Sanders mentions cutting waste.

[Plane]

That sounded good for a bit, then he seemed to start saying that he mostly meant the military.

As if the Military were not already the branch of government the most cut in recent years.

[Xavier_Onassis]

It is also the branch that has no real cost supervision on hugely expensive weapons that are of very dubious value for the defense of the country.
We have overspent like drunken sailors on weapons and the military since WWII. There are many industries that love the non competitive nature of 
military weaponry. All they have to do is say it is secret. There is no foreign competition, and very little national competition.

The F 35 fighter and the additional  aircraft carrier and all its backup boats are not necessary. We do not need three air forces.

[Plane]

  So Sanders is unaware that the military has already been cut a lot since the 1980s?

Bush, Clinton ,Bush and Obama have benefited from the Reagan "peace dividend" a lot .

So now it could well be argued that we have barely enough military to fulfill our obligations of treaty.

Lets get the rest of NATO to get off of their duffs.

It is ridiculous that France has ONE carrier, England has ONE carrier and Spain has one carrier that is very old.

Lets persuade our allies to spend a lot more on their strength and then after that reduce our spending in the same scale.

The other choice is to relax the free world while the enslaved world is stirring.

[Xavier_Onassis]

What precisely is the "enslaved world" these days?
Russians and Chinese are free to travel wherever they want, the same for all the Eastern European countries except perhaps Belarus.

That leaves North Korea, Eritrea, Belarus and maybe a couple other African nations.

[Plane]

  I agree with your list , but why is it so short?

   Is freedom easily found in most of the world ?

      Would you not include the territory where Boko Haram and Isis hold sway?

         And is the freedom of Russia really first quality?

[Xavier_Onassis]

Boko Haram is not going to be defeated by F 35's or aircraft carrier groups. It is in Nigeria, and is not a country.

The freedom of  individual Russians is not  something that will be improved by the US ,military. Get serious.

The term "free world" was always a prppaganda term and now it is simply meaningless and obsolete when it applies to the defense of this country.

[Plane]

There is an enslaved part of the world and we have already established agreement that North Korea is a prime member of that .

Does this have to be only fully fledged and recognized countries?

I also agree with you that the enslaved world is smaller now Post Reagan.

[Xavier_Onassis]

The term is NOT "post Reagan".

It is "post Gorbachov".

Reagan has nothing to do with the collapse of the USSR. All he did was talk about tering down the Berlin Wall, after which years passed before it happened.
He was not Joshua, and the Berlin Wall was not Jericho,

[Plane]

Hahahahahahaha!

Gorbachov made a serious effort to save the Soviet Union,  a theoretical alternate president would ,perhaps, have helped him do that.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Nonetheless, it was Gorbachov that decided not to send troops to prevent East Germans from escaping, first to Austria.

The ones who really tore down the wall were the Germans on both sides of it. Of course, the E German Volkspolizei did their part by doing nothing to stop them. Reagan has zilch to do with it. He was drifting off in Altzheimerland by then.

[Plane]

You think Kennedy did nothing too?

The Soviet Union was a tough nut, Reagan did not destroy it by himself.

...but his shaming of the Evil Empire , his shaking a finger at the wall , his military buildup that the Soviets could not afford to counter, were all effective parts of the grand anti-communist conspiracy.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Reagan did not destroy it at all.

That "Reagan defeated the USSR and tore down the wall" crap is just that: crap.

[Plane]

That is not precisely what I am saying.

Reagan certainly did not act alone everything he did could have been undone by the Soviets of earlier years, before the years of disillusionment had eroded the faith of the Soviet man.

Reagan certainly did not act alone if there had not been previous presidents that weakened and bled the USSR with words and deeds secret and public the Soviets might not have been so demoralized and weak. President Carter as a standout example.

The leaders of other Nations and the Catholic church also took effective actions and multitudes of individuals learned and acted Matthias Rust being an unusual example flying into the USSR while many thousands voted with their feet trying to get out.

So I can't maintain that Reagan alone ended the Soviet Union, but he was a big part of the leadership and direction that brought a long festering corruption to the point it could erupt, And because the people within the Iron Curtain were so ready for it that they lanced the boil from within , this happened without the millions of casualties that had been so long predicted.

So Reagan was not alone , perhaps not even indispensable , but Reagan led when many were too timid Reagan led.

[Plane]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGVaoF3cqe4&feature=player_detailpage

This is why President Sanders will certainly be a wartime president.

[Plane]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZgyCLJOofw&feature=player_detailpage

Al Jezera view of Drone program.