Should military spending be reduced? - Page 9




 
--
 
June 10th, 2006  
Mohmar Deathstrike
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabs
Your just flat wrong there, these countries dont have antiquated radar systems. They have top of the line russian sams (S-300) and many many many other types of anti-air weapons. Put on top of that i could probally make a radar capable of detecting a B-52 we most certainly need the B-2 to do the missions we need to do.

The DDX I can sorta agree on the ABs do the job just fine.
What countries have S-300? I could only find one shady article about Iran having them. But no sources were given.
June 10th, 2006  
Rabs
 
 
China and Russia are the other two. I think N. Korea might have it.
June 10th, 2006  
Mohmar Deathstrike
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabs
China and Russia are the other two. I think N. Korea might have it.
Ah okay. I thought the discussion was revolving around non-nuclear possible enemies of the USA.
--
June 14th, 2006  
Senior Chief
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabs
Your just flat wrong there, these countries dont have antiquated radar systems. They have top of the line russian sams (S-300) and many many many other types of anti-air weapons. Put on top of that i could probally make a radar capable of detecting a B-52 we most certainly need the B-2 to do the missions we need to do.

The DDX I can sorta agree on the ABs do the job just fine.
In reading what you can on the internet it looks like the S-300 and the Patriot systems are very similar. The Patriot system has been a proven system for some years and has had some upgrades to reflect the new threats that are out there. I don't know if the S-300 has been modified much past the mid 90's
June 18th, 2006  
Rob Henderson
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohmar Deathstrike
Ah okay. I thought the discussion was revolving around non-nuclear possible enemies of the USA.
The discussion was revolving around military spending. Threads like this are often turned about. My two cents: When we have eliminated those "starving children in 3rd world country" ads of off TV, then we can spend money on jet fighters and tanks and ships and advanced weaponry systems.
June 18th, 2006  
Damien435
 
 
Tell you what, Cadet, you find a why to somehow feed a continent of one billion without causing food prices back home in the US to sky rocket and I may just go along with your idea, but in the meantime I prefer to see my money going into an investment that has both immediate and longterm potential to pay off.
June 18th, 2006  
bulldogg
 
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by C/1Lt Henderson
When we have eliminated those "starving children in 3rd world country" ads of off TV, then we can spend money on jet fighters and tanks and ships and advanced weaponry systems.
Ok, I've stopped laughing now... whew, that was priceless. It has been proven repeatedly that since prior to 1992 there were already too many people on the Earth and that even if ALL arable land were put to its most efficient use producing foodstuffs and somehow it was all magically divided equally among every person there is not enough to adequately feed everyone. We would all be malnourished. However it does ease some people's guilt about being born in a land of plenty to donate a few pennies and keep no talent hacks like Sally Struthers in employment trying to "save little Mbutu". Then again I am a selfish and I just give a damn about me and my family, friends and my countrymen.
June 18th, 2006  
ASTRALdragon
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by C/1Lt Henderson
The discussion was revolving around military spending. Threads like this are often turned about. My two cents: When we have eliminated those "starving children in 3rd world country" ads of off TV, then we can spend money on jet fighters and tanks and ships and advanced weaponry systems.
There is a way to feed those people. It's called genetically engineered food. If those governments want to listen to Greenpeace and have their people starve rather than eat GE food, then that's their problem. Hell, 80% of the produce you buy in American grocery stores are either genetically engineered or treated with pesticides. If feeding African children is truly your concern then resign from the military and join the Peace Corps or the UN Food Program. I hear they're always looking for non-paid volunteers.
June 19th, 2006  
WarMachine
 
 
I heard that a lot of the problems with people starving don't have to do with the food sources but getting the food to them. Nobody likes grain for dinner, but if you're malnourished then at least it's something, that's why we kept sending the grain to needy people. But warlords or gangs steal the food and people starve some more. Or the governments which get money to buy food embezzle it, crap like that. There has to be plenty of food still being grown since the world population is growing in developing countries, idk where it comes from but it's there. India and china have less arable land than the USA but they still feed a billion people each. It's the places that have the worst sort of infrastructure and governments that have food shortages all the time.
June 19th, 2006  
Senior Chief
 
 
For the guy that is worried about world hunger.

Do like I do, sponsor a child through Compassion International or one of the other organizations that put food in the mouths of those kids.

It's a small thing I do, but if everyone did one small thing there would be over 200,000,000 kids that didn't starve to death!

Think about it!