If Kerry wins?

[Semper Fi]

Will he cut military spending greatly and give it to the illegal alien crack-addicts with his nearly $1 trillion health care plan? I seem to think that, judging by the recent things I've read/heard. I'd like to know if that may be true before I dig myself into a hole with any debates I may find.

 

[Jimmyeatworld]

Will he cut military spending greatly and give it to the illegal alien crack-addicts with his nearly $1 trillion health care plan? I seem to think that, judging by the recent things I've read/heard. I'd like to know if that may be true before I dig myself into a hole with any debates I may find.

He'll only do that if the UN lets him.

 

[5stringJeff]

If Kerry wins I'm quitting my job and leeching off of welfare.

 

[tpahl]

Will he cut military spending greatly and give it to the illegal alien crack-addicts with his nearly $1 trillion health care plan? I seem to think that, judging by the recent things I've read/heard. I'd like to know if that may be true before I dig myself into a hole with any debates I may find.

He has said that he would send more troops and I have never seen him mention he would cut military spending.

As for the health care spending, Bush has not been the greatest in that regards either. he has created yet another layer of buearcracy in the health care industry.

Travis

 

[DKSuddeth]

military spending can afford a cut of a few billion dollars anyway. It might make the spenders more accountable and cause less waste.

 

[freeandfun1]

It can? During a war?

How can we cut spending if Kerry is going to increase the size of the military?

 

[007]

Will he cut military spending greatly and give it to the illegal alien crack-addicts with his nearly $1 trillion health care plan? I seem to think that, judging by the recent things I've read/heard. I'd like to know if that may be true before I dig myself into a hole with any debates I may find.

Don't even worry about it. He ain't got a snowballs chance in hell of winning.

 

[DKSuddeth]

It can? During a war?

How can we cut spending if Kerry is going to increase the size of the military?

it can, theres so much waste in the military budget its unreal. its all a fiscal mess. stricter fiscal accountability would either A) reduce spending by a few billion dollars or B) provide a few billion dollars to go into buying a few more jets or tanks.

 

[tpahl]

It can? During a war?

How can we cut spending if Kerry is going to increase the size of the military?

To continue all the things that Kerry would like to do with military we can not afford to cut spending. However both kerry and Bush want to keep our military in over 100 plus countries.

If Badnarik was elected we would be able to cut the military budget because we would not have such an aggressive military that feels the need to be in 100+ countries. Many of these nations have huge economies and are not a threat and could provide their own defense. Other countries are not a threat but we send our troops to them to help in some war that is not our business. This creates enemies.

Travis

 

[Annie]

To continue all the things that Kerry would like to do with military we can not afford to cut spending. However both kerry and Bush want to keep our military in over 100 plus countries.

If Badnarik was elected we would be able to cut the military budget because we would not have such an aggressive military that feels the need to be in 100+ countries. Many of these nations have huge economies and are not a threat and could provide their own defense. Other countries are not a threat but we send our troops to them to help in some war that is not our business. This creates enemies.

Travis

That seems reasonable. Can you give some examples of countries we should pull out of?

 

[tpahl]

That seems reasonable. Can you give some examples of countries we should pull out of?

Japan, South Korea, Australia, Italy, Germany, Britian, and Spain, are all great examples of countries that can and should defend themselves.

Saudia Arabia is a great example of a country that we created enemies by being in. Thankfully Bush has decided to pull out of S. A. had we never been there, 9/11 very likely would have never happened. Other countries that we should not have troops in because it is creating enemies are Iraq and Isreal.

The Philipines and the former Soviet Republics are are great example of us just having troops for no reason that actually protects the US in any way.

If you keep in mind the purpose of the US military is to protect the US, and any deployment that does not advance that cause is a bad depolyment you are really left with a tiny percentage of number of countries we should have troops in.

Travis

 

[5stringJeff]

Japan, South Korea, Australia, Italy, Germany, Britian, and Spain, are all great examples of countries that can and should defend themselves.

Saudia Arabia is a great example of a country that we created enemies by being in. Thankfully Bush has decided to pull out of S. A. had we never been there, 9/11 very likely would have never happened. Other countries that we should not have troops in because it is creating enemies are Iraq and Isreal.

The Philipines and the former Soviet Republics are are great example of us just having troops for no reason that actually protects the US in any way.

If you keep in mind the purpose of the US military is to protect the US, and any deployment that does not advance that cause is a bad depolyment you are really left with a tiny percentage of number of countries we should have troops in.

Travis

We have troops in countries like Germany and Japan as part of this little thing called Power Projection. That means if we have to deploy somewhere like Iraq, we have assets overseas that can get there quickly. Or would you rather get rid of that ability to destroy our enemies, in the name of Less Government?

 

[tpahl]

We have troops in countries like Germany and Japan as part of this little thing called Power Projection. That means if we have to deploy somewhere like Iraq, we have assets overseas that can get there quickly. Or would you rather get rid of that ability to destroy our enemies, in the name of Less Government?

Please keep in mind, alot of our enemies are enemies BECAUSE we have troops in so many countries. One of Osamas largest complaints was troops in Saudia Arabia and military support of Israel.

Travis

 

[DKSuddeth]

Other countries that we should not have troops in because it is creating enemies are Iraq and Isreal.

We have troops in Israel?

 

[5stringJeff]

Please keep in mind, alot of our enemies are enemies BECAUSE we have troops in so many countries. One of Osamas largest complaints was troops in Saudia Arabia and military support of Israel.

Travis

We would have still been OBL's enemy because of our support of Israel and our sanctions against Saddam's Iraq.

I am no fan of Saudi Arabia, but your argument is weak. Yes, I would like to consolidate our overseas bases as well and pull out of a few countries. However, those countries interpret such a move as a weakening of the bonds between our two countries, so there are many diplomatic points to consider as well. I agree with you in theory, but your strategy of "bring them all home" is not realistic.

 

[Hobbit]

We have troops in Israel?

Last time I ever heard of a U.S. soldier in Israel, it was my Uncle, and he went unarmed and spent 4 hours being interrogated before being allowed on the plane. Troops in Israel? pfft.

As for Iraq, what do you propose we do? Pull out and abandon those people? The country isn't stable enough for that right now and if we pull out, it'll be a disaster.

 

[Annie]

Travis I agree with pulling out of SA, though I think it had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11, just another excuse for the enemy. On the other hand:

Russia, I'm not so sure:

http://www.slate.com/Default.aspx?id=2104542&

Japan/Australia?

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20040...ge-jr/a-global-power-shift-in-the-making.html


Now I am really looking for someone smart to do what I would like domestically, but I think for the present, it's important to keep a close eye on what's happening geo-politically at the global level. I think that a Libertarian is the most likely to emerge, but hasn't happened yet.

 

[tpahl]

We would have still been OBL's enemy because of our support of Israel and our sanctions against Saddam's Iraq.

Yes i understand that pulling out of Saudi Arabia alone would not have ended all of osamas complaints. But it would have weakened his support base. Not all of his followers care about all 3 of osamas complaints equally. Most of his hijackers were from Saudi Arabia and I think it would be reasonable to conclude that the US troops in SA was there biggest complaint.

I am no fan of Saudi Arabia, but your argument is weak. Yes, I would like to consolidate our overseas bases as well and pull out of a few countries. However, those countries interpret such a move as a weakening of the bonds between our two countries, so there are many diplomatic points to consider as well. I agree with you in theory, but your strategy of "bring them all home" is not realistic.

Weaking this particular relationship is actually a good thing. As it stands now many nations either...

A. Rely on our defense spending and military to protect themselves while they instead spend their money on socialized health care or other domestic spending. We are in essence subsidizing their domestic spending. They are taking advantage of us.

or

B. Dragging us into conflicts that are not any of the US's concern. Increasing the threat of attack against the US instead of decreasing the threat.

Or both. Yes, these countries might get pissed at us and raise a big stink if fwe leave, but this is one of the things that I agree with GW Bush on. Who cares what other countries say and think about us? They have their own agenda and do not have what is best for the USA. Other countries want us to do what is best for them. Our foriegn/military policy should always be about what is best for the good ol USA, not France and Russia. In the end we are not going to lose allies just because we are requiring that they defend themselves. And we will in fact GAIN allies by staying out of wars that have nothing to do with us.

Travis

 

[tpahl]

Travis I agree with pulling out of SA, though I think it had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11, just another excuse for the enemy.

Lets see... which would upset you more... foriegn troops in what you consider a holy land, an embargo against people you consider to be brothers with, and military support of people you consider to be an enemy?

Or some country half a world away enjoying its freedom?

Bush has ignored the obvious and stated reasons for the terrorists attacks against our country. We have no choice in what he says, but that does not mean we need to beleive it when we are given evidence to the contrary.

On the other hand:


Russia, I'm not so sure:

http://www.slate.com/Default.aspx?id=2104542&

What does this have to do with whether we need troops in the region? So Putin is mismanaging Russia. That does not mean it is our business, it is a threat to us, or that neighboring countries deserve/need our support.

Japan/Australia?

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20040...ge-jr/a-global-power-shift-in-the-making.html

This article if anything supports the idea that the region is a dangerous place for the US to become involved in. Every country we decide to support will mean that we are becoming enemies with their enemies. Why would you want us to become involved in a region you beleive is so dangerous?

Now I am really looking for someone smart to do what I would like domestically, but I think for the present, it's important to keep a close eye on what's happening geo-politically at the global level. I think that a Libertarian is the most likely to emerge, but hasn't happened yet.

Badnarik has a very keen eye for the US foreign policy. Take a look at the following two quotes regarding US failures...

Spreading Democracy

Moderator: one of the things when we went into Afghanistan and Iraq was that we were bringing the benefits of democracy, the free market and social tolerance. We have insisted that women be included in government councils in Afghanistan and imposed a flat tax on Iraq. Can you export ideas like that and what larger responsibility does our country have to bring two other parts of the world the ideas that we believe in|?

Badnarik: First of all, the Founding Fathers loathed a democracy, calling it a tyranny of the majority. The United States is not a democracy. The United States is a constitutional Republic based on private party and individual rights. In the 1860’s we passed the 13th amendment, which presumably eliminated slavery and it took well over 100 years to erase the racial hatred between the whites and the blacks. How does the American government think that they can go into another country and override thousands of years of culture? It is not our job to export anything except products and services.

Foreign Relations

Moderator: This is a related question but maybe one that is a little more involved. How much can the United States do and how much should it do to either restrain or encourage the Israeli government in its efforts to combat Palestinian terrorism?

Badnarik: Our founding fathers were very wise. [In] George Washington’s farewell address, he encouraged us to establish economic ties with all countries and establish entangling alliances with none. [Inaudible] …ties, we establish at least one enemy. If we give money to one government, the people they are fighting hate us. Occasionally the government in its very finite wisdom chooses to fund both sides of the encounter. Apparently believing that by giving both sides money, both sides will love us. Apparently, it never occurs to congress that if we give money to both sides, both sides will hate us for funding their enemy. People within the United States are free to do anything they want with their personal funds, but it is immoral to tax Arabs and send that Israel, or to tax the Jews and to send that to the Arabs. We need to stay out of entangling alliances.

source: http://www.tblog.com/templates/index.php?bid=tpahl&static=193871

 

[Annie]

You spin well, but to ignore what is going on in Russia, is to ignore Europe, something that cost us dearly in the 20th C.

The same holds true with the real politik of the East. Isolationism will not work for us, now France????