Newly released NSA slides explain mechanics of US surveillance

[rehmwa 2]

Gravitymaster

What is the #1 priority for the President of the U.S.?

that's a toss up between
1 - re-election
2 - donations

hard to tell which is most important. lucky they kinda go hand in hand

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[turtlespeed 226]

rehmwa

***What is the #1 priority for the President of the U.S.?

that's a toss up between
1 - re-election
2 - donations

hard to tell which is most important. lucky they kinda go hand in hand

Agreed, but his talking points change from day to day.

This week its his war on the environmental bad stuff, who knows what it will be next . . . Whatever makes him seem like he is actually DOING something related to his job besides vacation and golf . . .

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[rehmwa 2]

I just meant 'President' in general. Not this one specifically. They are all pretty much the same. (Other than this one doesn't have to worry about re-election now)

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[DanG 1]

Quote

You are going to have a hard time convincing me that anyone deeply involved with government wants to make it smaller or reduce the budget. Not employees, not contractors, not elected employees, nobody. Call them Democrats, Republicans, Independents...they are being paid by the machine. Why would they want to dismantle it?

In general, I agree. But "Liberals" generally want to increase the size of social spending programs, while "Conservatives" generally want to increase the size of defense programs. That's why trying to blame the "Liberals" for the size of the defense apparatus is a little disingenuous.

- Dan G

[rehmwa 2]

DanG

But "Liberals" generally want to increase the size of social spending programs, while "Conservatives" generally want to increase the size of defense programs. That's why trying to blame the "Liberals" for the size of the defense apparatus is a little disingenuous.

disagree -

"generally" I don't believe them when they state what they "want" us to believe.

In Practice, both seem to just end up increasing the size of all programs.

that's what's broken

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Gravitymaster 0]

rehmwa

***What is the #1 priority for the President of the U.S.?

that's a toss up between
1 - re-election
2 - donations

hard to tell which is most important. lucky they kinda go hand in hand

Quote

“As President, I have often said that I have no greater responsibility than protecting the American people,” wrote President Obama in the new “National Strategy for Counterterrorism” that was released by the White House yesterday. A similar sentiment appears in the Introduction to the new Strategy, which states that the President “bears no greater responsibility than ensuring the safety and security of the American people.”

That's straight from the horses mouth. This is why Liberals have so much trouble understanding that without a strong Defense, all the Social Programs they want, mean nothing.

[rehmwa 2]

Gravitymaster

That's straight from the horses mouth. This is why Liberals have so much trouble understanding that without a strong Defense, all the Social Programs they want, mean nothing.

GM - I'm an advocate for a strong defense and agree with your position.

HOWEVER, there's a big difference between a "strong" defense, and a ridiculously bloated defense used to underpin entire redundant industries and keep towns and regions and districts of foreign countries alive by injecting military welfare funds into the voting districts. It's just as bad as the analogous programs of the left - too much and for the wrong reasons.....

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Gravitymaster 0]

rehmwa

***That's straight from the horses mouth. This is why Liberals have so much trouble understanding that without a strong Defense, all the Social Programs they want, mean nothing.

GM - I'm an advocate for a strong defense and agree with your position.

HOWEVER, there's a big difference between a "strong" defense, and a ridiculously bloated defense used to underpin entire redundant industries and keep towns and regions and districts of foreign countries alive by injecting military welfare funds into the voting districts. It's just as bad as the analogous programs of the left - too much and for the wrong reasons.....

I don't disagree. I think we need to take back our Military from the Politicians and Corporations that hi-jacked it very long ago. HOWEVER, given a choice between an over-bloated Military that can actually protect us and pissing money away on yet another ineffective social program, I'll take the missiles.

[turtlespeed 226]

Gravitymaster

******That's straight from the horses mouth. This is why Liberals have so much trouble understanding that without a strong Defense, all the Social Programs they want, mean nothing.

GM - I'm an advocate for a strong defense and agree with your position.

HOWEVER, there's a big difference between a "strong" defense, and a ridiculously bloated defense used to underpin entire redundant industries and keep towns and regions and districts of foreign countries alive by injecting military welfare funds into the voting districts. It's just as bad as the analogous programs of the left - too much and for the wrong reasons.....

I don't disagree. I think we need to take back our Military from the Politicians and Corporations that hi-jacked it very long ago. HOWEVER, given a choice between an over-bloated Military that can actually protect us and pissing money away on yet another ineffective social program, I'll take the missiles.

And the bullets.

Mmmm Pork Flavored too!

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[rehmwa 2]

Gravitymaster

HOWEVER, given a choice between an over-bloated Military that can actually protect us and pissing money away on yet another ineffective social program, I'll take the missiles.

there are absolutely no, non-political, reasons to try to make it a choice

as long as people treat it like and "either/or" choice, vs just down costing both under the same philosophy of fiscal responsibility, we'll never get either group under control

there should be zero 'sacred cows' in the budget. zero

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[AggieDave 6]

BIGUN

Dave is spot on. Let's not throw too many rocks because it 's been a growing issue no matter which party affiliation. And, we need to remember that it was Bush who created the largest monstrosity of our time.

I blame Al Gore since he invented the Internet.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[kallend 2,106]

Gravitymaster

******What is the #1 priority for the President of the U.S.?

that's a toss up between
1 - re-election
2 - donations

hard to tell which is most important. lucky they kinda go hand in hand

Quote

“As President, I have often said that I have no greater responsibility than protecting the American people,” wrote President Obama in the new “National Strategy for Counterterrorism” that was released by the White House yesterday. A similar sentiment appears in the Introduction to the new Strategy, which states that the President “bears no greater responsibility than ensuring the safety and security of the American people.”

That's straight from the horses mouth. This is why Liberals have so much trouble understanding that without a strong Defense, all the Social Programs they want, mean nothing.

What EXACTLY is the threat to the USA that is so severe that we need to spend as much on "defense" (sic) as the rest of the world combined? (Other than the threat of lost $$$$ to the military-industrial complex, that is.)

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[turtlespeed 226]

kallend

*********What is the #1 priority for the President of the U.S.?

that's a toss up between
1 - re-election
2 - donations

hard to tell which is most important. lucky they kinda go hand in hand

Quote

“As President, I have often said that I have no greater responsibility than protecting the American people,” wrote President Obama in the new “National Strategy for Counterterrorism” that was released by the White House yesterday. A similar sentiment appears in the Introduction to the new Strategy, which states that the President “bears no greater responsibility than ensuring the safety and security of the American people.”

That's straight from the horses mouth. This is why Liberals have so much trouble understanding that without a strong Defense, all the Social Programs they want, mean nothing.

What EXACTLY is the threat to the USA that is so severe that we need to spend as much on "defense" (sic) as the rest of the world combined? (Other than the threat of lost $$$$ to the military-industrial complex, that is.)

Did you miss the whole 9-11 thing, or Bhengazi?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Gravitymaster 0]

kallend

*********What is the #1 priority for the President of the U.S.?

that's a toss up between
1 - re-election
2 - donations

hard to tell which is most important. lucky they kinda go hand in hand

Quote

“As President, I have often said that I have no greater responsibility than protecting the American people,” wrote President Obama in the new “National Strategy for Counterterrorism” that was released by the White House yesterday. A similar sentiment appears in the Introduction to the new Strategy, which states that the President “bears no greater responsibility than ensuring the safety and security of the American people.”

That's straight from the horses mouth. This is why Liberals have so much trouble understanding that without a strong Defense, all the Social Programs they want, mean nothing.

What EXACTLY is the threat to the USA that is so severe that we need to spend as much on "defense" (sic) as the rest of the world combined? (Other than the threat of lost $$$$ to the military-industrial complex, that is.)

The threats are there. They are also most certainly above yours and mine "pay-grades". Whether it be cyber attacks on our government and military computer systems, or the intel needed to fend of another 9/11, rest assured the threats exist. I believe you were one on the main whiners concerning our unpreparedness for 9/11. Now you have your answer.

[Andy9o8 2]

Gravitymaster

******That's straight from the horses mouth. This is why Liberals have so much trouble understanding that without a strong Defense, all the Social Programs they want, mean nothing.

GM - I'm an advocate for a strong defense and agree with your position.

HOWEVER, there's a big difference between a "strong" defense, and a ridiculously bloated defense used to underpin entire redundant industries and keep towns and regions and districts of foreign countries alive by injecting military welfare funds into the voting districts. It's just as bad as the analogous programs of the left - too much and for the wrong reasons.....

I don't disagree. I think we need to take back our Military from the Politicians and Corporations that hi-jacked it very long ago. HOWEVER, given a choice between an over-bloated Military that can actually protect us and pissing money away on yet another ineffective social program, I'll take the missiles.

I agree with him, too.
But given a choice between
(a) a bloated military that's easily one-third or more larger than what's needed to keep our children safe in their beds, plus stupid-ass criminalization of drugs and the bloated LEO and prison system that sucks off that tit, and
(b) guaranteed health coverage that's not dependent on having full-time employment with benefits even in tough economic times, just like EVERY OTHER modern, industrialized nation in this sector of the Alpha Quadrant,
I'll choose the latter.

You use the term "strong defense". I want a strong defense, too. But ever since the end of WWII, we've been bamboozled into believing that a bloated military equals "strong defense". Well, it doesn't; and even President Eisenhower warned us about it in his final speech in office. But nobody listened to him; we just packed him off into retirement and wished The Old Man well. And even Gen. MacArthur - about as fiercely conservative a militarist as we've had in modern times, warned us, in his retirement, about the bloat in our military and the folly of using it to project global power imprudently (specifically, he implored LBJ to pull out of Vietnam, rather than dive in deeper). Nobody listened to him, either.

Iraq and Afghanistan are but examples of the legacy of all that.

How's all that worked out for us?

[rehmwa 2]

Andy9o8

***HOWEVER, given a choice between.....

I agree with him, too.
But given a choice between ......

sigh - well, there we have it -

apparently, we MUST choose between two completely bloated applications - either of which will destroy our economy.

and that's why we'll be broke no matter which programs get 'chosen'



I choose neither - I don't care how well it's sold, I don't care how great, or devious, the motivation and rationalization we construct. If we can't pay for it, then the population needs to grow up and realize they can't have it.

Or, we can have "Compromise" - which always results in us executing on BOTH completely unaffordable programs - just tax more and borrow more.....

Quote

Iraq and Afghanistan are but examples of the legacy of all that.

How's all that worked out for us?

Yup....and your health care program is already broke and is going the wrong way - How's all that going to work out for us?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,070]

>I choose neither - I don't care how well it's sold, I don't care how great, or
>devious, the motivation and rationalization we construct. If we can't pay for it, then
>the population needs to grow up and realize they can't have it.

Agreed. There's nothing wrong with spending government money on things IF we are willing to pay for it. From all appearances we aren't. You can't have it both ways.

[rehmwa 2]

billvon

>I choose neither - I don't care how well it's sold, I don't care how great, or
>devious, the motivation and rationalization we construct. If we can't pay for it, then
>the population needs to grow up and realize they can't have it.

Agreed. There's nothing wrong with spending government money on things IF we are willing to pay for it. From all appearances we aren't. You can't have it both ways.

Oh no,,,, we are absolutely willing to let someone else pay for it.....(even if they don't have enough to, we can pretend they do...)

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[BIGUN 1,406]

>>I think we need to take back our Military from the Politicians

Little too far there, GM.

Left a tread mark on the Constitution.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[kallend 2,106]

turtlespeed

************What is the #1 priority for the President of the U.S.?

that's a toss up between
1 - re-election
2 - donations

hard to tell which is most important. lucky they kinda go hand in hand

Quote

“As President, I have often said that I have no greater responsibility than protecting the American people,” wrote President Obama in the new “National Strategy for Counterterrorism” that was released by the White House yesterday. A similar sentiment appears in the Introduction to the new Strategy, which states that the President “bears no greater responsibility than ensuring the safety and security of the American people.”

That's straight from the horses mouth. This is why Liberals have so much trouble understanding that without a strong Defense, all the Social Programs they want, mean nothing.

What EXACTLY is the threat to the USA that is so severe that we need to spend as much on "defense" (sic) as the rest of the world combined? (Other than the threat of lost $$$$ to the military-industrial complex, that is.)

Did you miss the whole 9-11 thing, or Bhengazi?

And our bloated military, equal to that of the rest of the world combined, prevented them how, exactly?

Funny that, say, Sweden, or Canada, or Denmark haven't been overrun, since they spend so little on "defense" compared to the USA.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Gravitymaster 0]

I'd suggest you read up a little on the history of WWII if you want to know why Sweden wasn't invaded by Germany and Finland was.

[Gravitymaster 0]

WHAT??? Why should we worry? I'm sure they have no interest in the U.S.

Quote

China's defence ministry said on Tuesday that its navy would send four destroyers, two guided missile frigates and a support ship for the "Joint Sea 2013" exercises, which start on Friday in the Sea of Japan and run until 12 July. The ships departed on Monday from the port of Qingdao, where China's Northern Fleet is based, and headed for the rallying point in Peter the Great Bay near Vladivostok.

"This marks our navy's single biggest deployment of military force in a China-foreign joint exercise," the ministry said.

General Fang Fenghui, the People's Liberation Army chief of the general staff, announced the exercises during a visit to Moscow, where he met his Russian counterpart, Valery Gerasimov. The two also announced that another round of anti-terrorism joint drills would be held in Russia's Ural Mountains region of Chelyabinsk from 27 July to 15 August.

In comments reported by the official Liberation Army Daily, Fang emphasised that outsiders should not consider the exercises threatening.

"The joint drill conducted by the two militaries of China and Russia do not target any third parties. Their aim is to deepen co-operation between the two militaries in the training field, boost capacity in co-ordinating military activities, and serve the purpose of safeguarding regional security and stability," Fang said.

China began deploying ships to the anti-piracy flotilla off the coast of Somalia in 2008 and in recent years its navy has joined in a series of joint drills in the Pacific and Indian oceans. Chinese land units have also taken part in border security and anti-terrorism exercises organised by the six-nation Shanghai Co-operation Organisation.

Co-operation with the US navy, the predominant maritime force in the region, has been more limited, although China will take part next year in the US-organised multinational Rim of the Pacific exercises, the world's largest maritime exercise.

Why do you think they are carrying out these joint military exercises?

You left-wingers are about as naïve as they come.

[turtlespeed 226]

kallend

***************What is the #1 priority for the President of the U.S.?

that's a toss up between
1 - re-election
2 - donations

hard to tell which is most important. lucky they kinda go hand in hand

Quote

“As President, I have often said that I have no greater responsibility than protecting the American people,” wrote President Obama in the new “National Strategy for Counterterrorism” that was released by the White House yesterday. A similar sentiment appears in the Introduction to the new Strategy, which states that the President “bears no greater responsibility than ensuring the safety and security of the American people.”

That's straight from the horses mouth. This is why Liberals have so much trouble understanding that without a strong Defense, all the Social Programs they want, mean nothing.

What EXACTLY is the threat to the USA that is so severe that we need to spend as much on "defense" (sic) as the rest of the world combined? (Other than the threat of lost $$$$ to the military-industrial complex, that is.)

Did you miss the whole 9-11 thing, or Bhengazi?

And our bloated military, equal to that of the rest of the world combined, prevented them how, exactly?

Funny that, say, Sweden, or Canada, or Denmark haven't been overrun, since they spend so little on "defense" compared to the USA.

True, but you can't be the world's constables if you don't.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[kallend 2,106]

turtlespeed

Quote

***

Did you miss the whole 9-11 thing, or Bhengazi?

And our bloated military, equal to that of the rest of the world combined, prevented them how, exactly?

Funny that, say, Sweden, or Canada, or Denmark haven't been overrun, since they spend so little on "defense" compared to the USA.

True, but you can't be the world's constables if you don't.

Who appoints the world's constables?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[turtlespeed 226]

kallend

***

Quote

***

Did you miss the whole 9-11 thing, or Bhengazi?

And our bloated military, equal to that of the rest of the world combined, prevented them how, exactly?

Funny that, say, Sweden, or Canada, or Denmark haven't been overrun, since they spend so little on "defense" compared to the USA.

True, but you can't be the world's constables if you don't.

Who appoints the world's constables?

Last time I think it was Obama.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun