Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Poor Brits
The fighting British man is as good as ours,his EQ is generally as good,but they sure don't have enough of it and what's odd is their committment here is not really large. Neither is it in Iraq.

Not too surprising UK spending on the military is about 5% of GDP, as compared with approximately 16% in the US. They are not prepared for long term conflict in multiple theatres.

But I see from the BBC the UK might be making some savings by withdrawing from Iraq - "General seeks UK Iraq withdrawal"

Britain's new Chief of the General Staff, Sir Richard Dannatt, is quoted as saying the British should "get out some time soon". He goes on to say "We are in a Muslim country and Muslims' views of foreigners in their country are quite clear. As a foreigner, you can be welcomed by being invited in a country, but we weren't invited certainly by those in Iraq at the time. Whatever consent we may have had in the first place, may have turned to tolerance and has largely turned to intolerance."

It would seem the coalition of the willing is becoming less so.
"Common sense is not so common" - Voltaire
Correction Pepe. The US only spends no more than 4% of it's GDP on defense expenditures. See the chart below. What you are confusing is the total outlay vs the percentage of the economic output. Granted the outlay is great, but the economy is so large, that it is very small when compared with the total output.

Note the outlays for WWII, Korean Way, and even the Cold War, which are all higher.

[Image: rethinking_the_surplus.gif]
All men are frauds. The only difference between them is that some admit it. I myself deny it.
H. L. Mencken
You're correct John, the data from the CIA make the figures clearer.

Quote:UK military spending = $42,836.5 million or 2.4% (2003)
US military spending = $518.1 billion 4.06%(FY03 est.) (2005 est.)
Source: CIA World Factbook
"Common sense is not so common" - Voltaire

Though your point about the "willing" is accurate,to include the USA. I personally think we're hanging by our fingernails right now and will leave Iraq and Afghanistan in defeat ultimately.

We will have gone from Afghanistan being jihad central to Pakistan,Afghanistan,Iraq,Gaza and Somalia under 100% jihadi control around 2008.
Defeat. It is an interesting term. Used often to express emotional discontent rather than reality.
Jihad central? That is an ambiguous term that describes nothing.
So what was it we did prior to all this that prevented further acts of terrorism?
The Cole was a defeat. Khobal Towers was a defeat. 1979 Iran, the Embassy, was a defeat. 1982-91 thirty US hostages killed over that period of time in Lebanon, it was a defeat. April 18, Embassy in Beirut, bombed 16 dead Americans, it was a defeat. The Marines killed in the bombing was a defeat.
21 acts of terror going back from 2000 to 1920. Thousands dead. Defeats all.
Yo what were we doing that prevented that?
Did we meet it head on like the war it is or like a crime and a police action?
Define the term defeat as you see it. Political? Military? Are we suffering untold casualties that make this a less than worthwhile effort?
Is it your desire we lose? Your attitude certainly makes that evident. There is not proof of what you say yet you vouchsafe it anyway.
There is plenty to show that in fact the opposite is occurring, yet it is ignored in order to go for the 'dark' side.
More and more provinces are being turned over to the Iraq. They are self governing (perhaps not to your liking, but then others don't like the way we govern ourselves) and in Afghanistan the Central government's influence expands not recedes.
Show me your proof of inevitable defeat. The only way we will suffer defeat is if the ungratefull citizens of this country once again chose to undermine the Military, give it lip support, then pull the rug from under it as they did to my generation in Vietnam. To that I say. 'If you do it again , never ever ask one member if the military to sacrifice their lives worthlessly on people who do not have the guts or wherewithal to see it through.
Defeat if it occurs will occur from within because of peole that think it is 'inevitable' and will surely occur because no one in america is capable of fighting it. Self Defeatism.
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government
Edward Abbey
[Image: eagle_1721.png]

Understanding reality is not defeatist. We're losing this war so bad it's palpable. Has nothing to do with politics either,but I won't get into that.

We're poised already to take a strong chance of losing in Iraq officially,all the future dead will be dead to provide both the USA and GW Bush a "fig leaf" like the dead in Vietnam from 1972-1975 were to provide same.

Hopefully,the non jihadi Iraqi will do better than the non communist Vietnamese did in 1975. Maybe we will keep air assets in theater to help the non jihadis,but we've already decided to abandon the nation,only a blind man cannot see it.
Bush's comments are for people like my wife,his intentions can be discerned in the Baker commission. We've given up hope. Instead of anger at me,I suggest you deal with reality,your nation and mine is bowing down to nothing more than a bunch of thugs.

Do I want that? hardly,my son has 2 combat patches already in Iraqi Freedom. What I want and what the people of this nation offer is 2 different things.


Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)