The Outrage over Defense Spending

Discussion in 'Politics' started by LeBuick, Apr 8, 2009.

  1. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Of all the articles I've read about the defense spending announcements, this is the first guy to pull back the covers to see what is really going on. All this outrage from the left and right is ridiculous. The left wants to keep those wasteful contracts in their states and the right is trying to make everyone believe we are now vulnerable to attacks.

    Those politicians on the Hill know none of the proposed changes will degrade the nations defensive readiness. We have enough bombs to destroy the world several times over so what's a few more going to do? What those politicians are really doing is putting on a show for the lobbyist and defense contractors whose pocket they dwell and to their constituents to say they tried their best to oppose the presidents agenda...

    The nation is buying into the biggest floor show in history. Hook, line and sinker...

    http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-defense7-2009apr07,0,6842364.story

    Why won't this nation see the light, I don't agree with everything Obama does but in this case he is making good decisions toward cutting wasteful spending and the nation just don't want to admit it.

    Am I the only one who sees the truth?
     
  2. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    Care to give some examples of the "wasteful" spending that he is cutting here?
     
  3. BigBossman

    BigBossman
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Messages:
    1,008
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have no problem with the government using my tax dollars to buy weapons or ammunition to protect our nation. I believe that one can never have too much ammo. You buy extra in hopes that you never need it & hoping that you'll never have to use it. At least it gives you peace of mind knowing that should you have to, you'll have an ample supply & won't have to worry about running out.

    If the government is buying less ammo for our troops, I hope they'll at least supply them with a pocket knife. That won't do any good unless they have been trained to dodge multiple bullets.
     
  4. just-want-peace

    just-want-peace
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    5,502
    Likes Received:
    40
    'Pears as how!

    Care to explain the in more detail to us iggernent yokels?

    IOW, since we really don't know if healthy eating has kept our heart healthy, lets go to junk food and see what happens! Stupid as that statement is, it makes as much sense as the above quote!
     
  5. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Start with the list of things Gates just cut then browse the long list McCain gave us during the campaign. It is also no secret how the defense companies under bid the competition knowing they can claim cost overruns and get more money later. The whole thing is a sham...
     
  6. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    I know of an over weight preacher from LA that is 94 and still eats fried everything, pork, beef and you name it. He is also a sweets junkie. Eating healthy may reduce the risk of heart disease but it certainly doesn't guarantee anything.

    It's like having the largest gun, it might make you feel safe but how much safer but whether it made you safer is open to the jury of time.
     
  7. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    How do you know that those defense items were "wasteful". You claimed to have some special insight that no else seems to have. Please tell me why any of the defense items being cut were "wasteful".
     
  8. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,069
    Likes Received:
    216
     
  9. JustChristian

    JustChristian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0
    Anything over what is required for our own national security is wasteful. Bush and the Neo-Cons wanted America to maintain its status as the ruler of the world. Why should Christians support this neo-Nazi perspective on the world when so many are needy?
     
  10. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    And how do you know what is required for our national security and what is not?

    Ruler of the world?

    Hyperbole makes you look silly.
     
  11. rbell

    rbell
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Comparing Bush to Hitler...what a monumentally stupid post.


    Oh...and that was Off-topic Bush-bash #3,926.
     
  12. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    At least JC can spell Neo. But he are an inginer don-chu-no.
     
  13. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    As you know, information like that won't be on the net but both countries have thousands of bombs which are way more powerful than the ones used in WWII. It is not the blast that will assure the worlds destruction, it is the radiation and nuclear winter that will follow. You'd be better off dieing in the initial blast.
     
  14. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    Problem with all that is that we no longer send our military to protect our nation but to protect and maintain the empires and interests of a handful of powerful men. The answer is to use our military for it's intended purpose. Defending the U.S. It was never intended that our military engage in nation building or open the markets in other countries so the international public privateers can leverage their capitol and privatize the natural resources of others by force.
     
  15. JustChristian

    JustChristian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0
    The classic economic tradeoff in Macro-Economics 101 was guns versus butter. You seem to be saying that we should spend as much as possible on arms and as little as possible to feed the poor. How is that consistent with Christianity?
     
  16. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    In the old Soviet Union and North Korea that is true.

    But it has not been true in the U.S.

    How do you get that from his post?

    His post says nothing about feeding the poor so it is not possible to draw such a conclusion.

    Your misunderstanding most likely comes from nothing more than your prejudices.
     
  17. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,069
    Likes Received:
    216
    We as Christians - thur our churches should feed the poor - physically and spiritually! And our church does that thur the SBC Co-op and other ministries we are involved in.

    Let me repeat myself - it is unconstitutional for the US Federal govt to be spending money for social programs. If I am misguided, please provide me chapter and verse of the Constitution.
    Remember, States or Commonwealths are not prohibited from doing so.
     

Share This Page

Loading...