d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Senate Impeachment Trial 2020
Prev1115116117118119134Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 54,187
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
Feb 6 2020 09:42am
Quote (bogie160 @ 6 Feb 2020 16:35)
Tax lawyers do, and they're some of brightest minds we have. Unfortunately their job is to reduce tax imprint, not increase it.


So what? Hire 20 of the best tax lawyers in the country, let them work for congress at a salary of $400k per year, with $5m in bonus if the tax reform they cook up has met certain goals 10 years after it was passed.
Member
Posts: 27,048
Joined: Dec 21 2007
Gold: 14,569.69
Feb 6 2020 09:43am
Quote (Ghot @ Feb 6 2020 07:16am)
Yes. It's not like we're talking lettuce here. Running low on military can't be fixed.. overnight. Take fighter jets for example... ya don't just build one over night. This is true of just about every facet of a modern military. Including, training the people to BE soldiers.
Just the one line per item list of electronics parts we used in the late 70's early eighties was a stack of spread sheet (19" wide?) THREE inches thick. And that was pretty much before computers. JUST electronics.

It would be a godsend for ANY govt. to be able to lower military spending by say, 25% in peace time. But that's robbing Peter to pay Paul. And the bill, when it comes due, in non-peace time, ends up getting paid for in our own human lives.
Seems like a great idea on paper, but in practice, it doesn't work very well.



Lol I cannot believe you buy in the the Fox narrative that our military budget is low. I think we spend more then the next 10 or 6 TOP CPI tries combines. Are you a tRump bot. You are completely brainwashed 100%
Member
Posts: 54,187
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
Feb 6 2020 09:44am
Quote (Ghot @ 6 Feb 2020 16:41)
Let's look at Pearl Harbor as an example.
In one fell swoop, a tiny island in the Pacific took out say... 70% of our navy. Without "extras" the US would have lost to the Japanese in WW II. At best, we would have only lost multiple millions of civilians lives, but still managed to keep the US, if we hadn't had... "extras".

On a side note, the US would probably NOT been able to handle D-Day at all, if we hadn't had extras.


Guess what, we're not in the middle of a world war, and all other countries in the world are a loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong way off from being able to defeat the US on its own soil.

The only real question is about whether the US would be able to defeat others (say China or Russia) on their soil. My point is that this ability is not really necessary.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Feb 6 2020 09:45am
Member
Posts: 105,150
Joined: Apr 25 2006
Gold: 10,475.00
Feb 6 2020 09:49am
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Feb 6 2020 10:44am)
Guess what, we're not in the middle of a world war, and all other countries in the world are a loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong way off from being able to defeat the US on its own soil.

The only real question is about whether the US would be able to defeat others (say China or Russia) on their soil.




Yeah. That's pretty obvious to all.
So what happens when Russia say, decides to go after all that cush real estate that we call Europe? WHO will stop them? You think Europe will be happy to wait around while the US says... just give us a year or so to get our military up to the task, and we'll be right there.

In the real world game or RISK... the winners are the ones that go 120%, not the ones that go... 80%.


/e The REASON it's not necessary is because we DO spend more on our military than the next 10 countries combined. This is WHY Russia doesn't just walk all over Europe, or China doesn't just walk all over India, or Japan, etc.

This post was edited by Ghot on Feb 6 2020 09:52am
Member
Posts: 93,001
Joined: Dec 31 2007
Gold: 2,299.94
Feb 6 2020 09:52am
Quote (Ghot @ Feb 6 2020 09:49am)
Yeah. That's pretty obvious to all.
So what happens when Russia say, decides to go after all that cush real estate that we call Europe? WHO will stop them? You think Europe will be happy to wait around while the US says... just give us a year or so to get our military up to the task, and we'll be right there.

In the real world game or RISK... the winners are the ones that go 120%, not the ones that go... 80%.


what happens when gravity is inverted and the tanks we created just float around? huh? what then? what about when the sun implodes? what if sex doesnt feel good anymore for all humans and cats become mans best friend?
Member
Posts: 105,150
Joined: Apr 25 2006
Gold: 10,475.00
Feb 6 2020 09:54am
Quote (thesnipa @ Feb 6 2020 10:52am)
what happens when gravity is inverted and the tanks we created just float around? huh? what then? what about when the sun implodes? what if sex doesnt feel good anymore for all humans and cats become mans best friend?




If that ever happens then it will obviously become time to eliminate all the bat winged hamburger snatchers. <--- Find THAT reference and I'll be impressed. :D
Member
Posts: 54,187
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
Feb 6 2020 09:55am
Quote (Ghot @ 6 Feb 2020 16:49)
Yeah. That's pretty obvious to all.
So what happens when Russia say, decides to go after all that cush real estate that we call Europe? WHO will stop them? You think Europe will be happy to wait around while the US says... just give us a year or so to get our military up to the task, and we'll be right there.

In the real world game or RISK... the winners are the ones that go 120%, not the ones that go... 80%.


Russia has a population of 140m, Europe has 500m+.
Europe has vastly greater industrial capacities than Russia, so in a prolonged war, Europe could outproduce them with ease.
European countries, despite all their complacency, still outspend Russia on military by a large factor.
Similarly, combined, the European countries have significantly more soldiers in active service than Russia, and significantly more tanks and jets.
The Brits and French also have nukes, so Russia also couldnt launch a nuclear first strike to get a strategic advantage.


The numbers game in Europe has swung decisively in the West's favor since the end of the cold war. Russia simply doesnt have the capacity anymore to overrun Western Europe. The most they could do is annex Estonia or something like that, but with the way the crippling economic sanctions (which Europe imposed on them in the aftermath of the annexation of Crimea) are hurting them, I cant imagine them to have much appetite for even such a minor adventure.
Member
Posts: 93,001
Joined: Dec 31 2007
Gold: 2,299.94
Feb 6 2020 09:56am
Quote (Ghot @ Feb 6 2020 09:54am)
If that ever happens then it will obviously become time to eliminate all the bat winged hamburger snatchers. <--- Find THAT reference and I'll be impressed. :D


I'm a huge Dan Oneill fan.
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Feb 6 2020 09:57am
Quote (Ghot @ Feb 6 2020 09:49am)
Yeah. That's pretty obvious to all.
So what happens when Russia say, decides to go after all that cush real estate that we call Europe? WHO will stop them? You think Europe will be happy to wait around while the US says... just give us a year or so to get our military up to the task, and we'll be right there.

In the real world game or RISK... the winners are the ones that go 120%, not the ones that go... 80%.


/e The REASON it's not necessary is because we DO spend more on our military than the next 10 countries combined. This is WHY Russia doesn't just walk all over Europe, or China doesn't just walk all over India, or Japan, etc.


Russia couldn't walk over Europe lol. Same reason China can't make real military moves against Japan or SK, although Japan would probably shit wreck China like they always have. All imports to Russia would stop and the whole country would collapse into civil unrest over night. What's that? Ghot gives shitty examples because he's ignorant of very basic aspects of the subject? Shocker I know!

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Feb 6 2020 09:58am
Member
Posts: 105,150
Joined: Apr 25 2006
Gold: 10,475.00
Feb 6 2020 09:59am
Quote (thesnipa @ Feb 6 2020 10:56am)
I'm a huge Dan Oneill fan.



You Googled. :D



Was a very good political comic...

https://www.amazon.com/Hear-Sound-My-Feet-Walking/dp/0912078138





/e

Quote (Black XistenZ @ Feb 6 2020 10:55am)
Russia has a population of 140m, Europe has 500m+.
Europe has vastly greater industrial capacities than Russia, so in a prolonged war, Europe could outproduce them with ease.
European countries, despite all their complacency, still outspend Russia on military by a large factor.
Similarly, combined, the European countries have significantly more soldiers in active service than Russia, and significantly more tanks and jets.
The Brits and French also have nukes, so Russia also couldnt launch a nuclear first strike to get a strategic advantage.


The numbers game in Europe has swung decisively in the West's favor since the end of the cold war. Russia simply doesnt have the capacity anymore to overrun Western Europe. The most they could do is annex Estonia or something like that, but with the way the crippling economic sanctions (which Europe imposed on them in the aftermath of the annexation of Crimea) are hurting them, I cant imagine them to have much appetite for even such a minor adventure.





Russia has more bombs nukes than the US. And they can be delivered with a button press.

This post was edited by Ghot on Feb 6 2020 10:03am
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1115116117118119134Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll