the 5 criteria to judge a politician

[J. Henry Christ]

[ QUOTE ]
In a sense it doesn't. Lockheed Martin makes all of our weapons. Logistical support is often done third party. The government merely provides the manpower and leadership. Which is really what it should be doing.

[/ QUOTE ]

The founding fathers might disagree vehemently.

[J. Henry Christ]

[ QUOTE ]
they don't do much for offense.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay. And every offensive entanglement America has engaged in has proven to be a waste of lives and resources in the long run and has led to the meteoric growth of the US federal govt and decrease in our peace and prosperity. If America had a kick-ass defense at 1/5 of the cost of maintaining our bloated offense, we would not be f'd with and would be morfe free with less burden of our govt. But you wouldn't have B-2s to give you a hard on during an air show, so I see the trade off.

[J. Henry Christ]

[ QUOTE ]
What is stated is that in a world where some country is going to be top dog. I want it to be the one I live in.

[/ QUOTE ]

And there is the root of most the problems with America. You don't want to be free, safe, and a moral govt, you want to be the big bully & "top dog" on the world's block. Congrats. You have your wish. Hope it is turning out as well as you had hoped. Hope the 100s of 1000s of dead Americans who fought in needless wars over the last 100 years, and the 10s of trillions of dollars which could have either been left to the people or spent on making America a truly great society, are all worth the price that yours and others ego has demanded.

[J. Henry Christ]

[ QUOTE ]
The fighter Jet secures the freedom which allows the guy the ability to pursue happiness.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's bs. Name one fighter jet ever used by the US military to secure our defense. Name just one time US jets ever defended our freedom... just one engagement. It never happened. Jets have been used in Korea, Vietnam, Gulf War, etc., all conflicts with other nations that never threatened our freedom or our way of life (however, maintaining, financing, and needlessly using our bloated military has threatened both).

[iron81]

Well, they tried to shoot down the jetliners on 9-11, but the passengers on United 93 beat them to the punch. Does that count? And before anyone says WWII, the US didn't have jets in that conflict.

[J. Henry Christ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Clearly our military can currently destroy any other indvidiual countries conventional forces (and probably any random combiniation of countries) without any problem.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not quite true, if we took on North Korea we'd lose 50 to 100 thousand American troops by conservative estimate. That's hardly 'without any problem'.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do we even need the ability to "take" N Korea? There are plenty of very rich, very capable countries in that region which can adequately defend themselves if forced to. And we could cheaply (relatively) defend against any strategic NK threat to our homeland. There is no reason the US needs to be involved in this potential conflict.... oh wait, having the world's largest "top dog" military has led us down this path, where we have sat for the last 50+ years, and all that investment hasn't made America safer from NK threats, but if anything we are more at risk or the same risk (near zero) from NK. So what again has been the point? Oh yeah, being top dog is cool.

[J. Henry Christ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Clearly our military can currently destroy any other indvidiual countries conventional forces (and probably any random combiniation of countries) without any problem.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not quite true, if we took on North Korea we'd lose 50 to 100 thousand American troops by conservative estimate. That's hardly 'without any problem'.

[/ QUOTE ]

If we really wanted to destroy North Korea we could easily obliterate them with nuclear weapons and they would not have time to strike back because their missiles can't reach us from North Korea. Russia, Britain, China, and France are the only countries that have sufficient missile range to strike back at us with nuclear weapons. Fortuntaley producing missiles with sufficient range to reach America from Asia or Europe is extremely difficult. Furthermore, ICBMs are very large and complex, so it is unlikley that North Korea has obtained them on the black market.

[/ QUOTE ]

We could have a nearly impregnable missile defense if we focused our defense budget from offense to defense. Maintaining the world's largest conventional offensive juggernaut actually makes us weaker in this regard.

[Paxosmotic]

I fixed yours for mine.

1. strong belief and support of the constitution and our role in a global economy

2. strong belief in America participating in the global democratic process and acting as a broker of peace

3. strong belief in a progressive tax rate, responsible government spending, and a balanced budget. A belief that wealth redistribution is necessary and the willingness to help the more fortunate understand that necessity through legislation.

4. Intergrity of character

5. whatever values and beliefs on social issues he'd like because government does not legislate morality.

[pwnsall]

I've always heard Washingon was a terrible military general.

[4 High]

Issues

1. Strong belief in restribution of some wealth. In various forms is acceptable, but believing in highly taxing the rich and cutting the poors taxes are big to me.

2. Desire to expand and fix Social programs such as Workfare(Not Welfare), Universal Healthcare and Fix Social Security.

3. At least a passing interest in taxing churches. No reason in this day and age they should not be.

4. Supportive of a strong and poweful BUT not wasteful military. I think both Clinton and Bush have gone too extreme in different ways.

5. Support of The Bill of Rights.

Person

1. Intelligence
2. Cunning
3. Dealbroker/Dealmaker
4. Charismatic
5. Highly Ethical