Results 1 to 20 of 339

Thread: What we support and defend

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #9
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Actaq non verba...

    Correction: Strike that 'q' after "Acta" above...

    Quote Originally Posted by carl View Post
    You always say that, the Congress is afraid of the Army or Air Force too. Why do you say that?
    Read what I wrote, don't quote what you want to think I wrote. I did NOT say -- and never have said -- afraid. What I did say was:

    ""in both cases as a counter to possibly restive Army and Air Force people...The Middle East and Dictatorships are not the only ones that are made nervous by Armies that are too strong, Democracies buy into that offsetting force routine as well...""

    Counter, leery of, nervous about, suspicious of -- none of those things equate to afraid. That's not just semantic, words are important. People who see one thing and escalate it are often afraid -- Congress isn't afraid, they just do not fully trust any of the Armed Forces and they trust the Army least -- it makes them nervous because of its size and cost and, truth be told, less than stellar social makeup (in the view of many). I have consistently said this:

    ""Congress does not want the Army to be too good for a variety of reasons.""

    I've written it enough and said why enough that I don't need to do it again here and now. Just paying attention to what Congress does as opposed to what they say should convince anyone who pays attention of the potential for that to be quite true. It is what I very definitely believe because in Congressional Hearing, GAO Audits and in other ways I have seen firm evidence of the existence of that bias over the years.
    The founders were afraid of standing armies...
    True and you, hopefully noted that I have generally applied that concern over Armies to all Democracies, not just the US. It's pretty plain to see if one just looks about.
    but in the last hundred or hundred and twenty years have any important politicians or major political parties stated that the Army must be kept weak and competing redundant forces must be kept in being to preclude the possibility of a Seven Days in May?
    My suspicion is that in the US at least, yes, some have -- but I'm not concerned about it enough to go Googling. I think that one might need go back little further than the 60s to find examples...

    After the debacle that was Viet Nam, the left leaners learned their lesson and will not denigrate the Troops so one is unlikely to find any instances of such distrust or disaffection cited publicly in the last 20 years or so. Still, as I Wrote, pay attention to what Congress does, even today and not to what they say.
    Last edited by Ken White; 06-03-2012 at 04:27 AM. Reason: Correction

Similar Threads

  1. Should we destroy Al Qaeda?
    By MikeF in forum Global Issues & Threats
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 03-14-2011, 02:50 AM
  2. Great COIN discussion over at AM
    By Entropy in forum Blog Watch
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 01-27-2009, 06:19 PM
  3. Vietnam's Forgotten Lessons
    By SWJED in forum Training & Education
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 04-26-2006, 11:50 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •