Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (381030)	4/28/2008 5:03:30 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573866

One place we could start saving is by closing unnecessary military bases all around the world where the countries we reside in can defend themselves. For example, why do we still have a sizable presence in South Korea? SK has a million man army and the best U.S. military equipment their sizable wealth can buy them. You have to take these on a case-by-case basis, and evaluate why we are actually there and who benefits and who is harmed, and by how much, if we are to redeploy or decommission a base. In SK, we aren't there solely for SK's interests; our troops there signify our own interests in the region and serve to apply pressure to NK and others in the area. These are very delicate matters and must be handled as such. I think one has to think carefully about the signals it sends, for example, to NK should we begin removing troops from SK. We basically have to consider this in every instance.

To: RetiredNow who wrote (381030)	4/28/2008 7:11:12 PM
From: bentway	Respond to of 1573866

"I'd rather build a few more aircraft carriers and limit permanent bases around the world. That would be far more effective, providing lighting strike force projection anywhere in the world. In addition, it would be far less intrusive and FAR less expensive." I'd like to take away the temptation for EVERY president to play with their "army men". Having a large standing army that can strike anywhere on the globe hasn't served us very well. We're the ONLY country still clinging to the idea. The rest of the world seems to get along fine without it.