Larry Gude
Strung Out
Yep.
Ok, so, at least I can take small comfort that we see the same thing. This is DISTURBING.
Yep.
also from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_Davis_Hanson...
"Hanson was a strong defender of George W. Bush and his policies, especially the Iraq war."
"Hanson believed that the Iraq War was a good and worthwhile undertaking and was, on the whole, a laudable success."
...I'm just sayin.
Would have been an amazing success if we hadn't elected a democrat before it was over. Don't care which one, they don't think globally nor fund globally. Their mindset when dealing globally tend to be let the UN do it. Have no idea on world affairs.
Would have been an amazing success if we hadn't elected a democrat before it was over. Don't care which one, they don't think globally nor fund globally. Their mindset when dealing globally tend to be let the UN do it. Have no idea on world affairs.
The author also fails to mention that, as of FY 2012, the US spent more on defense than the nations with the next 10 largest defense budgets combined.
I fail to see why this is significant on several levels. The first is one that may mean nothing to you - but I am sure I don't want to live in a world where say, CHINA is the box on the right, and we are one of the ones on the left.
Obviously the reality is much more complicated, but the argument is money = power. And by a pretty comfortable margin we spend the most money.
What is very interesting as it relates to China..is how incredibly much more they get for the money they spent, at least when evaluated in terms of simple parameters like "frigates launched per year". You can argue capabilities but they are fast closing those gaps and even without that, when it comes to things like open-ocean large naval combatants and auxiliaries , "quantity is a quality of its own". The Chines are outbuilding us at a remarkable pace and we do not even have, any longer, the shipbuilding capabilities to keep up with them even if we wanted to.
Do we have to respond symmetrically to every other navy?...no. But lets not kid ourselves that China's massively military expansion is somehow made benign simply because they spend less than we do.
So what's wrong with Gilligan's Monday morning dose of propaganda???
Germany was hit with a massive bill for war reparations. A bill it could never be expected to pay. Massive inflation resulted and led directly to a resurgence in reactionary political factions and ultimately to WWII.
The author has this precisely ass backwards. Collapsing oil prices reduce not increase the likelihood of Russia or Iran doing something stupid. They need money to finance operations...money they don't have when oil is at $65 a barrel.
What is very interesting as it relates to China..is how incredibly much more they get for the money they spent, at least when evaluated in terms of simple parameters like "frigates launched per year".
the people producing the frigates also work for the GOV.
so there are no profits involved .... or western style wages :shrug:
That isn't all true, except for the wages/salaries part. I work there..in those very shipyards.
I am sorry, you are saying the Ship Builders are not ALL Owned by the Chinese Gov. ?
my understanding is western companies doing business in China, have to form a partnership with China one that China is the 60% owner and holder of all IP
Somebody in Maryland is doing their part. I went to get gas today, but regular unleaded was never below $2.30 a gallon. It was like 2 weeks ago that it was $2.09 at Wawa on 235 and Rue Purchase.The article is no longer available at The Fresno Bee at the time of this post (404 error when I tried to access it).
Interesting to read the comments here, though. Some make good sense, others not so much.
The one that struck me as really "off" was the one about deflated oil prices.
If you've worked the Russia portfolio one would know that there is an ongoing, comprehensive discussion regarding artificially keeping oil prices high so as to keep Russia from doing anything rash. Not so high that that can truly benefit, but high enough. Not agreeing (or not) with the idea and its workings out, just saying that it is universally understood that we approach going to DEFCON 1 (I speak figuratively here, not literally) when oil prices go below ~ $65 per barrel.
So if you ever wondered why we can never seem to get consistently below $2 per gallon, now you know one of the reasons. It's a "Butterfly effect."
--- End of line (MCP)
"quantity is a quality of its own".
Total | 1942 | 1943 | 1944 | 1945 | |
M4 series, 75mm gun | 33 671 | 8 017 | 21 245 | 3 758 | 651 |
M4 series, 76mm gun | 10 883 | 0 | 0 | 7 135 | 3 748 |
M4 series, 105mm how. | 4 680 | 0 | 0 | 2 286 | 2 394 |