After a look on your bill i find somethings that doesnt appeal to me.
1. You want to modernize the army yet you wish not to put anything to uppgrades thus not modernizing the army.
2. The budget calls for expansion of infrastructure which is totally unnessescary as the current infrastructure is functioning and thus doesnt need to be expanded.
3. We should focus the needed IC on supplies so that we might be slef-relying and dont need to import from other countries, USA is the export of the world.
4. I disagree with the statement that peace can only be sustained through superior firepower and technology, which indicates that USA is a warmongering nation which we arent.
5. There is no reaserch intent on improving our industrial capacity and efficeny thus not improving out status as a the leading global industrial power.
6. There should be more reaserch on how to improve reasource production efficency so we can export more and have a well founded base for expansion of our industry.
7. We should also focus on technology within the computer area by which we can improve our reaserch rate and thus improve our nation's forefront in the world.
Thats what i have to say. If this is corrected your bill is appealing but untill fruther notice it is not that appealing, if it comes down to the point it is better than nothing.
-Senator William Fitzgerald Kenzington
1) As I have stated previously, with the threat of war still years away in the worst case and Europe just beginning to re-arm, I believe that we must first review and further develop our army and air units before upgrading our current forces. Most of our current military equipment is far behind the times, in many instances dating back to world war one. Thus, we should spend at least a year re-designing our military and building up our infrastructure before upgrading. This will avoid needless expenditures on military equipment which will be obsolete before it is even finished!
2) An improved transcontinental railroad to our important naval base at San Diego would greatly improve our supply throughput to the Pacific - vital for any Pacific conflict. However, I am willing to negotiate on this point as we do have existing facilities.
3) While eventually we will need to produce our own supplies, we are currently overflowing with natural resources. It would be foolish not to take advantage of this. By trading our excess raw materials for foreign supplies we will have more available to improve our industry and armed forces, and still be able to produce our own when needed.
4) War would be a tragic affair, I agree that our primary goal should be the maintenance of our neutrality. However, to quote the ancient tactician Vegitius: "Si vis pacem, para bellum or If you wish for peace, prepare for war" The only catastrophe worse than another Great War would be one in which we are technologically behind and militarily weak. I propose focusing on the Navy and Air Force, which can be constitutionally expanded with little manpower requirements during peacetime while our technicians work on improvements and prototypes to keep up with and surpass the cutting edge of military technology. If war does occur, our up to date navy and air force can protect us while we produce the necessary ground forces at home.
5) I do propose industrial and computing research at the very beginning of my tech. program
6) My trade experts have assured me that we have a sufficient surplus of raw materials to satisfy the entire world. It is not an issue of how much we have to sell, but of how much they are willing to buy
7) Agreed.
Senator Danner - You are correct, hostilities with a major naval power do not appear immenant. Perhaps I have been over - emphasizing the navy somewhat. However, due to the large time required to build ships we should finish our current projects while researching improved models for future construction, perhaps in '38.
As for the air force, we certainly have the resources to develop both strategic and tactical airpower. Personally though I believe that multi-role and Strategic assets are the future. The three most likely beligerants in the next decade are Germany, Japan, and the USSR. Given the vast distances involved to reach each nation I advocate focusing on long - range aircraft.
Thank you all for your feedback, taking it into account I shall prepare a revised, more detailed program which I shall present shortly.
-Sen. Thomas Rudolf [R - OH]
((Now that I'm home I can fire up the game and give a more detailed proposal... The main point of the railroad is that it is cheap and quick and will boost our practical for IC construction. Naval bases, Airfields, and RADAR's are also a good starting build))