# Military Spending Costs...



## tenacious (Jul 19, 2019)

I think most Americans support having a strong military.  But with the country running a Trillion Dollar deficit... seems like it's time to start considering how much is too much? 

All I know is this.  Obama pulled us out of Iraq, Trump says he's getting us out of Syria.  There is a peace deal in the works in Afghanistan.  How can we be exiting wars and the cost of the military has gone up?  




> *Defense spending is America’s cancerous bipartisan consensus*
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/defense-spending-is-americas-cancerous-bipartisan-consensus/2019/07/18/783a9e1a-a978-11e9-9214-246e594de5d5_story.html?utm_term=.8c7970dfff7d
> 
> You often hear that in these polarized times, Republicans and Democrats are deadlocked on almost everything. But the real scandal is what both sides agree on. The best example of this might be the defense budget. Last week, the Democratic House, which Republicans say is filled with radicals, voted to appropriate $733 billion for 2020 defense spending. The Republicans are outraged because they — along with President Trump — want that number to be $750 billion. In other words, on the largest item of discretionary spending in the federal budget, accounting for more than half of the total, Democrats and Republicans are divided by 2.3 percent. That is the cancerous consensus in Washington today.
> ...


----------



## espola (Jul 19, 2019)

tenacious said:


> I think most Americans support having a strong military.  But with the country running a Trillion Dollar deficit... seems like it's time to start considering how much is too much?
> 
> All I know is this.  Obama pulled us out of Iraq, Trump says he's getting us out of Syria.  There is a peace deal in the works in Afghanistan.  How can we be exiting wars and the cost of the military has gone up?


Rand Paul recently took the honorable position of refusing to allow unanimous approval of a bill that would have funded millions of dollars to support health care for first responders to the 911 disaster in New York and Washington.  Unanimous approval is a procedural maneuver that allows a bill to bypass the normal machinery a bill must pass through, such as multiple readings in the House and Senate (often bypassed by technicalities) and committee hearings, all of which can take weeks, even when a bill (such as the one in question) has overwhelming support.  His reason for refusing to grant unanimous passage was the bill's impact on the national debt.  However, he has not expressed much opposition to the real billion-dollar-budget-buster bills, such as defense appropriations and tax cuts for billionaires.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 19, 2019)

tenacious said:


> I think most Americans support having a strong military.  But with the country running a Trillion Dollar deficit... seems like it's time to start considering how much is too much?
> 
> All I know is this.  Obama pulled us out of Iraq, Trump says he's getting us out of Syria.  There is a peace deal in the works in Afghanistan.  How can we be exiting wars and the cost of the military has gone up?


A man like Eisenhower knew issues like this from all sides and saw where lobbying from powerful entities like those of defense contractors could/would go amuck. Much like big pharma, oil, food production, etc. Except in the case of military spending it is all tax payer dollars, not just tax breaks, loopholes, easing of regulations and making special allowances, etc. 
If we are so afraid of impending war we should have universal conscription, no excuses.


----------



## espola (Jul 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> A man like Eisenhower knew issues like this from all sides and saw where lobbying from powerful entities like those of defense contractors could/would go amuck. Much like big pharma, oil, food production, etc. Except in the case of military spending it is all tax payer dollars, not just tax breaks, loopholes, easing of regulations and making special allowances, etc.
> If we are so afraid of impending war we should have universal conscription, no excuses.


The military budget has long been welfare for science and engineering disciplines (of which I benefited for decades) without any of the messy political consequences of science and engineering being funded to study environmental impacts or the development of new energy sources.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 19, 2019)

tenacious said:


> I think most Americans support having a strong military.  But with the country running a Trillion Dollar deficit... seems like it's time to start considering how much is too much?
> 
> All I know is this.  Obama pulled us out of Iraq, Trump says he's getting us out of Syria.  There is a peace deal in the works in Afghanistan.  How can we be exiting wars and the cost of the military has gone up?


Obama built that.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 19, 2019)

tenacious said:


> I think most Americans support having a strong military.  But with the country running a Trillion Dollar deficit... seems like it's time to start considering how much is too much?
> 
> All I know is this.  Obama pulled us out of Iraq, Trump says he's getting us out of Syria.  There is a peace deal in the works in Afghanistan.  How can we be exiting wars and the cost of the military has gone up?


6 straight years of QE.  You people crack me up.


----------



## tenacious (Jul 19, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Obama built that.


Not sure I follow?  Presidents don't fund the military... 

But politics aside.  Can someone please tell me how it's gotten to be more expensive during peace time then war?  Because the we're getting ripped off alarm bells just started sounding in my head.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 19, 2019)

tenacious said:


> Not sure I follow?  Presidents don't fund the military...
> 
> But politics aside.  Can someone please tell me how it's gotten to be more expensive during peace time then war?  Because the we're getting ripped off alarm bells just started sounding in my head.


Since Vietnam we have always had some kind of war or "police action" going on somewhere.


----------



## espola (Jul 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Since Vietnam we have always had some kind of war or "police action" going on somewhere.


We got into Vietnam because we forgot our own roots in fighting off colonialism in the 18th Century, and some of our "leaders" were scared that if Vietnam went full-on commie (which is how the plebiscite election we had pledged to respect had turned out) that every country from India to New Zealand would be at risk to follow.  As it has turned out, the surest way for the people of a country to learn to hate having a Communist government is to actually have a Communist government.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 19, 2019)

espola said:


> We got into Vietnam because we forgot our own roots in fighting off colonialism in the 18th Century, and some of our "leaders" were scared that if Vietnam went full-on commie (which is how the plebiscite election we had pledged to respect had turned out) that every country from India to New Zealand would be at risk to follow.  As it has turned out, the surest way for the people of a country to learn to hate having a Communist government is to actually have a Communist government.


Should have stayed out of Central America as well.


----------



## espola (Jul 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Should have stayed out of Central America as well.


We have more legitimate concerns about Central America than we do (or did) in southeast Asia.  Our big problem there, as I see it, is that we act in a way that might be helpful to us culturally and economically, but lie about it because of the political liability back home (see the history of the rehabilitated felon Oliver North as an example).


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 19, 2019)

espola said:


> We have more legitimate concerns about Central America than we do (or did) in southeast Asia.  Our big problem there, as I see it, is that we act in a way that might be helpful to us culturally and economically, but lie about it because of the political liability back home (see the history of the rehabilitated felon Oliver North as an example).


The destabilization of duly elected governments, regime change, didn't work for us in Vietnam, Central America, Chile, Africa nor the Middle east. The "what happens next" plans were either ill concieved or not a consideration at all.


----------



## nononono (Jul 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> A man like Eisenhower knew issues like this from all sides and saw where lobbying from powerful entities like those of defense contractors could/would go amuck. Much like big pharma, oil, food production, etc. Except in the case of military spending it is all tax payer dollars, not just tax breaks, loopholes, easing of regulations and making special allowances, etc.
> If we are so afraid of impending war we should have universal conscription, no excuses.


*When you own a business, not upgrading with new equipment *
*to stay ahead of the competition is lost revenue....*
*When you are the leader of the Free World, not upgrading with *
*new equipment to stay ahead of the " Competing " Nations is a*
*recipe for impending FAILURE !*

*That's NOT a scare tactic....It's a FACT !*

*As for your comment about " Universal Conscription " ...it's a*
*ridiculous one. And NOT very well thought out. Of course what*
*should we expect from you Rodent, you don't do research....*
*You just regurgitate.*

*Throwing " Bodies " at a problem is absolute insanity and a good*
*way to lose in today's advanced warfare battlefield tactics....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> A man like Eisenhower knew issues like this from all sides and saw where lobbying from powerful entities like those of defense contractors could/would go amuck. Much like big pharma, oil, food production, etc. Except in the case of military spending it is all tax payer dollars, not just tax breaks, loopholes, easing of regulations and making special allowances, etc.
> If we are so afraid of impending war we should have universal conscription, no excuses.


Ahhh my little chicken hawk.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 19, 2019)

tenacious said:


> Not sure I follow?  Presidents don't fund the military...
> 
> But politics aside.  Can someone please tell me how it's gotten to be more expensive during peace time then war?  Because the we're getting ripped off alarm bells just started sounding in my head.


Exactly, they don’t fund it but they can tear it down.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> A man like Eisenhower knew issues like this from all sides and saw where lobbying from powerful entities like those of defense contractors could/would go amuck. Much like big pharma, oil, food production, etc. Except in the case of military spending it is all tax payer dollars, not just tax breaks, loopholes, easing of regulations and making special allowances, etc.
> If we are so afraid of impending war we should have universal conscription, no excuses.


Don’t forget the near doubling of the national debt under Obama.  Makes military spending look like chump change.  But you people keep running from it.  It’s kinda funny.  But I get it.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 19, 2019)

espola said:


> We got into Vietnam because we forgot our own roots in fighting off colonialism in the 18th Century, and some of our "leaders" were scared that if Vietnam went full-on commie (which is how the plebiscite election we had pledged to respect had turned out) that every country from India to New Zealand would be at risk to follow.  As it has turned out, the surest way for the people of a country to learn to hate having a Communist government is to actually have a Communist government.


So it wasn’t the Russians after all.


----------



## tenacious (Jul 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Don’t forget the near doubling of the national debt under Obama.  Makes military spending look like chump change.  But you people keep running from it.  It’s kinda funny.  But I get it.


I'm sorry what's your point here?  That because of Obama now nobody can talk about deficits ever again because you've thrown up a couple made up stats?  Good grief, you're really starting to pull the pasta a little thin on some of these answers bubs.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 21, 2019)

tenacious said:


> I'm sorry what's your point here?  That because of Obama now nobody can talk about deficits ever again because you've thrown up a couple made up stats?  Good grief, you're really starting to pull the pasta a little thin on some of these answers bubs.


Talk about the cause of ALL deficits all you want.  That’s the point.  Use all the Lasagna you want.


----------



## tenacious (Jul 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Talk about the cause of ALL deficits all you want.  That’s the point.  Use all the Lasagna you want.


Um... not sure I agree. 
Obama inherited two/three wars that were started in the wake of 911.  Since then those wars have all been declared success and have seen massive troop withdraws.  And yet the year cost of funding the military hasn't fallen the way it has at the end of every war in the history of mankind. 

Do you see where I'm going with this, and how my exact point is that plainly this is not business as usual?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 21, 2019)

tenacious said:


> Um... not sure I agree.
> Obama inherited two/three wars that were started in the wake of 911.  Since then those wars have all been declared success and have seen massive troop withdraws.  And yet the year cost of funding the military hasn't fallen the way it has at the end of every war in the history of mankind.
> 
> Do you see where I'm going with this, and how my exact point is that plainly this is not business as usual?


Ye$ it i$.  The Romans had their own QE too.  Debasing money makes everything more expensive.  When you add more money to the system without adding any more goods and services to the system, you have more dollars in the system competing for less goods and services.  Hence the secondary price inflation, after the primary money supply inflation.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 21, 2019)

tenacious said:


> Um... not sure I agree.
> Obama inherited two/three wars that were started in the wake of 911.  Since then those wars have all been declared success and have seen massive troop withdraws.  And yet the year cost of funding the military hasn't fallen the way it has at the end of every war in the history of mankind.
> 
> Do you see where I'm going with this, and how my exact point is that plainly this is not business as usual?


Um... anyone who begins a reply with, "Um" is ummm, well, um,...Um....


----------



## tenacious (Jul 21, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Um... anyone who begins a reply with, "Um" is ummm, well, um,...Um....


Funny how a couple of well placed words can really produce a reaction in a reader.  I slip some of those things in sometimes and usually no one points them out.  And then other times, you just know by the response... umm, how do you say... that the aim of the barb was true.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 21, 2019)

tenacious said:


> Funny how a couple of well placed words can really produce a reaction in a reader.  I slip some of those things in sometimes and usually no one points them out.  And then other times, you just know by the others response... umm, how do you say... that the aim was true.


Um... Yeah, umm,...that's the ticket,..guh,..slurp,.gu-hump.


----------



## tenacious (Jul 21, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Um... Yeah, umm,...that's the ticket,..guh,..slurp,.gu-hump.


So no thought on military spending or the deficit?  Just MAGA all the waay! 
But hey, why do that when you can play mayor of the forum and look down on how others write.  lol 

Anyway you didn't answer my question?  I'm cool with treating you however you want to self identify.  Is it hick or hillybilly?  And trust me when I tell you Ima make sure to say it with love each and every time I bring it up...


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 21, 2019)

tenacious said:


> So no thought on military spending or the deficit?  Just MAGA all the waay!
> But hey, why do that when you can play mayor of the forum and look down on how others write.  lol
> 
> Anyway you didn't answer my question?  I'm cool with treating you however you want to self identify.  Is it hick or hillybilly?  And trust me when I tell you Ima make sure to say it with love each and every time I bring it up...


Atta boy.
You are a softy deep down. 

hey I am too.


----------



## tenacious (Jul 21, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Atta boy.
> You are a softy deep down.
> 
> hey I am too.


Not many in here can understand this next sentence I'm going to say quite like you.  But, it's a cruel world out there for us givers.  So I appreciate the kind words.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 21, 2019)

tenacious said:


> Not many in here can understand this next sentence I'm going to say quite like you.  But, it's a cruel world out there for us givers.  So I appreciate the kind words.


Shit 'givers', his in an obvious manner, yours in prose.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 21, 2019)

tenacious said:


> Not many in here can understand this next sentence I'm going to say quite like you.  But, it's a cruel world out there for us givers.  So I appreciate the kind words.


Small cracks of humanity bleed through.


----------



## Booter (Jul 22, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Don’t forget the near doubling of the national debt under Obama.  Makes military spending look like chump change.  But you people keep running from it.  It’s kinda funny.  But I get it.


Due to the Great Recession, making W. Bush’s temporary tax cuts permanent, increased Social Security and Medicare spending as more Baby Boomers retire and become 65 years old and the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.  *The national debt was already projected to double before Obama even took office.  President Obama’s debt actually grew at a slower annual rate than any of the Republican presidents even though there were events that negatively impacted the deficit that started before he became President.*

Same old drivel from Izzy the partisan hack!!!  Izzy take a look at how much Don The Con is adding to the national debt.  While the economy is experiencing its longest sustained expansion in American history, the federal deficit is ballooning — when its supposed to shrink during strong economic times.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 22, 2019)

Booter said:


> Due to the Great Recession, making W. Bush’s temporary tax cuts permanent, increased Social Security and Medicare spending as more Baby Boomers retire and become 65 years old and the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.  *The national debt was already projected to double before Obama even took office.  President Obama’s debt actually grew at a slower annual rate than any of the Republican presidents even though there were events that negatively impacted the deficit that started before he became President.*
> 
> Same old drivel from Izzy the partisan hack!!!  Izzy take a look at how much Don The Con is adding to the national debt.  While the economy is experiencing its longest sustained expansion in American history, the federal deficit is ballooning — when its supposed to shrink during strong economic times.


You are trying to converse with a parrot.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 22, 2019)

Booter said:


> Due to the Great Recession, making W. Bush’s temporary tax cuts permanent, increased Social Security and Medicare spending as more Baby Boomers retire and become 65 years old and the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.  *The national debt was already projected to double before Obama even took office.  President Obama’s debt actually grew at a slower annual rate than any of the Republican presidents even though there were events that negatively impacted the deficit that started before he became President.*
> 
> Same old drivel from Izzy the partisan hack!!!  Izzy take a look at how much Don The Con is adding to the national debt.  While the economy is experiencing its longest sustained expansion in American history, the federal deficit is ballooning — when its supposed to shrink during strong economic times.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 22, 2019)

Booter said:


> Due to the Great Recession, making W. Bush’s temporary tax cuts permanent, increased Social Security and Medicare spending as more Baby Boomers retire and become 65 years old and the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.  *The national debt was already projected to double before Obama even took office.  President Obama’s debt actually grew at a slower annual rate than any of the Republican presidents even though there were events that negatively impacted the deficit that started before he became President.*
> 
> Same old drivel from Izzy the partisan hack!!!  Izzy take a look at how much Don The Con is adding to the national debt.  While the economy is experiencing its longest sustained expansion in American history, the federal deficit is ballooning — when its supposed to shrink during strong economic times.


both Bush and Obama made trillion dollar deficits fashionable.  Obama just averaged a trillion dollars in deficits through his 8 glorious years.  Six of which were subsidized with QE.
The Fracking President.  Might as well.


----------



## messy (Jul 22, 2019)

Booter said:


> Due to the Great Recession, making W. Bush’s temporary tax cuts permanent, increased Social Security and Medicare spending as more Baby Boomers retire and become 65 years old and the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.  *The national debt was already projected to double before Obama even took office.  President Obama’s debt actually grew at a slower annual rate than any of the Republican presidents even though there were events that negatively impacted the deficit that started before he became President.*
> 
> Same old drivel from Izzy the partisan hack!!!  Izzy take a look at how much Don The Con is adding to the national debt.  While the economy is experiencing its longest sustained expansion in American history, the federal deficit is ballooning — when its supposed to shrink during strong economic times.


You’re way over their head whenever you discuss economics.
The simple math of Trump tax cuts leading to less revenue leading to greater deficits escapes them. They don’t understand it.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 22, 2019)

messy said:


> You’re way over their head whenever you discuss economics.
> The simple math of Trump tax cuts leading to less revenue leading to greater deficits escapes them. They don’t understand it.


So, you, the big tax and spend Ca lib has issues with higher taxes?
I have now seen it all.


----------



## messy (Jul 22, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> So, you, the big tax and spend Ca lib has issues with higher taxes?
> I have now seen it all.


Republicans are so dumb they do “spend and don’t tax.” Really stupid.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 23, 2019)

messy said:


> Republicans are so dumb they do “spend and don’t tax.” Really stupid.


Thatʻs a Laffer.


----------



## nononono (Jul 23, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You are trying to converse with a parrot.


*You are regurgitating like a plugged toilet....*


----------



## Booter (Jul 23, 2019)

*Under Donald Trump, spending is growing faster than under Barack Obama*

It's official: Conservatives only care about deficits when a Democrat is president.

Under Donald Trump the deficit is on a path to more than a trillion dollars per year and discretionary government spending is growing faster than it was under Barack Obama, when he was working to stimulate our way out of the Great Recession.

It's a story we've seen repeatedly since Ronald Reagan. Bill Clinton was famously the last president to preside over a budget surplus and by 2014 Barack Obama had gotten our deficits to half of what they are today under Donald Trump, despite the Great Recession. Because of the sequestration deal that was just taken off the books in this latest budget deal, Obama presided over a reduction in discretionary government spending of nearly 2% per year in his second term.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/23/opinions/under-trump-spending-is-growing-faster-than-under-obama-avlon/index.html


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 23, 2019)

Booter said:


> *Under Donald Trump, spending is growing faster than under Barack Obama*
> 
> It's official: Conservatives only care about deficits when a Democrat is president.
> 
> ...


After 6 straight years of QE and a near doubling of the national debt why wouldnʻt deficits be higher?  Fries U!  What a deal!


----------



## messy (Jul 23, 2019)

Booter said:


> *Under Donald Trump, spending is growing faster than under Barack Obama*
> 
> It's official: Conservatives only care about deficits when a Democrat is president.
> 
> ...


Of course they are. They usually do spend more than they bring in. They’re dumb like Iz. They don’t understand economics. Their last president sent us into a recession.
But 2 of their idiots tried to save money by voting against the 1st responders of 9/11 compensation fund. Good job!


----------



## Multi Sport (Jul 23, 2019)

tenacious said:


> Anyway you didn't answer my question?  .


Waiting to see how your detective work is coming along. I just gotta ask that you report your findings back here to the forum.

On your topic... our Military takes it's direction from our government who has already proven a lack self control when it comes to spending. From local to state to our federal government leaders they are mostly in it for themselves so it's not surprising that the same attitude has permeated into our Military.

A friend of mine, retired Navy pilot, would tell me of the "fuel dumps" they would do in order to secure funding for additional fuel. Maybe start there and move up.

Don't forget to report back.. *GoBearGo* and I are having a little wager on your findings...


----------



## espola (Jul 23, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Waiting to see how your detective work is coming along. I just gotta ask that you report your findings back here to the forum.
> 
> On your topic... our Military takes it's direction from our government who has already proven a lack self control when it comes to spending. From local to state to our federal government leaders they are mostly in it for themselves so it's not surprising that the same attitude has permeated into our Military.
> 
> ...


In my days in the Navy, nobody "dumped" fuel, but as the end of a budget period approached the flight training schedule would be increased to make sure that full use was made of the allotted amount.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 24, 2019)

espola said:


> In my days in the Navy, nobody "dumped" fuel, but as the end of a budget period approached the flight training schedule would be increased to make sure that full use was made of the allotted amount.


Navy aircraft dump fuel all the time to meet landing weight requirements.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jul 24, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Navy aircraft dump fuel all the time to meet landing weight requirements.


According to my friend that was not the case. They were flying out for the sole purpose of fuel dumping. Im sure they also dump prior to landing but the amount of $$ wasted just to dumo fuel must be pretty high..


----------



## nononono (Jul 24, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> According to my friend that was not the case. They were flying out for the sole purpose of fuel dumping. Im sure they also dump prior to landing but the* amount of $$ wasted just to dump fuel must be pretty high..*


*It is..............!*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 24, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> According to my friend that was not the case. They were flying out for the sole purpose of fuel dumping. Im sure they also dump prior to landing but the amount of $$ wasted just to dumo fuel must be pretty high..


Around the end of the month Skipper would ask pilots, “who wants to go to vegas for the weekend”.  Miramar was still Tomcat Alley back then.  Depending on how much gas we had to burn weʻde launch 2 to 4 birds off to Nellis.


----------



## espola (Jul 24, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> According to my friend that was not the case. They were flying out for the sole purpose of fuel dumping. Im sure they also dump prior to landing but the amount of $$ wasted just to dumo fuel must be pretty high..


Well, if your "friend" says so, who are we to argue?


----------



## espola (Jul 24, 2019)

espola said:


> In my days in the Navy, nobody "dumped" fuel, but as the end of a budget period approached the flight training schedule would be increased to make sure that full use was made of the allotted amount.


Training squadrons (where everyone wants fight hours) will sometimes find that if they can keep up a high aircraft ready rate then they may push at the limits of  their fuel allotment and the CO will request from the Wing Commander that fuel allotted to active squadrons that are not flying much (usually that means many of the pilots are on leave after returning from deployment) be transferred.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jul 24, 2019)

espola said:


> Training squadrons (where everyone wants fight hours) will sometimes find that if they can keep up a high aircraft ready rate then they may push at the limits of  their fuel allotment and the CO will request from the Wing Commander that fuel allotted to active squadrons that are not flying much (usually that means many of the pilots are on leave after returning from deployment) be transferred.


If you say so. Who are we to argue.


----------



## espola (Jul 24, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> If you say so. Who are we to argue.


I have many friends who can tell the same story.


----------



## espola (Jul 24, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Around the end of the month Skipper would ask pilots, “who wants to go to vegas for the weekend”.  Miramar was still Tomcat Alley back then.  Depending on how much gas we had to burn weʻde launch 2 to 4 birds off to Nellis.


I arrived at Pt. Mugu on a Friday afternoon in June 1970.  They told me I was assigned to Night Shift and to come back Monday at 4 PM (they gave me Sunday night off so the paperwork could process from the Shop Chief to the Night Shift Supervisor).  Friday afternoon a Navy Pilot and RIO checked out one of the NMC F4 fighters for a "cross-country training mission" to Pensacola, Florida for the weekend.  They requested a cargo blivet (an enclosed container that could installed temporarily on a wing bomb rack) to carry their personal luggage.  They returned Sunday after dark and attempted a landing on a path 90° from the heading of the main runway, in a wildlife preserve.  They were still digging up parts when I came into work Monday at 4 PM.


----------



## messy (Jul 24, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Around the end of the month Skipper would ask pilots, “who wants to go to vegas for the weekend”.  Miramar was still Tomcat Alley back then.  Depending on how much gas we had to burn weʻde launch 2 to 4 birds off to Nellis.


You girls sound cute!


----------



## Multi Sport (Jul 24, 2019)

espola said:


> I have many friends who can tell the same story.


As do I.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 24, 2019)

messy said:


> You girls sound cute!


Man overboard.


----------



## messy (Jul 25, 2019)

Nice group of Marines down there at Pendleton, huh?
Human trafficking and drugs.
Oorah!


----------



## nononono (Jul 25, 2019)

espola said:


> Training squadrons (where everyone wants fight hours) will sometimes find that if they can keep up a high aircraft ready rate then they may push at the limits of  their fuel allotment and the CO will request from the Wing Commander that fuel allotted to active squadrons that are not flying much (usually that means many of the pilots are on leave after returning from deployment) be transferred.



*What....?*

*




*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 25, 2019)

nononono said:


> *What....?*
> 
> *
> 
> ...


"You can't handle the truth"


----------



## espola (Jul 25, 2019)

More on the Marines arrested for smuggling --

The Marines were taken into custody at Camp Pendleton on Thursday morning during battalion formation....The arrests were “a public display for the entire unit to see,” 1st Lt. Cameron Edinburgh, a division spokesman, told The Los Angeles Times.​
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/marines-arrested-on-human-smuggling-charges_n_5d39fb5be4b0419fd339eb18


----------



## nononono (Jul 26, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> "You can't handle the truth"



*Puleeeease...*
*Do some research Rodent....*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 26, 2019)

nononono said:


> *Puleeeease...*
> *Do some research Rodent....*


Your projections would be hilarious if you weren't such a sad character.


----------



## nononono (Jul 26, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Your projections would be hilarious
> if you weren't such a sad character.


*Just for you Rodent...*
*Just for you....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 27, 2019)

messy said:


> Nice group of Marines down there at Pendleton, huh?
> Human trafficking and drugs.
> Oorah!


They didn't want those people to be held at the concentration camps on the border where Trump is building ovens and gas chambers.  The drugs came with the humans as street currency.  Duh!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 27, 2019)

messy said:


> You’re way over their head whenever you discuss economics.
> The simple math of Trump tax cuts leading to less revenue leading to greater deficits escapes them. They don’t understand it.


Less revenue is what you had before and certainly after 6 straight years of QE and a near doubling of the national debt.  Fries U!  What a deal.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 27, 2019)

messy said:


> You’re way over their head whenever you discuss economics.
> The simple math of Trump tax cuts leading to less revenue leading to greater deficits escapes them. They don’t understand it.


Less revenue is what you had before and certainly after 6 straight years of QE and a near doubling of the national debt.  Fries U!  What a deal.


----------



## tenacious (Jul 31, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Less revenue is what you had before and certainly after 6 straight years of QE and a near doubling of the national debt.  Fries U!  What a deal.


Isn't that special... bubs has an excuse about why he's fine with Trumps deficit spending after years of pronouncing himself and free trader.

No more quoting from Milton Friedman for you.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 1, 2019)

tenacious said:


> Isn't that special... bubs has an excuse about why he's fine with Trumps deficit spending after years of pronouncing himself and free trader.
> 
> No more quoting from Milton Friedman for you.


Why would I be fine with the annual average trillion dollar deficit spending of Obama that Trump inherited?


----------



## tenacious (Aug 1, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Why would I be fine with the annual average trillion dollar deficit spending of Obama that Trump inherited?


I believe the better question is why you're anti-deficit spending with Obama, but never willing to hold Trump up to the same criticism? 

You afraid Sheriff Joe is going to ride up with his happy cowboy friends and take away your republican card?  lol  You people make me laugh with how trained you've become.


----------



## nononono (Aug 1, 2019)

tenacious said:


> I believe the better question is why you're anti-deficit
> spending with Obama, but never willing to hold
> Trump up to the same criticism?
> 
> ...



*Tiny " T " and his Liberal Lemming Tirade.....*
*Oooooo....yur  soooo stern..*
*How about you wake up to the Shithole Obama*
*was creating and Trump has eliminated.....*
*You want to talk about training....you're still*
*parading around in a Brown Shirt and Jack Boots....*


----------

