Name this country:
Okiewan

Okiewan

Admin
Dec 31, 1969
29,555
2,237
Texas
*709,000 regular (active duty) service personnel

*293,000 reserve troops

*Eight standing Army divisions

*20 Air Force and Navy air wings with 2,000 combat aircraft
*232 strategic bombers

*13 strategic ballistic missile submarines with 3,114 nuclear
warheads on 232 missiles

*500 ICBM's with 1,950 warheads

*Four aircraft carriers, and 121 surface combat ships and
submarines, plus all the support bases, shipyards and logistical
assets needed to sustain such a naval force.

Who is it?
 
F

fatty_k

~SPONSOR~
Jul 3, 2001
1,275
0
Name this country's armed forces:

50,000 army personnel.
5 BB guns.
3 row boats.
2 bottle rockets.
4 Beaver float planes (with optional ski attachment).




Answer: Canada :)
 
H

Hucker

~SPONSOR~
Sep 15, 2000
999
0
These are the American military forces that have disappeared since the 1992 election of Bill Clinton and Al Gore.

:)
 
Last edited:

S

smb_racing

Master of None
LIFETIME SPONSOR
Jul 31, 2000
2,085
0
russia?
 
J

jamsxr

Member
Dec 4, 1999
174
0
USA

Is that our current standing force?

I posted some figures like that on the Flame board about a year and a half ago, just before the primary election. :(

It upset everybody so much that I deleted the content and apologized to everyone--remember? :think
 
Jaybird

Jaybird

Apprentice Goon
LIFETIME SPONSOR
Mar 16, 2001
6,452
0
Charlestown, IN
Hmmmm...sure aint Jomamastan, so my best guess is:
Red China
 
H

Hucker

~SPONSOR~
Sep 15, 2000
999
0
709,000 regular (active duty) service personnel
293,000 reserve troops;
Eight standing Army divisions;
20 Air Force and Navy air wings with 2,000 combat aircraft;
232 strategic bombers;
13 strategic ballistic missile submarines with 3,114 nuclear warheads on 232 missiles;
500 ICBMs with 1,950 warheads;
Four aircraft carriers, and;
121 surface combat ships and submarines, plus all the support bases, shipyards and logistical assets needed to sustain such a naval force.
Is this country Russia? . . . No

Red China ? . . . No

Great Britain ? . . . Wrong Again

USA? . . . Hardly

Give up??


Well, don't feel too bad if you are unable to identify this global superpower because this country no longer exists.

It has vanished.

These are the American military forces that have disappeared since the 1992 election of Bill Clinton and Al Gore.

*cough* check again *cough*

http://www.wakeamerica.com/future/articles/ShowArticles.php3?m_ArticleNumber=3
 
HiG4s

HiG4s

~SPONSOR~
Mar 7, 2001
1,311
0
If the point was the Democrats don't support the military you need to research further.

Per the satistics at www.history.navy.mil

From 1992 to 1998 the US fleet was cut by a total of 114 ships including 2 carriers and 39 surface war ships, a little less than your quote.

From 1988 to 1992 under Bush the US Navy lost 102 ships including 3 battleships.

from 1976 to 1980 the undet Carter the US lost 6 ships total to cuts.

from 68 to 76 under Nixon and Ford the US lost 396 ships including 8 carriers.
 
Last edited:

R

R White

Member
Sep 13, 2001
141
0
OWBOY! I was in the army under Ford/ Carter. named by the pres of the time. The army that can't! very true to the time.I stood in a parade for Carter@ wesibaten AFB yet was in army. we towed tanks out to the parade grounds because they didn't run, and couldn't get parts,yet they had a new paint job! :think
reg. republican
 
Last edited:

longtime

longtime

Member
Oct 7, 1999
846
0
Nice Try, HiG

Originally posted by HiG4s
If the point was the Democrats don't support the military you need to research further.
Click to expand...

No, we just need to correct people who intentionally try to make statistics mislead.

Your reference to that web page was very helpful. Because I KNEW you were wrong about who builds, and who cuts, the military. Of COURSE the Dems cut it and the Reps build it. You pointed out that conveniently left out who BUILT the dang Navy. The page shows -- it was Reagan. (I must have missed it, where was he in your supposedly informative post?) And the deepest longest cuts came under Clinton. How did I know this? I was at the tailhook convention (before the sex scandal - and btw that convention is filled with thousands of carrier aviation folks -- not just pilots -- all there to learn about carriers and the latest technology) when Reagan appointee Secretary of the Navy John Lehman reiterated his goal of a 600 ship navy -- something that under Carter was thought impossible.

Tragic to see what's come of the Navy since then.

btw -- as to cuts under Bush -- that was the first post-Soviet administration. Of course some cuts were warranted. As to cutting battleships, which I guess you think is important, I loved those big guys. But the bring-em-back-out-of-mothballs experiment was over. The Aegis classes rendered their utility marginal in the current state.

(This from a guy who cares DEEPLY about the US Navy, my friend)

Lastly, I think I can (probably already have) gut your argument about who really supports the Navy. Since the Navy hand was the one you chose to play, after statistics were floated about how Clinton cut the Air Force and Army as well, I'll assume that your hands on those fronts were even weaker.

In sum -- *please* . :silly:
 
Last edited by a moderator:


FRESH VIDEO

Help Us Out?

Top Bottom