Skip to main content

View Diary: Media chooses paranoia over substance in reporting proposed Pentagon troop reductions. Again. (66 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  A huge standing Army is becoming more and more (4+ / 0-)

    obsolete in the current types of war.

    Small quick reaction forces are more pertinent than anything else for on the ground troops. Coupled with air and naval power, we don't NEED a huge lumbering army.

    Libertarianism is just Fascism with a facelift. Scratch the surface of Libertarianism and you will find the notion that corporations should rule supreme, just as it was with Fascism..

    by Walt starr on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 12:48:09 PM PST

    •  Nor do we want one (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MPociask, Calamity Jean

      Armies occupy. We want to get in and get out, not station 100k troops there for half a century.

      I'm living in America, and in America you're on your own. America's not a country. It's just a business.

      by CFAmick on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 01:09:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Nor is it (likely) constitutional (0+ / 0-)

        The Constitution explicitly provides for a permanent navy and both the text and the history of the Constitution suggest a temporary army that should be raised only when needed (and then only provided for an initial period of 2 years).

        "There shall be no standing army but in time of actual war."  -  Thomas Jefferson.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site