(07-31-2020, 05:38 PM)jagibelieve Wrote:

(07-31-2020, 04:23 PM)mikesez Wrote: I'm for shrinking a lot of the hardware.
We won't need to build another aircraft carrier for another three decades or so.
We have enough ICBM armed submarines for constant mutual assured destruction on not only this planet, but two other planets at least.
but it seems like we have about the right number of troops.
And the coast guard is actually underfunded. those guys are the first responders to any kind of boating accidents or illegal drug trafficking, and their bridge computers are running Windows 95.
I also think we need to make the national guard a real national guard again. if you sign up for it, they should not be able to send you to foreign countries.

Once again you have no idea what you are talking about.

1.  2 of our carriers are over 40 years old and 3 of them are over 30 years old.  They are rapidly nearing end-of-life.  I (unlike you) happened to serve on a 30 year old ship.  It's not good.

2.  The Coast Guard is not part of the DoD.  They fall under The Department of Homeland Security the same as U.S. Customs and Boarder Patrol.

3.  The National Guard is a reserve component of the military.  They can and should be able to deploy anywhere at anytime.

1) if we abandon the five carriers that you say are over 30 years old, we would still have 14 carriers, more than every other Navy in the world combined.

2) ok. Their ships tend to be 50 and 60 years old. Regardless of which budget line item they are under, it seems that they should get more.

3) you are begging the question. My assertion is that it should not be this way, and you say I'm wrong because it is that way. One of the worst logical fallacies there is.  my point is that it should be possible to volunteer to be one of the people who responds during floods and earthquakes and hurricanes and not be liable to be forced to join in on our next foreign adventure / war of choice. of course the difference for you is you probably never saw a war you didn't like.

---