cold war was a brilliant manuever on the part of Soviet leadership and their comrades in the western camp. Clinton in DC, Schroder in Germany, Blair in England, ands best of all, Gorbie in the Presidio, put some big ducks on the pond. The Western camp fell asleep and didnt have its "watchmen on the wall" and we could suffer a devestating defeat soon. All this is too horrible to contemplate,but it must be said.
 
I got news for youse guys: the Constitution does not provide for the federal gumt to keep standing armies. What do you think our all volunteer force is? Thass raht, unconstitutional!

We have never won a war except with troops who were drafted or enlisted after war was declared.


------------------
45 ACP: Give 'em a new navel!
 
Boxing analogy:

Red trunks feints a jab at blue trunks.

Blue trunks lets his guard down, realizing it was just a feint, after all.

Red trunks doesn't feint next time.

Blue trunks takes a right cross to the chin, down for the count.

Militarily, has the current administration done something similar? A strong army is an insurance policy. We might just be glad we had one in the future, but right now, the insurance policy has been put on the back burner. And playing peacekeepers doesn't help, either. Soldiers, in the immortal words of Rush Limbaugh, are trained to break things and kill people. Our military is distracted on too many fronts--too many flashbulbs going off and no one's focused on our military but some opportunistic nations wringing their hands and waiting. Just because the Soviet Union had fallen doesn't mean no more bullies are on the block.

[This message has been edited by Johnny Got His Gun.1 (edited December 05, 1999).]
 
Part of the current problem is that the serving senior officers are not making the tough decisions that they need to be making. Wes Clark was a pretty good example of a political soldiers who got tagged. The current Army Chief of Staff is making a good effort by getting rid of the heavy (armor/mech) divisions, but it is by no means certain that he'll succeed.

Giz

------------------
"I don't make enough money to buy cheap stuff" - Mark Manning
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top