This is pretty much nonsense, Delt - no matter what occurs, there is still a 'budgeting' process that can make the most efficient use of resources . . . and no matter how 'unfriendly' the world may be, a constant updating of this budgeting will still produce the most efficient method.

OK, fine. What happens if the North Koreans decide to cross the DMZ? Do we ask them to wait until we increase our "budget?" When that happens, efficiency and budget go out the window.

We can't staff the present conflict(s) we're in without putting a huge strain on the Reserves and National Guard. From a purely money "budget," the administration doesn't even include it in the Federal fiscal budget, but has spent tens of billions of dollars in special funding.

It took months to build up forces for Desert Storm.

I'm not a Hawk by any means, but there are some situations that won't wait.

We used to staff our military with the idea of being able to react to two separate major conflicts in different parts of the glove. With the cutbacks we've put in place, we're hard pressed to handle one -- assuming we can agree that Iraq and Afghanistan are pretty much the same place.

Sorry if you think that nonsense. It seems more like reality to me.

Clearly, we can't "budget" for every contingency but must try to be as efficient as possible, on the other hand, we have to be able to react quickly with some amount of force without depleting other missions.

That's the problem. What in the hell are we doing? I am by no means an expert on anything military, but isn't it pretty much common sense that we shouldn't be stretched as thin as we are right now? Doesn't the current state of the world suggest that we shouldn't be all over the place like we are -- so when something DOES happen, we'll be more likely to have the resources to deal with it?

That's the operative question.

I'm not an expert on anything -- except maybe TV Production -- but I think there has to be some kind of ballance between being the world's policeman and isolationism. I don't know how either of those can work for a "Superpower." I also have no clue as to how to find that mid-point.

There must be a middle ground, but in that area there has to be flexibility to meet an unexpected crisis -- which is why I don't think there is really a way to totally "budget" our assets.

As a former boss used to say, "You can't build a church for Easter Sunday." On the other hand, you can't be completely without some kind of cushion.

I didn't say that I didn't work.I started working when I was 13 years old. I worked two jobs through most of my college years and held an academic scholarship which required at least a 3.50 to keep.

My rent was cheap, I paid 1/3 of the utilities, the jobs I worked didn't have the level of stress or responsibility that my "grown-up" jobs have had. The amount of responsibility in taking care of your own tuition and paying for college housing is not anywhere near the level of responsibility of managing employees, working in your career, raising kids, paying the mortgage, etc. There's no comparison, seriously. Nobody else was depending on me to put food on the table or keep a roof over their heads. I didn't have to do laundry for a bunch of other people, clean up other people's messes, shop for their clothes, etc. In comparison to my current level of responsibilities, it was no big deal.

Except for the 'kids' part, LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

-RC
--So other than 'raising kids', the responsibility of working and paying tuition doesn't hold a candle to the responsibility of . . . working . . . and paying bills . . . nicely done

I do not have a Link. But Feel Free to find it as I will not do it for You!

It is in Child Abuse Laws.

You Do, You Get Time. Over protective was used as a Do not Hurt THe Kids.:mad:

Oh, Welcome to The Real World!

The Fed. Govt. cut over many Years the Military Budget saying the The Researves and National Guard will be the fill ins.

Well, Now They are and Our Civilian Soldiers are many who are losing their lives. Because of the cut backs which are going on today is the reason.

Our Weekend Worriers who may be call up "In A Time Of National Emerencys" are Now over In War Zones. They are not just weekend any more are they?

National Emergencys are of Local Importance such as Kristina and Helping Our Home People.

It is the Same GOVt. that Cut The Coast Guard Budget which now seems to be very Important for Home Land Security!

It is the same Govt. that Cut INS Budgets before OOPs Illegal Aliens.

Maybe that will answer Your ???s!:rolleyes:

One of my undergraduates that was taking over in my Sorority was in the reserves before the Iraq War was started... The Navy was paying her way to go to college. She heard all the stories about NPHC membership intake and thought it would not be any worse than boot-camp, then discovered it was a total different idea that she just loved when she became one of my sorors. She literally had tears in her eyes after her final initiation because she had not been surrounded by that much "love"...

So, no, I don't think military service conflicts with joining a greek organization unless folks make it out to be...

I dunno, the retired Rear Admiral I knew became the CEO of USAA a few years back...

But yeah, from dog catcher to US President, they do put on their military service at the top of their resume, as they should...

And yeah, there may be training needed for business skills, but one gets them over time... I guess from some "corporate think tanks", I guess they say, at least they know where the CEO will stand when there is a "sinking ship..." :rolleyes:

And then again, Ollie North didn't "biatch out" when he up in front of congress during the Iran-Contra affair...

With the retired military on TV: And why are all the retired military mostly on the Fox News Channel??? That's one thing I cannot figure out... Like Lt. Col. Bonaventure et al. And he looks young... With the exception of those that are hating on Rummy right now, who else is on TV--besides Ollie?

That's fine - I suppose teaching preschool, running a babysitting business, and worrying whether I would be making enough for tuition wasn't stressful at all.

Perhaps we shouldn't judge how much "responsibility" others have had.

It's not just two, but three.

I believe that, 20 years after college graduation, most will look back on those years as the most fun years of their adult lives. I also believe that most would rate their level of responsibility in their post-university jobs as higher than that of the jobs they held while in school. There are other life responsibilities that don't come up until later also. More people depend on you in a variety of different ways. You're taking care of your parents, instead of the reverse. You frequently have responsibilities to a spouse, to children, or other dependents. Your financial responsibilities grow exponentially. Your responsibilities within your household increase (upkeep of a house vs. a student apartment, etc).

Whether you experience more "stress" or not is a whole different discussion and irrelevant to this thread. Stress and responsibility don't necessarily go hand in hand.

You really seem to be taking this as a personal attack and it isn't, so I'm not sure why you're taking it that way. In the type of system I've spelled out, by babysitting and teaching pre-school, you would have fulfilled the requirements. You just would have served in that type of capacity for two years before beginning college, while earning money, and had a "GI Bill" type deal to help you with college after that.

I cannot begin to imagine how if, as you say, the college years are the most fun years of many people's lives and that often there are fewer responsibilities than exist later in life, that is a bad thing.

I think that many don't realize it at the time and they might appreciate it more if they did some of the other stuff first, that's all.

Implementing it would be a total nightmare and there is no funding for such a program, so it's a moot point anyway. I just think it would be good for the country and the individuals who experienced it.

If given a choice between a military draft for everybody or a choice between a draft or community service for all, I'd support the latter, but not the former.