Commanders Post at The Warpath - View Single Post

dragontat7169 · 10-29-2004, 01:13 PM

Normally, I don't speak about Politics...except for when it directly relates to me. I was in the Marine Corps from '91 to '99 (most with a Democrat as 'Commander in Chief' "Bill Clinton") and let me tell you about Democrats. Most of the cuts you say that happened as a Result of Bush were all put into place when Clinton was President. Clinton successfully reduced all Military Personnel. The Marine Corps, which is already the Smallest Branch, was reduced from 185k to under 125k in the 8 years that Clinton was President. When Budgets are given to the Armed Service, it is done on a basis of per member. So the fewer members the fewer dollars in the Budget. Fewer Dollars in the Budget means fewer dollars to spend on equipment such as body armour, weapons and vehicle maintenance. When Bush took over, he took over an already depleted Military (Thanks to Clinton) with inadequate weapons and gear. And Clinton had also put into effect Bills that made it more difficult to get emergency funds for the Military.

So if you ask me which has done better for our country and the defense there of, I would have to say Republicans. Anyone who thinks that the war in Iraq is strictly for Oil, then you definitely need to look a the big picture. Bush has successfully proven that Iraq (Saddam) has monetarily supported Al-Qadea (or however you spell it). Yes, Bush has made mistakes but he has also admitted to them. Bush has also made decisions and stuck by them. I would rather have a President that is willing to make decisions (instead of someone like Kerry who jumps from one side of the fence to the other to sastify public opinion) and sticks to them regardless of the public opinion. And if we let another Democrat lead our country, I am afraid that the Military will suffer more than anyone can possibly imagine and the Defense of our Country would be at a greater risk.

10-29-2004, 01:13 PM	#41
dragontat7169 Camp Scrub Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 92	Normally, I don't speak about Politics...except for when it directly relates to me. I was in the Marine Corps from '91 to '99 (most with a Democrat as 'Commander in Chief' "Bill Clinton") and let me tell you about Democrats. Most of the cuts you say that happened as a Result of Bush were all put into place when Clinton was President. Clinton successfully reduced all Military Personnel. The Marine Corps, which is already the Smallest Branch, was reduced from 185k to under 125k in the 8 years that Clinton was President. When Budgets are given to the Armed Service, it is done on a basis of per member. So the fewer members the fewer dollars in the Budget. Fewer Dollars in the Budget means fewer dollars to spend on equipment such as body armour, weapons and vehicle maintenance. When Bush took over, he took over an already depleted Military (Thanks to Clinton) with inadequate weapons and gear. And Clinton had also put into effect Bills that made it more difficult to get emergency funds for the Military. So if you ask me which has done better for our country and the defense there of, I would have to say Republicans. Anyone who thinks that the war in Iraq is strictly for Oil, then you definitely need to look a the big picture. Bush has successfully proven that Iraq (Saddam) has monetarily supported Al-Qadea (or however you spell it). Yes, Bush has made mistakes but he has also admitted to them. Bush has also made decisions and stuck by them. I would rather have a President that is willing to make decisions (instead of someone like Kerry who jumps from one side of the fence to the other to sastify public opinion) and sticks to them regardless of the public opinion. And if we let another Democrat lead our country, I am afraid that the Military will suffer more than anyone can possibly imagine and the Defense of our Country would be at a greater risk.