There are fewer people joining the military every year, and at the same time, our fleet is also shrinking...yet the area of the oceans that American sea power needs to be projected remains the same. Sure, we could get more ships, but this retired sailor will tell you that unless there are more crews to fully man these vessels, it just means that the sailors who are Active Duty will have to deploy more just to keep up with the global threats around the world. More ships means more people needed. Aircraft carriers and subs are great, but they can't be everywhere at once, and Russian and Chinese naval officials (who ARE expanding their surface/sub fleets), are aware of this, and happily using it to their advantage to upsurp America's global presence and influence on international affairs. Teddy Roosevelt and Alfred Mahan must have rolled in their graves that this was even up for discussion in the first place!
The marines came to St. Louis and showcased their new and advanced weaponry. I saw thunderous looking weapons that had the ability to fire a thousand rounds of high powered ammunition in a matter of seconds. There was a variety of such weaponry. If you attend one of these shows, you will understand clearly what this President mean't when he said it is a new and different military.
Did you know that an individual somewhere on the ground can provide detailed information to someone stationed thousands of miles away and at a moments notice, hit a button that can take out a target that is even thousands of miles farther away from either of these individuals and hit a target like a sharpshooter? Its true.
I find it so amusing AND sad that some of you people keep wrongly insisting that President Obama said NONE when OUR President clearly said FEWER. There is a DIFFERENCE, duh!
I guess water (dirty or not) always seeks it's own level, and the Willard/Lyin'Ryan ticket is the ticket that never misses telling a LIE when the opportunities present themselves.
WILLARD, The Fool, is DEFINTELY NOT ready for PRIMETIME. Sen. John Kerry was definetely correct when he labeled Willard the "Wikipedia" candidate. Willard seemed to have been given several key words/talking points AND stuck with them whether or not these points related to the questions asked of him.
You know...the word difference.."None" or "Fewer" doesn't matter. It showed to me..a VETERAN & other military personnel that have spoken out on this issue, that POTUS the "COMMANDER & CHIEF" is out of touch with the military. While continuing his arrogance he got it wrong saying ships go underwater...b/c they don't. Submarines do. Romney may not have served the military, but think some american & Obama are forgetting..Obama hasn't either. Obama has a severe problem with his arrogance...he needs to win over the undecided voters. What comes to mind when I watch him and listen to his arrogance..I can't help,but wonder if he's like this with certain world leaders. He is a representation of all of us when he meets with dignitaries.
Now, as a wife, I would of been embarrassed and as a mother, he was totally disrespectful. Just b/c your the POTUS doesn't give you a free pass to be disrespectful. In all the debates I have seen I have NEVER seen a POTUS act in the manner Obama did. The key in this last debate,like every last debate, was to come off looking "Presidential". Obama didn't get the memo.
You mistake intellect and competence with what you are calling "arrogance." You are using your "VETERAN" status as something to add legitimacy to your analysis, but that is not going to happen to intellectual readers who watched the same debate, heard the same comments, and can discern the difference between the truth and a negative and biased analysis that has no merit.
You are out of touch. You defend Romney for having never served in the military, but forget that he has five sons who have never served either. What does that suggest about his value of serving in the military. Even the wealthy Prince Charles and his brother Prince Harry are taught the value of service to country.
If all you see when you hear this President speak is his "arrogance," you need to be true to yourself and admit what your real dislike about this man is. It will reveal more about you than you care to admit publicly.
Perhaps as his wife and his mother, as you infer, you state you "would have been embarrassed." I feel certain, based on your attitude, those privileged positions are something you never would have had to worry about.
Obama is NOT MY PRESIDENT, just like Bush wasn't yours'. Remember all the abuse you liberals threw at him, and you expect different for Obama?
Now, the truth is, we don't have "fewer" bayonets now than at the start of WWI. The army was almost nonexistent then, a few hundred thousand soldiers. We currently have over a million bayonets in service currently, with "replacements" on order. Kind of tells you, they wear out.
The army no longer gives bayonet training as part of rifle training (as I got in the early 70's) but they are still issued for many other uses. (like we did if we lost our P38)
Romney is every bit as ready to be president as Obummer EVER will be. Hussein is now stooping to "snarking" and insulting to get his point across - like all liberals.
Veteran_Homeowner: I have a Navy submariner veteran friend who says "Yes, submarines ARE classed as 'warSHIPs', although they are commonly known by those who SERVE on them as 'boats', but that's reserved for US--those who SERVE on them."
As a retired officer, I find all these negative comments about our President shameful. I can attest we don't have horses anymore and bayonets are mostly a piece of history. This President has done more for vets than any in recent history. Both he and his wife have been tremendous advocates for military families. Remember that the AWOL Texas Air Guard lieutenant kept the flag draped coffins completely out of sight as they came back from the two wars he mindlessly started. As a retired colonel at my VFW Post put it so well, "the republicans start all the wars, but it's the democrats that take care of all the veterans."
Agree! Obama did termendously well in putting America back together after a huge catastrophic mess that Republican left. Let him finished the job for another term. We don't need a dumbo like Mitt Romney on board. He is incapable on foreign policies, defense & military. He makes stupid comments all the time that reflects his true nature. I would never vote for a person who already said honestly that he didn't care about the 47% Americans. I can't imagine a moron like that running the White House. Romney is just another stupid, rich man who thinks that he could "govern". He's another form of George W. Bush. Disaster. Vote for Our President, Obama, because he is for all Americans!
granted, bayonets still exist, but in our current times the methods of war are a little bit different compared to when bayonets were regularly used for the purposes of war... that was the point the President was making and Ryan and his acolytes clearly couldn't figure it out.
I'll side with you and Maria with this, and - yes - I have not always agreed with the President in the past. But I don't recall where we're all supposed to blindly "toe the line". At least unless you're in the GOP, based on enough voting records I've read through in the past... GS425 wants to believe Obama is clueless, but Obama certainly alluded to something loud and clear. Only those who can't figure any of the possibilities out will merely say they have no clue, which is what Ryan did...
Sad Obama took a serious topic of cutting a billion dollars out of the military and made a low ball comment. Like Obama really knows our great military so well when he shows he never went through basic training.
I think he knows a bit more than Romney & Ryan. Romney avoided the draft by going to France as he attended a pro-war demonstration. Ryan says he knows about war as he voted for two of them. I'll give the Prez a thumbs up. He has treated us far better than nearly any of republican ilk.
You are absolutely clueless as to what the cuts were for. You only use it as something to criticize. Tell us, what are some of the things he literally cut that the military needs.
The low ball comment is called just that because this President scored with a well deserved and sharply pointed Zinger that continues to resonate. Now, deal with it.
So much ocean, So few ships. What's a sailor to do? Big oceans reuire many ships Mr. President and not just the "ships that go under water" (known to sailors as electric boats) and aircraft carriers. If you want to project the ability of the USA across the worlds waters, you must have a capable Navy, with many ships. If you just want to apologize, well, you have Air Force One at your beck and call.
When this President used the term ships, he was speaking in general terms. He did not imagine that so many would be expecting him to quote style and model numbers. Intellectuals clearly understood his point. Others, well, they probably didn't understand a whole lot of anything.
Just so President Obama realizes the Marines still have about 120,000 bayonets as the OKC-3S and the Army also uses the M9. President Obama is very ignorant with how he behaved and not someone I want leanding my country. Maybe he can lead a kindergarten playground session but not America. Also, President Obama, Mr. Romney did not point out to you that we don't have any "ships that go underwater" Just saying Mr. Obama. I think with your smart remarks to Romney you got a little excited and said "oh we have these things that airplanes land on and we have ships that go underwater...submarines" No they are not ships underwater President Obama...maybe YOU need to know our military. If you knew it maybe our Ambassador and 3 other men in Libya would have been protected.
He figured out the CIA with drones could assassinate people all over the world (non-American war zone areas) without too much political fallout. It would surprise me if a republican president would use drones this way or even be allowed to use them this way. Remember the bellyaching over water-boarding?
The only problem is this isn't comedy central. We need a plan with direction and leadership. The USSR still can't be trusted. The only interest they have is their own.
No one is suggesting that it is comedy central. It is what it is. Everyone seeks to score in a debate, and this widely criticized President fired a verbal zinger that continues to resonate and will also go down in history. Accept it, even if you don't like it.
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Reply to Comment The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Did you know that an individual somewhere on the ground can provide detailed information to someone stationed thousands of miles away and at a moments notice, hit a button that can take out a target that is even thousands of miles farther away from either of these individuals and hit a target like a sharpshooter? Its true.
Mittens is "waye out of touch."
I guess water (dirty or not) always seeks it's own level, and the Willard/Lyin'Ryan ticket is the ticket that never misses telling a LIE when the opportunities present themselves.
WILLARD, The Fool, is DEFINTELY NOT ready for PRIMETIME. Sen. John Kerry was definetely correct when he labeled Willard the "Wikipedia" candidate. Willard seemed to have been given several key words/talking points AND stuck with them whether or not these points related to the questions asked of him.
Now, as a wife, I would of been embarrassed and as a mother, he was totally disrespectful. Just b/c your the POTUS doesn't give you a free pass to be disrespectful. In all the debates I have seen I have NEVER seen a POTUS act in the manner Obama did. The key in this last debate,like every last debate, was to come off looking "Presidential". Obama didn't get the memo.
P.S. To quote John Kerry isn't saying much.
You mistake intellect and competence with what you are calling "arrogance." You are using your "VETERAN" status as something to add legitimacy to your analysis, but that is not going to happen to intellectual readers who watched the same debate, heard the same comments, and can discern the difference between the truth and a negative and biased analysis that has no merit.
You are out of touch. You defend Romney for having never served in the military, but forget that he has five sons who have never served either. What does that suggest about his value of serving in the military. Even the wealthy Prince Charles and his brother Prince Harry are taught the value of service to country.
If all you see when you hear this President speak is his "arrogance," you need to be true to yourself and admit what your real dislike about this man is. It will reveal more about you than you care to admit publicly.
Perhaps as his wife and his mother, as you infer, you state you "would have been embarrassed." I feel certain, based on your attitude, those privileged positions are something you never would have had to worry about.
Now, the truth is, we don't have "fewer" bayonets now than at the start of WWI. The army was almost nonexistent then, a few hundred thousand soldiers. We currently have over a million bayonets in service currently, with "replacements" on order. Kind of tells you, they wear out.
The army no longer gives bayonet training as part of rifle training (as I got in the early 70's) but they are still issued for many other uses. (like we did if we lost our P38)
Romney is every bit as ready to be president as Obummer EVER will be. Hussein is now stooping to "snarking" and insulting to get his point across - like all liberals.
granted, bayonets still exist, but in our current times the methods of war are a little bit different compared to when bayonets were regularly used for the purposes of war... that was the point the President was making and Ryan and his acolytes clearly couldn't figure it out.
I'll side with you and Maria with this, and - yes - I have not always agreed with the President in the past. But I don't recall where we're all supposed to blindly "toe the line". At least unless you're in the GOP, based on enough voting records I've read through in the past... GS425 wants to believe Obama is clueless, but Obama certainly alluded to something loud and clear. Only those who can't figure any of the possibilities out will merely say they have no clue, which is what Ryan did...
The low ball comment is called just that because this President scored with a well deserved and sharply pointed Zinger that continues to resonate. Now, deal with it.