Dr. Strangelove Reborn

[Tequila Zaire]

I guess it's fitting with the recent re-release on DVD in a brand spanking new package and restoration that nuclear weapons are back in the limelight.

Our good ex-commie bastards now known as the kinda democratic but not really Russia has a genius idea...with about a decade of dismantaling weapons freeing up serious $$$ for the weakened nation it really only makes sense to....BUILD NEW ONES!!! Better than ever! Modernized and ready to wipe out nations who look down upon em...now is this the same as our golden age nuclear standoff? Kinda...only more for show on the part of Putin's administration and his naive view that if he rebuilds the military might of Russia the world will return to the cold war view of it...maybe someone should visit with him and give him a crazy lil lesson on modern economics and teach him how to do what he's failed miserably to do so far....rebuild the russian economy.

When you're nations smartest are forced to sell stuff at garage sale like bazzare's...maybe...jsut maybe...fancy Nuclear Weapon Systems are not the focus one should spent serious $$$ on.

Expect this to make the usual media rounds and ignored cause unless these things nuke a city they are not all that fun anymore. Though I'm sure a few more immediate russian enemy states will have cause for fear...cause really if ANYONE is asking to be nuked it's them...at least in a threat capacity anyhow.

Ah...fun times...sure makes Dr. Strangelove even more current than ever...just when you think it's dated itself...BAM...the world acts stupid again.

[Nightingale]

But it isn't the first time that Putin and others have said they're going to build a new arsenal like the world has never seen before, and those other times came to nothing too. I suspect that this one will remain on the drawing board, or be mentioned again as rebuilding the might of Mother Russia when the next elections come around.

[Tequila Zaire]

But it isn't the first time that Putin and others have said they're going to build a new arsenal like the world has never seen before, and those other times came to nothing too. I suspect that this one will remain on the drawing board, or be mentioned again as rebuilding the might of Mother Russia when the next elections come around.

Maybe...maybe not...the point of it all is they spend more time with this kinda nonsense instead of rebuilding a broken nation...Friggin Russian Mob runs most of that country these days.

[OliX]

something like that T.Z. maybe new october revolution will make some progres, this time with another color instead of red maybe blue.... oreven bether, PINK...

I will more like to see Rusia as 52 state

[DharmaLion]

Actually....rebuilding the Russian military machine may be the only thing that brings the Russian economy back.

How do you create hundreds of thousands of new jobs in a very short period of time??

Build bombs.

[Nightingale]

Actually....rebuilding the Russian military machine may be the only thing that brings the Russian economy back.

How do you create hundreds of thousands of new jobs in a very short period of time??

Build bombs.

The prime example being Germany in the Thirties, but it does backfire, as history has told us and shown us time and time again.

Remember, Russia built masses of bombs and created jobs like there was no tomorrow right through until the end, and it didn't work. The Russian economy is in exactly the same condition now as it was then, except that Russia no longer prints all its own money and has to deal internationally. Far better would be to stop hounding the oil industry and get it back working efficiently. Putin's promise to supply GB with 10% of its oil needs by 2010 is one way forward, weaponry is a way back.

Watch the weapons industry over the medical / welfare standards in the US over the next ten years or so (assuming no U-turn) and you'll see increased spending on weapons and an increased percentage of the population relying on welfare to survive.

[DharmaLion]

The prime example being Germany in the Thirties, but it does backfire, as history has told us and shown us time and time again.

Remember, Russia built masses of bombs and created jobs like there was no tomorrow right through until the end, and it didn't work. The Russian economy is in exactly the same condition now as it was then, except that Russia no longer prints all its own money and has to deal internationally. Far better would be to stop hounding the oil industry and get it back working efficiently. Putin's promise to supply GB with 10% of its oil needs by 2010 is one way forward, weaponry is a way back.

Watch the weapons industry over the medical / welfare standards in the US over the next ten years or so (assuming no U-turn) and you'll see increased spending on weapons and an increased percentage of the population relying on welfare to survive.

So very true.

The impact of military spending is massive regardless of the economic system.

Does anyone (I know you CA people do) remember a few years back when all those military bases were being closed?

Over half of the bases that were slated for closing were kept open due solely to the potential negative impact those closings would have had on local economies.

[Tequila Zaire]

So very true.

The impact of military spending is massive regardless of the economic system.

Does anyone (I know you CA people do) remember a few years back when all those military bases were being closed?

Over half of the bases that were slated for closing were kept open due solely to the potential negative impact those closings would have had on local economies.

Yeah I remember that...they closed bases all over the country at that time...many had to do with either ship building or bases simply too undermanned or rarely used for what they were intended...a low number of people signing up didn't help either....since we were at "Peace" no one put money into the military much...even good ole congress. Though the military budget was high most of as usual went to the air force so they could spend billions on new weapons systems.

[Nightingale]

And the problem now is that the US army is overstretched, as is the British army. Bases in Germany are being closed by the US in order to cover the lack of recruits at home and the growing committment to overseas areas of conflict (most of which have either gotten out of hand or been grossly underestimated). In the UK the government is still talking about reducing the number of soldiers, amalgamating regiments and sending troops to new peacekeeping duties while complaining that there aren't enough soldiers signing on to cover all the duties.

Too many accountants, too many generals with children's toys and too few reality based military / politicians who can see what is really needed.

Who needs more ships and combat aircraft for peacekeeping? Soldiers on the ground, with the right equipment, are what are needed.

[Tequila Zaire]

Well the german base closing are actually part of a pulling out plan started last year or so...the idea is to move them to more friendly areas like Poland...which happens to be a much more strategic area that the U.S. has wanted for years. I'm sure however the main base in that nation will remain open until the german people protest enough that the U.S. pulls out fully. Something many would like to see to be honest. Same with S. Korean bases really.

It's not so much an overstreached force as it is one that in all truth has not been used in a war for quite some time. So as a result it's time to reshift the peices while keeping the old structure usable. No sense in having so many trrops in areas no longer a threat you know? Plus without a draft it means using what recruits one has...along with the tools of the age.

None here are calling for a draft outside of the partisan players...and their plan was shot down...even Bush has said he does not want a Draft army...same with many generals. Draft armies are simply too much of a political and training liability. Citizen Soldiers are best for major conflicts like world wars...Vietnam proved that to draft men for such a conflict is not only a bad idea but suicidal...and many in command today where soldiers of that conflict.

I'd honestly rather see air power used for peacekeeping...not allied troops...Somalia, Rawanda, The Balkans...hell all of Africa the U.N. has sent troops in...each proved that it not only fails but causes more problems than it solves. What good are peacekeeprs if they can't keep the peace?

Truth is you would get more people signing up if it was worthwhile...and right now...as before...it's not. You can't go ANYWHERE in the military. Every person I know has come out with little to show and complaining endlessly.

What good is it to be a soldier in the U.S. Army where half the world thinks you commit war crimes, the other half shoots at you, and your own country praises you but forgets you soon after you get home? Plus your own allies hide behind political games and leave you out to dry along with your own government...

I had it out with a Marine recruiter a bit before the war...and he's not called back since. Gimme a worthwhile cause and I'd sign up...but no fucking way would I die in Iraq protecting people who don't want me there...let alone for bullshit reasons no one admits too.

WW2 had a great cause with a clearly defined enemy...Nazi Germany was fucking insane...Imperial Japan was equally so...and the world needed people to do a deed that still has many buried overseas. Granted I'd bitch and moan each day I was there...but at least if I survived I could look back and see what I fought for...like WW2 vets now who thanks to everything written about and revealed about the war have no doubt they fought a good fight....hopefully vets of Iraq get to say the same thing.

[Nightingale]

The people overseas only get to see the bad images of the US army; they are going to see images of the shooting of wounded enemy, of 10 year olds lying dead and of families claiming they can get no medical support because that is exactly the thing which sells the news.

Sorry, but the US army is well over stretched at the moment. Why are hardly trained recruits being sent out to Iraq? Why are National Guardsmen being sent out to Iraq? Why are Reservists being called up and sent out to Iraq? The generals and Bremer complained that not enough troops were sent to Iraq from the start - and asked for more even though Bush constantly claimed that he'd have sent more if he'd been asked. There couldn't be any more troops sent out, because the troop levels are not there.

If the US wishes (from a governmental level) to remain seen as the world's policeman, then troops and ground equipment are more important than aircraft. When it came down to it, on September 11, their airforce wasn't there to be scrambled to stop the flights into the twin towers. This may not have come across clearly in the US, but there were several reports that the main airforce base responsible for the area had the planes there, but not a single flight crew ready to be scrambled and, thanks to the lack of thought by someone either in the military or linked to them, it was thought unnecessary to scramble them anyway (or attempt to).

[Tequila Zaire]

If the US wishes (from a governmental level) to remain seen as the world's policeman, then troops and ground equipment are more important than aircraft. When it came down to it, on September 11, their airforce wasn't there to be scrambled to stop the flights into the twin towers. This may not have come across clearly in the US, but there were several reports that the main airforce base responsible for the area had the planes there, but not a single flight crew ready to be scrambled and, thanks to the lack of thought by someone either in the military or linked to them, it was thought unnecessary to scramble them anyway (or attempt to).

True enough...the Air Force dropped the ball big time though I'm curious what would happen if they did manage to scramble and shoot down the 9/11 planes before they hit...big mess either way.

As far as overstreached goes...I still think it's an issue of badly handled resources...the troops needed are there but they not being placed in a manner that is beneficial. As far as national guardsmen being called up...that's part of what they sign up for but I agree they are being asked to fill spots they should not be handling. Reservists make up a majority of the armed forces in certain areas so that's no shock...

They're not getting an influx of recruits they way they sold this conflict so either they start pulling divisions from other parts of the world or rethink how to handle this...cause with no nation wanting to get into this mess...the U.S. and British forces are all alone. Wouldn't be too surprised if forces in the Asian theatre start getting put into Iraq sometime in the future.

This is the first major war without a major draft for the U.S. so it's something that's really being figured out as it happens...that has to be factored in too. Desert Storm was shorter and had many more nations and men...this time they gotta go with what they have with no influx of men...something new to deal with really.

Reminds me of the joke about the U.S. Marines motto..."The Few, The Proud, The Marines"....now it's just "The Few..."

The forces in Iraq are being asked to do too much, too fast, with little support from those they are there to help...guess some lessons from Vietnam have been forgotten.

[Nightingale]

The US army, as you say TS, is overstretched because the forces are in the wrong place; the forces were in the wrong places from the start because this planning stage was overlooked. Too few troops were sent in and too few other countries backed Bush - which should have given him a clue by four but didn't.

I think the airforce would have had big problems if the 9/11 planes had been shot down. There would have been no weapons or bombs found in the remains. The terrorists were using the planes and their fuel as bombs, which is something no one has experienced before. There would have been a lot of explaining to do afterwards, and a lot of good people who had made the right decision would have been forced to move on. As it is, the wrong decisions were made and no one has been given the blame - whether rightly or wrongly.

Most of the lessons in Vietnam have been forgotten. Who, in the present military government set up (not including the military themselves) has experience from Vietnam? Bush? Rice? Ashcroft? Rumsfeld? Cheney? To the best of my knowledge, none of them.

[Tequila Zaire]

The US army, as you say TS, is overstretched because the forces are in the wrong place; the forces were in the wrong places from the start because this planning stage was overlooked. Too few troops were sent in and too few other countries backed Bush - which should have given him a clue by four but didn't.

Can't lay it all on Bush in this case...I'd rather it be focused on the men below him who were directly in charge of the distribution of those forces cause logistics are fucked to no end over there...it's too easy to blame Bush and let the men who really fucked their duty up off the hook...when simple things like Armor Kits for vehicles are not getting ot their designated units and entire divisions held back because one nation wouldn't giuve the ok...you have a massive failure on multiple levels that in the Military happens too much in war. I wish it was all at Bush's door but since he does not dostribute the forces...I'd have more to say to the Generals on the ground and the boys in the Pentagon to be honest.

[Nightingale]

Can't lay it all on Bush in this case...I'd rather it be focused on the men below him who were directly in charge of the distribution of those forces cause logistics are fucked to no end over there...it's too easy to blame Bush and let the men who really fucked their duty up off the hook...when simple things like Armor Kits for vehicles are not getting ot their designated units and entire divisions held back because one nation wouldn't giuve the ok...you have a massive failure on multiple levels that in the Military happens too much in war. I wish it was all at Bush's door but since he does not dostribute the forces...I'd have more to say to the Generals on the ground and the boys in the Pentagon to be honest.

Of course, in essence it has nothing to do with Bush whatsoever. He gives the orders to move and it is up to the Generals and the War Department to make sure that the logistics are in place. It's not as if they hadn't been planning this action for some years in advance.

However, I've seen it first hand, and I doubt that it will ever change. Problems of delivery of vital supplies were condemned loudly in GB following the first Gulf War - including a letter from myself published in the Sunday Times - and exactly the same has happened in the second Gulf War; the logistics were not up to the task of supporting the soldiers on the ground, despite the fact that that is their only reason for being.