2012-09-16, 12:20 PM
I don't think you guy's actually understand what's going on lol.
1) We're pulling out, we're going to the pacific, next action hasn't been determined yet, but here's the problem. When we pull out and become isolationist's we lose clear visibility and intel concerning other countries. We have technology but there's limitations that can't overcome just simply being there. So when we pull out, the world is going to get rattled as we abandoned them to deal with the threat themselves. We become a target. Unless we build large moats with crocodiles alligators and fences that reach the atmosphere, we're fuc`ked.
2) By pulling out we no longer can flex our offense. We leave looking vulnerable, so refer to point number one, we need defense.
3) Our nuclear arms fleet has been decaying the last 2-3 decades. This administration has to bite the bullet and destroy it. Nuclear arms slowly decay and rot out even the capsules they are kept in, plus we want a method of retaliation if we face worst case scenario.
1) We're pulling out, we're going to the pacific, next action hasn't been determined yet, but here's the problem. When we pull out and become isolationist's we lose clear visibility and intel concerning other countries. We have technology but there's limitations that can't overcome just simply being there. So when we pull out, the world is going to get rattled as we abandoned them to deal with the threat themselves. We become a target. Unless we build large moats with crocodiles alligators and fences that reach the atmosphere, we're fuc`ked.
2) By pulling out we no longer can flex our offense. We leave looking vulnerable, so refer to point number one, we need defense.
3) Our nuclear arms fleet has been decaying the last 2-3 decades. This administration has to bite the bullet and destroy it. Nuclear arms slowly decay and rot out even the capsules they are kept in, plus we want a method of retaliation if we face worst case scenario.