Amazing. Simply amazing. I began my career with leaders that watched the gutting of the force after VN through the Carter years then the incredible capability build-up of the Reagan years where I came in at the end through Desert Storm. I then watched our capability decline through the Clinton years, fighting for flight time and parts and then the build up through this current conflicts. I also got to watch the IC get chopped to the bone for a decade and the resultant 9/11 (among other causes).
So, youngster, you can scoff at those that saw it before and feel free to paint us as skeptics of your future but we've been there and you will be too. Waving the whole birther crap at those that have the experience is just plain immature. It's all I've come to expect from some of your generation.
Though I was not in there military during the Clinton years, some things are public knowledge thanks to free speech. I also think the birther comment was immature but it was an attempt to show how immature the points of some of the esteemed board members were.
The draw downs were probably necessary because we could not sustain a build up of that magnitude. It cost money, money that we don't have at the moment. Not with a bad economy. Neo-conservatives will have all believe that the build-up was/is necessary. Yeah, it is not free and something has to give. After Reagan ramped up things, Bush 41 knew he had to draw-down especially with the bad economy. He(Bush) started the draw-down not Clinton. Draw-down was inevitable at that point and the only thing Clinton may have been guilty of was the pace of the draw-down. Obviously, trying to paint Clinton in an unfavorable manner only helps to make the point.
Analyst on both sides of the isle are saying Obama's policies are for all intents and purposes a continuation of Bush 43's policy. Is it the tax cuts for the wealthy, the increase of troops in Afghanistan, bail out of auto-industry(GM), the economy recovery (bail-out) package that was started by the Bush administration. So maybe our policy views are not as far off as the shouting heads will make us believe.
Seems to me that Neo-conservatives and their fiscal responsibility message turn a blind eye to DOD spending. True Republican's will ALWAYS advocate fiscal responsibility and cautioned approach to military involvement.
Here is the question I have though, why is it that when Reagan left office the economy was tanking. When Bush 41 got in, not much happened to resuscitate it and then Clinton years brought prosperity only to be followed by a plunge into the same economic hardship we survived? I know, it is a cycle!!
