Leland F. Jackson, CPA wrote: > I still believe in a strong military, but one that uses strength to deter > aggression
Hi Leland! Give them a taste of mutually assured destruction? How would a "strong" military deter aggression? You would have to have 100 divisions of paratroops and 20,000 transport aircraft at the ready. It is possible, though. Let's say we deployed all of these in bases throughout the world. You could have troops and supplies on the ground in 10 hours anywhere. Darfur anyone? Have to have universal military service to do it. A big training base in every state. Kids train for a year and then deploy to a forward base for a year. If war is declared stop loss goes into effect and they are in for the duration. Not to even mention SAC and all those nukes on the Bombers and missles. -- Regards, Pete http://pete-theisen.com/ _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
