The Pentagon (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 02, 2024, 06:39:56 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  The Pentagon (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: The Pentagon  (Read 3951 times)
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

« on: January 02, 2006, 08:32:12 PM »

Hugh shows his lack of reasoning again.
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

« Reply #1 on: January 02, 2006, 08:48:05 PM »

The embassy bombings did not require two heavy divisions to respond to them.
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

« Reply #2 on: January 02, 2006, 08:55:54 PM »

Why can you not just order the military to redeploy home in the interim? All the Senate will do is order the sale/closure of military bases and probably pass an omnibus bill covering the redeployment home.
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

« Reply #3 on: January 02, 2006, 09:24:47 PM »

Not smart either True Dem. We need only to maintain certain infrastructure (Aviano, Ramstein, etc.), not all of our troop bases. Naval facilities should, of course, be maintained, though naval committment can be lessened.
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

« Reply #4 on: January 02, 2006, 09:56:51 PM »

Which troops? I'm of the opinion that we should maintain our full forces in the Balkans, while withdrawing the combat units from elsewhere in Europe, save a few air units in the UK.
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

« Reply #5 on: January 02, 2006, 10:02:04 PM »

All our heavy combat troops in Western Europe are doing now that they couldn't do in similar US bases is prop up the local economies near their bases. That's pretty much it. If you make the argument that we should maintain them for strategic deployments, why not just maintain the equiptment, meaning that they are only a six hour flight from Europe.
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

« Reply #6 on: January 03, 2006, 10:19:21 PM »

WTF No
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

« Reply #7 on: January 03, 2006, 10:30:30 PM »

That's not exactly a compromise. It's more like saying we'll do what I want, but then do something different with the troops afterward.
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

« Reply #8 on: January 03, 2006, 11:04:03 PM »

It's the retraining of 60,000 heavy troops into elite special forces light infantry that gets me the most.
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

« Reply #9 on: January 05, 2006, 04:39:39 PM »

Maintaining air units in the UK, our units in Italy and the Balkans, and our base in Incirlik as well as maintaining bases like Ramstein to support fast deployment is what should be done. There's no need to arbitrarily cut 40% or 10% of troops.
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

« Reply #10 on: January 05, 2006, 05:03:17 PM »

Yes, maintaining our air/naval bases in Spain, Portugal, and Iceland is beneficial, though we have no units (and haven't really since the 60s) in France.
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

« Reply #11 on: January 07, 2006, 09:38:16 AM »

Look, folks.  Last time I checked we aren't facing the same kind of threats that we did in the Cold War era. 
No, but should we then convert all heavy units into "Special" Forces?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
So, you think we should retrain soldiers who may now operate a tank and send them to Ranger School?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Then I hope you're prepared for major flunk outs because without lowering standards, there are going to be an enormous number that cannot pass.
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

« Reply #12 on: January 13, 2006, 10:27:41 PM »

Anyway, I was saying retrain heavy infantry, nor Armored Units.

Anymore, there is hardly a difference between retraining Bradley crews and their squads or a tank crew.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 10 queries.