Be honest enough to call "Boots on the Ground" what it is.

[TalkingDog]

[elleng]

1. O'Malley Lays Down The Law On 'Boots On The Ground'

http://on.aol.com/video/omalley-lays-down-the-law-on-boots-on-the-ground-519248875

[TalkingDog]

2. Thank you. Very kind. eom

[EndElectoral]

53. yes, he called the moderators on it at one of the debates.They all need to stop a question like this

[yellowcanine]

3. I hate that phrase. Wannabe Arm chair generals talking military.....

[Wilms]

4. Body Bags in Choppers

Coffins Loaded on Airplanes

[sarge43]

11. Your daughters and sons

with their bodies, minds and lives forever fucked over by fire, steel and all manner of other shit.

[staggerleem]

15. Boots ON the Ground =

Bodies IN the Ground!

[HughBeaumont]

5. . . . in a completely useless conflict that has NOTHING to do with defense.

Toss that in there while we're at it.

[SammyWinstonJack]

26. +1000000

[saturnsring]

6. blood on the sand - is what i correcrt them with

[oberliner]

7. I think the cheers would be even stronger

Especially among the Trump crowds.

[SoapBox]

8. And they should be the FIRST ones to be the "boots on the ground"...

However, if they were selected, they would run for hiding.

[Lizzie Poppet]

9. Except most are probably 4F.

Not exactly the pick of the litter, Trump fans...

[lark]

10. Nope, won't bother them a bit.

Their sons and daughters won't be fighting, they want other people's kids to die for profit, not their own.

[maxsolomon]

12. If we never put Boots on the Ground

then why do we need the most expensive military on the planet? to repel a land invasion?

the modern military exists to project American power and protect American economic interests around the world. when your sons and daughters sign up, that's what they're signing up to do. if they don't know that, you should tell them. politicians can't; it's electoral suicide in a propagandized nation.

relatively altruistic deployments (to the Sahel, to help hunt Boko Haram, for instance) I don't get too worked up about.

now, someone tell me that Hillary is no different than Trump and will instantly start another war of choice like Iraq.

[AlbertCat]

13. Hillary is no different than Trump

Oh she's different... she should know better.

[maxsolomon]

14. thanks, i knew you'd come through!

nt

[zalinda]

18. Has she seen a war she didn't like? n/t

[maxsolomon]

20. no, she likes them all!

she's particularly fond of the Boer war, and the War of the Roses. if she is elected, the FIRST thing she'll do is invade someplace. ANY place, just because she loves war so much. just like her bloodthirsty husband and all the wars he started. and she won't even bother with a pretext like yellowcake.

and there's just no way a republican house would deny her, because she's THE SAME AS TRUMP and they'd never obstruct a DINO.

where do you think she'll invade? Oman? Iceland? Andorra?

[pangaia]

27. Not Oman. That's for sure.

We're on good terms with Sultan Qaboos bin Said Al Busaidi. And who by the way is dearly loved by most Omanis and basically built his country from nothing.

Also, I have friends there. So no invasion, please.

[maxsolomon]

28. sorry, Oman it is

i'll propose it, and she'll go for it, because she's never seen one she didn't like.

sending the email right now.

[pangaia]

30. Well, you should know that several of the people I know

are in the RGO.. The Royal Guard of Oman.

These are the guys who protect the Sultan..

Do NOT mess with them. :&gt )))

[Fairgo]

37. well said

[davidthegnome]

44. A fair point, max

The fact of the matter is that we don't need to keep pouring as much money as we do into the military budget. We could cut but a small portion to more properly fund our schools, our infrastructure, our healthcare - and so on and so forth. There are military projects every year that cost billions of dollars and go absolutely no where. There are bases around the world getting funding for stuff they absolutely don't need - because if they don't USE that funding, what they get afterwards will be significantly less. Somewhere you'll find rooms full of useless junk that was, essentially, our tax dollars at work.

Sadly, it's not the projects, the generals, the big brass or the big corporate types that take the hit when funding is cut... it's usually just your average soldier - their gear, their job, their overall available benefits. Somehow, we have to stick it to the people who deserve it, the big moneybags sitting on top of the MIC.

As for the war of choice business... I have no clue, I hope she doesn't, whether immediately or otherwise. No, she's not Trump, which is one of the precious few reasons I have to vote for her if she wins the nomination. For me, it's kind of like (as a piece of satire the other day suggested) voting for Saruman to stop Sauron. I'll do it if I have to, I'm just not happy about it.

[maxsolomon]

46. I've heard the Army called the biggest welfare program in the nation.

without it, there are fewer routes out of poverty for those who join.

[davidthegnome]

48. Second to corporate welfare.

Someone posted a list here, not too long ago, of what the average tax payer pays for. Actual safety net spending (TANF, EBT, housing assistance, etc.) was pretty low on the list, as was educational spending. The military ranked in second - but by such a long shot it's bizarre. We spend far more subsidizing corporations than we do even on military. Every year.

Also - your point is a big part of the problem, IMO. Do we want people signing up to join the military because poverty has left them with few or no other sustainable options? Is that the kind of military we really want? How much does the average, or standard military member bring in every year? What about benefits? How far out of poverty are people really lifted through the military? How many come home with PTSD, or commit suicide, or worse, overseas, not just because of the horrors of war, but because there is nothing waiting for them back home?

When I was eighteen, I thought about joining the military myself - the job options at home were terrible, and I couldn't afford college. This was around the same time we were invading Iraq, and my Father talked me out of it. I had gone to the Marines first, who refused to talk to me because I had a GED rather than a typical high school diploma. My best option was the army. The Recruiter told me I'd have to lie about my past marijuana usage, that I would have to stop taking my anti-depressant and anti-anxiety medication - then asked me what I wanted to do. "You wanna jump outta planes and shoot people? How about Airborne? No? Maybe we can put you in intelligence somewhere... your test scores were good...." I learned later on that the latter was basically a joke, far more likely I would have been regular infantry than anything else.

I also made them nervous because I already had PTSD. In retrospect, had I joined up, survived and carried on... I might have been able to pay for college, I would probably be in a much better financial situation now. Now it's too late, I'm way too screwed up physically and mentally.

I consider it a high calling and an honor to serve one's Nation in a military capacity... my problem is with the politicians and big moneybags that decide when and where they go to war, then abandon them when they come back home.

[ProfessorGAC]

50. It's So Linked To The Macroeconomy, It Won't Happen

Nobody in Congress will ever have the fortitude to cut funding into their own district.

That's not an accident. It's what Eisenhower was talking about.

They are no completely entrenched in the overall economy, that cutting defense spending will cause economic hardship that would take a decade to foment recovery.

They know that and they would never have the courage to take the risk of doing that in their own districts. Unless, of course, we're talking some 78 year old who isn't planning to run again.

But, there won't be a hundred of those at one time, so there won't be a mass political suicide any time soon.

[davidthegnome]

54. That's partly the point.

It's just not sustainable. This can't be kept up indefinitely - eventually we will run out of enemies, or oil, or money, or (any of or) all three. There needs to be some kind of major outlet for the level of spending and production that comes out of the MIC, which eventually comes down to another war, in which we end up spending more - so much more - than we already were to begin with.

I don't know what the solution is - it will take minds greater than mine to come up with one... but there needs to be one, eventually, because what's going on right now in this Country - what has been going on for decades - cannot be sustained. Perhaps the eventual collapse of our economy and even the MIC is inevitable, at some future point, but how much damage will be done before that happens is anyone's guess.

Maybe mass political (please note I said and mean "political" not actual) suicide is exactly what we need. I don't know, I'm not entirely convinced yet... but I'm getting there. The outrageous amounts of money pouring into our electoral system continues to grow. Super PACs, corporations, wealthy donors... the drug companies, oil companies, the financial industry itself... more and more it seems that they own our politicians, our elections - that we are given is more the illusion of choice, than an actual choice in governance.

The politics in this Country right now... are extreme. I wonder if even the oldest people here can remember a time when they were so very extreme. How the heck did Donald Trump or Ted Cruz ever get anywhere near being considered for President?

I honestly think that the revolution is only beginning - and if the politicians do not side with the people who want and demand change, their relevance, power and wealth will eventually crumble. The Roman Empire was once thought to be almost infallible - so very wealthy and with such great military might that... at one time, it could not truly be challenged. Ultimately, however, it become so lazy, so overwhelmingly corrupt, greedy and twisted that it's demise was all but inevitable.

I wonder if we are reaching that point, with our American empire.

[ProfessorGAC]

56. I Think You Misunderstood

I'm not glad about the MIC being basically untouchable. So, i don't take issue with anything you said, but you seem like you're trying to convince me of something.

[davidthegnome]

57. Sorry.

That wasn't really my intent - but some times I get a bit carried away...

[LiberalLovinLug]

16. and we may be spending trillions on the war machine

But, if its anything like the last manufactured war, your son or daughter will have to pony up for their own body armor, and we will also reduce Vet care funding for when they return damaged, if at all.

[stuffmatters]

17. And dead "boots on the ground" are called "troops"

Always disgusted by both distancing, depersonalizing terms.

[Ferd Berfel]

19. More reasons to have a full, permenant Draft

no exemptions, no deferments, everyone of both sexes and a certain age - IN ! 2 years. For your service you get free college and healthcare.

If more Americans have skin in the game, we will start fewer wars and make fewer excuses to join in the wars others have started.

[maxsolomon]

21. No

the MIC must be brought to heel and reduced significantly. there are around 33 million 17 year olds in the US right now. there are 1.4 total in the armed forces, the largest army on the planet. we don't need >30 million more troops.

[Ferd Berfel]

22. I agree but many people simply will refues to grasp that

UNLESS THEY have skin in the game. If all that a CHickenhawk has to do is push a button and send someone elses kid in to the meat grinder it's not gonna change

I'd be all for Bernie's plans to cut teh military budget - with a chainsaw

[Dont call me Shirley]

24. +1,000,000,000,000!

[pangaia]

29. 33 million 17 year olds? That's like 10% of the entire US population.

I find that difficult to believe.

In fact one chart I found says about 27 million 18-24 year olds.

[maxsolomon]

31. oh, i read it wrong.

you're right.

33/6 = 5.5 million. Still more troops than we need or can afford.

[MH1]

33. Don't make them all troops.

Include options for Peace Corps, Vista, CCC type stuff, teaching assistants. Allow the 2 years to be served any time between 18 and 26, so going to college first is an option.

How to afford it: Tax the top 20% or so to pay for paying a reasonable stipend to each participant and fund the infrastructure of the program.

You'd have a helluva lot stronger citizenry as well as military.

[gladium et scutum]

34. There are approximately

1.4 million Americans in the United States Armed Forces. The Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) has a strength of about 2.2 million in all of its 5 branches. The Chinese govt. announced last year that they would be reducing the size of PLA by 300,000 in the near future. We are not the largest army on the planet.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

38. we out source many positions

consider

[gladium et scutum]

39. Such As? n/t

[SoLeftIAmRight]

40. ???

really?

[maxsolomon]

42. Ok, most expensive then

NO FUCKING DRAFT

[gladium et scutum]

55. Dont disagree on that. n/t

[highoverheadspace]

23. I also strongly dislike that phrasing.

"Collateral Damage" is another one. It really means women and children with their arms, legs and heads blown off. We need to change the terminology into what it really is. I'm tired of these warmongering propaganda terms.

[Dont call me Shirley]

25. I abhor that term and never use it.

[MH1]

32. Except for a lot of people in that crowd,

it isn't THEIR sons and daughters, and they know it.

And their bloodlust cheers will continue.

[Brother_Love]

35. There are boots in the air and in the water too.

[DebJ]

41. Add, "YOUR sons and daughters, not MINE." n/t

[Politicub]

43. The follow up question is - when is your son or daughter enlisting?

[sammythecat]

45. Well, they could make it more palatable

to the more comfortable if they'd just stress the fact it wouldn't be their sons and daughters, but only those of the poor and working poor who have few other options. I mean, that is what they're for, right? Work cheap and defend our property? They all get to be called heroes for participating, and they get "thanked for their service" all the time. All in all a great system we've put in place over the past 30 or so years. Works well for all. Doesn't it?

[zentrum]

47. Yes, and...

….if we brought back the draft so it really would threaten the sons and daughters of those cheerers, we'd have a lot less war.

[mrdmk]

49. Call it what it is, "War, Blood from your Children"

K & R

[RoccoR5955]

51. If they REALLY want a war

they should start a draft. Then we would see how WE THE PEOPLE feel about their damn wars!

[EndElectoral]

52. It conjures up the image of boots and ground. Perhaps faceless creatures that live only for this.

It's a horrible phrase, essentially anesthesizing the real people who must wear these boots, their lives are reduced to simply boots, numbers, killing mechanisms, and their familes nowhere to be found.

Let's stop this phrase, and agree together, no matter what politician you're for, let's agree this is NOT an acceptable term anymore. Let's call it as the Union Veteran council called it. No more anesthesizing of war with catchy phrases that strip a soldier of his humanity.