The Ryan plan doesn't even touch Medicare until 2022. So anyone currently retired, or retiring in the next 10 years will get the exact same program in place now. Everyone else will have time to adjust.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42801519/ns/politics

Just for the record, Cingular bought AT&T, not the other way around. They changed the name back to AT&T a few months later because it is a better known brand.

This deal will raise costs for wireless consumers in the end though.

Not to mention "Dances With Wolves."

There will always be some need for separate training and acquisition programs, and I think that no matter how you organize your combat elements separate services are an effective organization for this. Both of these areas require experience and in the case of training, traditions also go a long way.

In the case of the MEU, the Marines are deployed from some sort of Naval Amphibious element. The sailors are trained to get the element into the theater of operations, operate and defend the naval element, provide a platform for Marine aviation and get the Marines ashore. The Marines then utilize their air and ground elements to achieve the combat objectives on land. The Marine commander is subordinate to the Naval commander during all seaborne phases of the operation, and the Naval commander is subordinate to the Marine commander for ground phase. There is a clear and distinct hand off between phases of operational expertise and command.

The only part the Army is really missing right now is the joint command at the sub brigade level. Current structure places an Air Force Air Support Operations Group in place at the Army's Brigade Combat Team level, but this is only a GROUND element within the Air Force and is not actually subordinate to the Army command. The actual Air Force wings are commanded at the task force or theater command level. Current doctrine does not even allow Army personnel to communicate directly with Air Force aviation elements in combat. An airman actually has to be embedded in the Army unit to call in air strikes in support of ground operations.

As with the heavy brigade/division, the current system works for major theater operations and would not be cost effective if we deployed integrated units on that scale, but that's the whole point. We're not looking to operate on that scale anymore.

A Russian invasion of Europe is the only scenario where large scale theater operations are feasible. In the rest of the world, strike capability and rapid deployment are the solutions we need and any objective requiring occupation is not in our national interests.

So, if I am reading this right, the Army should be organized like the Marine Corps. The "Combat Group," sounds and awful lot like a MEU (Marine Expeditionary Unit).

I think the idea is worth exploration. While we operate in unified commands and Joint Task Forces, as GetReal noted, in an MEU, combat elements are integrated at a sub-brigade level. In an MEU, all of the elements are focused on a single battlespace/objective and there is no mistaking the fact that it is the boots on the ground that all of the other elements are there to support. The MEU is perfect for kicking down a door and enforcing US interests on the short term, with little to no capacity for occupation. If we'd really like to get out of the business of occupation, again, this seems like a good option.

I'll address the issue of separate services vs the Canadian Forces model in my next post.

The vast majority of posters here are opposed to those who are here illegally. We fully support those who enter the US legally, or at least gain legal status once they enter. I myself am only a second generation American. When my grandparents came to America, they had to have sponsorship, and prove they had a useful trade. If you want to live, work, and or raise children in America, play by the same rules, pay the same taxes as the rest of us. It sounds like you also took this path. Don't piss all over the work you did to get where you are by supporting people who are unwilling/unable to follow the same process.

The real solution is making it harder to get into the country in the first place and then harder to start a life here once you get in. For example, we need to evaluate the burden on government services that illegal immigrants place on the system and invest half of that in additional border protection. (Maybe divert from the "Defense," budget as well). Then, we do need to make it a lot harder to get a drivers license, or enroll your child in school without being able to prove legal residence(US issued birth certificate, or immigration documentation). Finally, we need to appropriately penalize those who hire undocumented workers. Basically, we need invest more in prevention, and take away any appeal in being here illegally. I don't favor a mass expulsion of people already here, especially children who are or were truly raised as Americans despite their paperwork.

The difference there is that Mr. Bin Laden actually organized and funded a terrorist organization. If I gave you a manual on bank security, a ski mask and a gun, and then told you to go rob a bank, that's a complete step further than simply telling you to go rob a bank.

Here's one closer to home. I can say I think police officers are oppressive and deserve to be shot, and I am within my protected rights. If I drive Maurice Clemmons around and help him do his laundry, I am aiding a fugitive and have broken the law.

Words are protected, actions are not.

It's free speech whether you like what someone has to say or not. If I tell you you should go rob a bank, you and you alone are responsible for the crime you committed, not me.

The corporate world is different. We are legally liable for our actions if we create a hostile environment that prevents someone from earning a living. Most ordinary people you meet on the street have some sense of politeness or simply a desire not to provoke their fellow citizens, but unless it is direct harassment, we are protected by law to say, print, draw or otherwise express whatever we feel regardless of the message. THIS IS AMERICA!

I really wish we could get past this debate.

The state and federal governments need to grant the same rights and benefits to all family units based around two consenting adults.

As citizens, we need to remember that people have a constitutional right to their religious beliefs and a constitutional right to express them, just like every other belief and ideology whether we like it or not.

All of us need to keep in mind that whether we choose label ourselves or others, be it religious, homosexual, liberal, or indifferent, we have alienated someone with the label. Our lives are enriched and peaceful when we choose to just see people, rather than the ideology or sexuality they adhere to.

We're all trying to make our way and the journey is much more pleasant together than alone.