Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel is stepping down under pressure, the first cabinet-level casualty of the collapse of President Obama's Democratic majority in the Senate and a beleaguered national security team that has struggled to stay ahead of an onslaught of global crises.

The president, who is expected to announce Mr. Hagel's resignation in a Rose Garden appearance on Monday, made the decision to ask his defense secretary — the sole Republican on his national security team — to step down last Friday after a series of meetings over the past two weeks, senior administration officials said.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/102183397" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Who's ready for the two year Democratic dictatorship

Yep "Resigning"
The wheels on the bus...

Chuck was hired to downgrade the Military and did a great job but now it turns out a strong Military is needed

This is the administration that can't shoot straight

Another rat off the sinking ship.

If you stand to close to a nuclear disaster, you get contaminated. Run Chuck, run.

CAA Flagship wrote:If you stand to close to a nuclear disaster, you get contaminated. Run Chuck, run.

Too

kalm wrote:

CAA Flagship wrote:If you stand to close to a nuclear disaster, you get contaminated. Run Chuck, run.

Too

Hagel always has been a douchebag so getting tied up with the idiot in the White House serves him right.

Gotta find a new job for Holder.

Bronco wrote:Yep "Resigning"
The wheels on the bus...

Chuck was hired to downgrade the Military and did a great job but now it turns out a strong Military is needed

This is the administration that can't shoot straight

Um...
Can you explain exactly what a stronger military than the one we have is needed for exactly..?
Seriously probably the dumbest thing anybody has ever said on this forum

"country that spends more than the next five largest militarys in the world COMBINED needs more military"

I will listen to a logical debate on how we should USE our existing military better - yes indeed


The American World Police Needs More Military

The U.S. military is not the largest, although U.S. military personnel are better paid that those in China, Russia, etc. They also live in nicer living quarters, medical facilities, etc. than soldiers in most countries, so naturally, we spend more per service member than most.

However, the bulk of expense is related to our reliance on technology. Technological development and implementation ain't cheap. As long as we wish to maintain technological supremacy, we will continue to spend big bucks.

Chizzang wrote:

Bronco wrote:Yep "Resigning"
The wheels on the bus...

Chuck was hired to downgrade the Military and did a great job but now it turns out a strong Military is needed

This is the administration that can't shoot straight

Um...
Can you explain exactly what a stronger military than the one we have is needed for exactly..?
Seriously probably the dumbest thing anybody has ever said on this forum

"country that spends more than the next five largest militarys in the world COMBINED needs more military"

I will listen to a logical debate on how we should USE our existing military better - yes indeed


The American World Police Needs More Military

YOU are correct in a lot of what you say here-

But that pie chart is disingenous and you know it.

China's per capita spending is based in their own currency and therefore extremely deflated. Add to that that their military industrial complex is almost entirely state owned and therefore they underreport their own spending (and they also don't pay $200 bucks for ponchos). China's spending IS currently less than ours but they will pass us in about 5-6 years and that means that either they are about to suddenly EXPLODE (not likely) or your pie chart is statistics (lies, damn lies.... more likely)

Chizzang wrote:

YOu must have misunderstood what I said

But thanks for all the pie

I like pie

BTW I have always said that EU countries spend one dollar less on their own militaries for every dollar we spend on our own. Scientists call that a parasitic relationship but we call them our friends.

I'm all for letting the EU guarantee its own safety for a change (and watch what happens to all those social utopias when they have to choose between paid vacations for all or not speaking Russian)

CID1990 wrote:
YOu must have misunderstood what I said

But thanks for all the pie

I like pie

BTW I have always said that EU countries spend one dollar less on their own militaries for every dollar we spend on our own. Scientists call that a parasitic relationship but we call them our friends.

I'm all for letting the EU guarantee its own safety for a change (and watch what happens to all those social utopias when they have to choose between paid vacations for all or not speaking Russian)

Sure, I completely agree: But that will never happen
because 80% of the people who vote Republican think we need MORE MILITARY
(as this political forum shows me over and over again)

Because somehow "More" is better
and "More" solves all the problems
More Military is the answer

Bronco wrote:Yep "Resigning"
The wheels on the bus...

Chuck was hired to downgrade the Military and did a great job but now it turns out a strong Military is needed

This is the administration that can't shoot straight

Actually we don't need half the military we have now; we're the world's largest producer of oil and don't need the middle east any more. Keep Israel around for if we need any killing done in the area and start pulling out today.

Ivytalk wrote:Gotta find a new job for Holder.

I think his future is assured.

CitadelGrad wrote:The U.S. military is not the largest, although U.S. military personnel are better paid that those in China, Russia, etc. They also live in nicer living quarters, medical facilities, etc. than soldiers in most countries, so naturally, we spend more per service member than most.

However, the bulk of expense is related to our reliance on technology. Technological development and implementation ain't cheap. As long as we wish to maintain technological supremacy, we will continue to spend big bucks.

And hope we don't catch the wrong solar flare at an inopportune time...

Chizzang wrote:

CID1990 wrote:
YOu must have misunderstood what I said

But thanks for all the pie

I like pie

BTW I have always said that EU countries spend one dollar less on their own militaries for every dollar we spend on our own. Scientists call that a parasitic relationship but we call them our friends.

I'm all for letting the EU guarantee its own safety for a change (and watch what happens to all those social utopias when they have to choose between paid vacations for all or not speaking Russian)

Sure, I completely agree: But that will never happen
because 80% of the people who vote Republican think we need MORE MILITARY
(as this political forum shows me over and over again)

Because somehow "More" is better
and "More" solves all the problems
More Military is the answer

You're both right. Our military build up and projection of power in the Middle East and Western Europe
made it such that none of our allies needed to spend much on defense. Its how we won the super power game. And tons of people in the defense and energy industries got really rich from it.

It's almost like it was by design.

(Yes, I'm Captain Obvious).

houndawg wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:Gotta find a new job for Holder.

I think his future is assured.

In a federal prison.

I'm giving Obama mega credit for how he firmly handled what appears to be a derogatory personnel situation. This is accountability and, if Conks knew anything about that, they'd recognize it.

Lots of presidents would have just let it be, but Obama was thinking about not only his administration and the politics of it all, but, also, about the well-being of the nation in doing this.

Think back to the W reign of error. That pussy would never have done this, nor so publicly. Correction, Cheney would never have done this.

Rats off a sinking ship? Shit, Obama forced the guy out (as a good people manager would do). Powell got (rightfully) disgusted and jumped the ship on his own.

Obama 1, Conks 0.

CitadelGrad wrote:

houndawg wrote:
I think his future is assured.

In a federal prison.

Not a chance. He'll make millions on Wall Street.

houndawg wrote:

CitadelGrad wrote:
In a federal prison.

Not a chance. He'll make millions on Wall Street.

……..especially during the Obama administration!

GObama!!!!!!

houndawg wrote:

CitadelGrad wrote:
In a federal prison.

Not a chance. He'll make millions on Wall Street.

With all the other banksters who should be in federal prisons.

Cap'n Cat wrote:

houndawg wrote:
Not a chance. He'll make millions on Wall Street.

……..especially during the Obama administration!

GObama!!!!!!

It's called an asset bubble you stupid fuck.

Too bad that grandma and grandpa fixed-income are getting fucked by Obamayellenbernanke every day.