DiscussMormonism.com

But despite the Pentagon's claims, America is far from capable of stopping any type of missile attack, a fact it has lived with since the Cold War. While it has had some limited success in developing interceptors capable of stopping one or two missiles from a rogue regime like North Korea, a barrage of nukes from Russia or anywhere else would be unstoppable and trigger the "mutually assured destruction" of both nations.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/pentagon-ful ... 57001.html

The US is spending 598 billion dollars for nothing?

DoubtingThomas wrote:The US is spending 598 billion dollars for nothing?

Not "nothing." It's so the stockholders in companies that provide military hardware can get rich.

But despite the Pentagon's claims, America is far from capable of stopping any type of missile attack, a fact it has lived with since the Cold War.

This is why we have a well-regulated militia, necessary for the security of a free state.

Putin said that Russia's new warheads could thwart any missile defense system.

Most of the expense is in exorbitant defense contracts.

MeDotOrg wrote:

But despite the Pentagon's claims, America is far from capable of stopping any type of missile attack, a fact it has lived with since the Cold War.

This is why we have a well-regulated militia, necessary for the security of a free state.

I like the sarcasm

MeDotOrg wrote:

But despite the Pentagon's claims, America is far from capable of stopping any type of missile attack, a fact it has lived with since the Cold War.

This is why we have a well-regulated militia, necessary for the security of a free state.

I fear that the White House dotard thinks the only thing to stop a bad country with a nuclear weapon is a good country with a nuclear weapon.

The Defense Department's $680 billion budget pays for over 3.1 million employees, both military and civilian. Another 3 million people are employed by the defense industry both directly, making things like weapons, and indirectly, such as working in local businesses supported by a contractor's location in a town.

Notwithstanding the logistical implication....perhaps a more reasonable review of "why" would be refreshing. A bullet proof vest wont stop a bullet to the head, so why bother wearing the vest?
Burglar alarms and cops can't stop all the robberies...they have "limited success"...so why bother having them?
We have gun laws and murder laws, but people still get shot and killed...seems like a waste of money enforcing and re-regulating them...so why bother?

Not to mention how much money is wasted not curing cancer...so yeah...the OP is reasonable.

Some Schmo wrote:I fear that the White House dotard thinks the only thing to stop a bad country with a nuclear weapon is a good country with a nuclear weapon.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) published a major report in October 2017 that estimates the nuclear weapons spending plans President Donald Trump inherited from his predecessor will cost taxpayers $1.2 trillion in inflation-adjusted dollars between fiscal years 2017 and 2046. This amounts to about 6 percent of all spending on national defense anticipated for that period, as of President Barack Obama’s final budget request to Congress in February 2016. When the effects of inflation are included, the 30-year cost would approach $1.7 trillion, according to a projection by the Arms Control Association.

https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/ ... ernization

Obama, like Trump have access to what the threats are to us...actually I believe your point is correct, Nuclear weapon are our only way to detour rouge countries who past presidents let them get these weapons.

Markk wrote:Obama, like Trump have access to what the threats are to us...actually I believe your point is correct, Nuclear weapon are our only way to detour rouge countries who past presidents let them get these weapons.

When you say rouge countries, do you mean communist? I've heard of red countries, but rouge?

Some Schmo wrote:I fear that the White House dotard thinks the only thing to stop a bad country with a nuclear weapon is a good country with a nuclear weapon.

So who is the good country that's going to stop us?