Republicans don't want to cut the Defense budget

[Darkwind]

First off, it's not my chart. And second, I'm not doing anything. The defense budget is obscene and needs to be cut in half!

Your're right, it wasn't. My bad and I apologize.

The domestic budget is obscene and needs to be cut by 90%, while the defense budget is the only thing keeping your ass free.

No use even trying to debate this.

You want cuts to the Defense.....4 dollars from entitlements for each dollar of defense.

Take it or leave it.

I do find it odd that Obama-bots want to make military spending the issue when even if you saved 250billion through cuts you would still have well over a Trillion dollars needed to balance the budget...

I fully agree we should cut military spending and end out useless "wars." But I'm not naive to believe that 250 billion means chit when people are not willing to look at the welfare spending that eclipses military spending by near double.

Again to mention my point from before seeing as most Obama – bots will ignore it. Obama grew military spending when he had a super majority, not cut it… That means if you voted Obama or Dem you support blooded military spending.

Well, I don't count them as useless wars. They ended up being mismanaged wars due to (surprise) political infighting. It has come to the point where even our very security and safety means nothing to those who want a 'leg' up on the opposition and proves all of them will do whatever it takes to retain power and money.

The real problem is not military spending, but Un Constitutional spending on things that are best left to the States to decide, or to entitlements to people who have no right to those benefits. Hell, no one has a right to government largess.

This is what will have to be fought. Government largess to purchase votes versus an increasing angry population that will soon, rise up in revolution against the abuse.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Because we made a mistake in Iraq you think it means we should close all our bases and just bring everyone home? Sorry, But the mere presence of those basis have helped keep the peace and Stability around the world.

I haven't said we should close all bases around the world, but honestly the middle eastern bases need to go, they are there to prepare attacks on other middle eastern countries and light up fire there, we don't need that to happen, and all the children killed in Iraq war plus the after affects of the siege, Keeping out of the middle east needs to happen

We have to help protect our allies.

Because we made a mistake in Iraq you think it means we should close all our bases and just bring everyone home? Sorry, But the mere presence of those basis have helped keep the peace and Stability around the world.

I haven't said we should close all bases around the world, but honestly the middle eastern bases need to go, they are there to prepare attacks on other middle eastern countries and light up fire there, we don't need that to happen, and all the children killed in Iraq war plus the after affects of the siege, Keeping out of the middle east needs to happen

Could not disagree more, those Mid East Bases are there to Prevent Regional War, and of course Secure the Worlds Oil Supply, Not just our own.

If any Basis need to go it's in Europe, Our Allies there do not need US basis anymore as a Stabilizing Factor. Where I don't think we should be pulling back is the Middle East and the Pac Rim, We should stand our Ground in Both Places.

No they don't, the bush era no they didn't if I need to explain this then we have a problem dude... The last thing we want happening is pitching countries against each other, but that's waht corporate and goverment interests want, especially in Egypt they want to screw up Egypt now because they don't like Muslim brotherhood

 

[Avorysuds]

1.4 Trillion dollar deficit Obama-bots... Lets say you get your 250 BILLION (half) cuts in military spending. 1,150,000,000,000 to go. Lets see it!

Or, we can pretend that you care deeply about wasted spending and deficits and you do not have to try and answer this question.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

So you don't have a clue why Syria is different than Libya, but of course YOU know we can just pull out of middle east bases based on your vast knowledge reading coloring books.

This why removing bases from middle east will help a lot, let the middle east handle it's affairs but based off oil America has to get involved, but leave political affairs alone. It's all about interests, when gaddafi was killing Libyans Obama condemned and international world sent NATO but what about when Saudi Arabia killed Bahrain protestors? Nothing said and Syria is left alone. Someone explain why Syria was left like that?

I know why it's Israel who decides what can be done to Syria, and I already know who's supporting rebels it's not america or Europe

 

[Avorysuds]

Your're right, it wasn't. My bad and I apologize.

The domestic budget is obscene and needs to be cut by 90%, while the defense budget is the only thing keeping your ass free.

No use even trying to debate this.

You want cuts to the Defense.....4 dollars from entitlements for each dollar of defense.

Take it or leave it.

I do find it odd that Obama-bots want to make military spending the issue when even if you saved 250billion through cuts you would still have well over a Trillion dollars needed to balance the budget...

I fully agree we should cut military spending and end out useless "wars." But I'm not naive to believe that 250 billion means chit when people are not willing to look at the welfare spending that eclipses military spending by near double.

Again to mention my point from before seeing as most Obama – bots will ignore it. Obama grew military spending when he had a super majority, not cut it… That means if you voted Obama or Dem you support blooded military spending.

Well, I don't count them as useless wars. They ended up being mismanaged wars due to (surprise) political infighting. It has come to the point where even our very security and safety means nothing to those who want a 'leg' up on the opposition and proves all of them will do whatever it takes to retain power and money.

The real problem is not military spending, but Un Constitutional spending on things that are best left to the States to decide, or to entitlements to people who have no right to those benefits. Hell, no one has a right to government largess.

This is what will have to be fought. Government largess to purchase votes versus an increasing angry population that will soon, rise up in revolution against the abuse.

The wars were not constitutional so I agree that the issue is non constitutional spending. The war powers act is in fact not constitutional... If congress wants to concede it's powers to the President and make him King, amend the constitution and let the people have a fighting chance.

Of course the wars were mismanaged, they were money pits due to not being constitutional. The whole point of declaring war is to first establish a reason for the war. However this does not take away from the bigger issue, deficit spending, and that is what Obama-bots are attacking, the waste in military spending. So I ask, even if they got a 50% cut in military spending what do they do to balance the budget, 1.15 trillion to go.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

1.4 Trillion dollar deficit Obama-bots... Lets say you get your 250 BILLION (half) cuts in military spending. 1,150,000,000,000 to go. Lets see it!

Or, we can pretend that you care deeply about wasted spending and deficits and you do not have to try and answer this question.

Bush increased Federal spending by as much as 2x than Obama

 

[Darkwind]

I do find it odd that Obama-bots want to make military spending the issue when even if you saved 250billion through cuts you would still have well over a Trillion dollars needed to balance the budget...

I fully agree we should cut military spending and end out useless "wars." But I'm not naive to believe that 250 billion means chit when people are not willing to look at the welfare spending that eclipses military spending by near double.

Again to mention my point from before seeing as most Obama – bots will ignore it. Obama grew military spending when he had a super majority, not cut it… That means if you voted Obama or Dem you support blooded military spending.

Well, I don't count them as useless wars. They ended up being mismanaged wars due to (surprise) political infighting. It has come to the point where even our very security and safety means nothing to those who want a 'leg' up on the opposition and proves all of them will do whatever it takes to retain power and money.

The real problem is not military spending, but Un Constitutional spending on things that are best left to the States to decide, or to entitlements to people who have no right to those benefits. Hell, no one has a right to government largess.

This is what will have to be fought. Government largess to purchase votes versus an increasing angry population that will soon, rise up in revolution against the abuse.

The wars were not constitutional so I agree that the issue is non constitutional spending. The war powers act is in fact not constitutional... If congress wants to concede it's powers to the President and make him King, amend the constitution and let the people have a fighting chance.

Of course the wars were mismanaged, they were money pits due to not being constitutional. The whole point of declaring war is to first establish a reason for the war. However this does not take away from the bigger issue, deficit spending, and that is what Obama-bots are attacking, the waste in military spending. So I ask, even if they got a 50% cut in military spending what do they do to balance the budget, 1.15 trillion to go.

The wars were Constitutional, and the War Powers Act is what it is. Congress still needed to authorize the action and to use the word 'war' is a semantic game that I long ago gave up playing.

There were solid national interests and security of the United States that was at stake.

However, I have joined the liberal camp in this regard. Future wars, if we are forced to have them, should be just our air superiority and bombing the other country from up high. No nation building. Just destroy the bastards and go home..

Regardless...Defense spending is the only real spending that the Feds have authority for. The rest of it is vote pandering.

 

[Darkwind]

1.4 Trillion dollar deficit Obama-bots... Lets say you get your 250 BILLION (half) cuts in military spending. 1,150,000,000,000 to go. Lets see it!

Or, we can pretend that you care deeply about wasted spending and deficits and you do not have to try and answer this question.

Bush increased Federal spending by as much as 2x than Obama

Obama has increased deficit spending and the debt by more than the combination of all the other Presidents combined.

The spending is vote pandering, vote payoffs and bribes for future support.

It is time we stop sugar coating it.

 

[Avorysuds]

Well, I don't count them as useless wars. They ended up being mismanaged wars due to (surprise) political infighting. It has come to the point where even our very security and safety means nothing to those who want a 'leg' up on the opposition and proves all of them will do whatever it takes to retain power and money.

The real problem is not military spending, but Un Constitutional spending on things that are best left to the States to decide, or to entitlements to people who have no right to those benefits. Hell, no one has a right to government largess.

This is what will have to be fought. Government largess to purchase votes versus an increasing angry population that will soon, rise up in revolution against the abuse.

The wars were not constitutional so I agree that the issue is non constitutional spending. The war powers act is in fact not constitutional... If congress wants to concede it's powers to the President and make him King, amend the constitution and let the people have a fighting chance.

Of course the wars were mismanaged, they were money pits due to not being constitutional. The whole point of declaring war is to first establish a reason for the war. However this does not take away from the bigger issue, deficit spending, and that is what Obama-bots are attacking, the waste in military spending. So I ask, even if they got a 50% cut in military spending what do they do to balance the budget, 1.15 trillion to go.

The wars were Constitutional, and the War Powers Act is what it is. Congress still needed to authorize the action and to use the word 'war' is a semantic game that I long ago gave up playing.

There were solid national interests and security of the United States that was at stake.

However, I have joined the liberal camp in this regard. Future wars, if we are forced to have them, should be just our air superiority and bombing the other country from up high. No nation building. Just destroy the bastards and go home..

Regardless...Defense spending is the only real spending that the Feds have authority for. The rest of it is vote pandering.

I share your sentiments on not wanting to debate the constitutionality of the war powers act, for me it is clearly unconstitutional and costs the US money, lives and influence. I still feel we should get out of other countries and shrink military spending, I however do not have a number in mind on what would be adequate military spending.

In the end you are correct, military is a power enumerated to Government, welfare and many other programs, stimulus’s and so on are not and were not for good reason. The reason is that costs never stop going up.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

1.4 Trillion dollar deficit Obama-bots... Lets say you get your 250 BILLION (half) cuts in military spending. 1,150,000,000,000 to go. Lets see it!

Or, we can pretend that you care deeply about wasted spending and deficits and you do not have to try and answer this question.

Bush increased Federal spending by as much as 2x than Obama

Obama has increased deficit spending and the debt by more than the combination of all the other Presidents combined.

The spending is vote pandering, vote payoffs and bribes for future support.

It is time we stop sugar coating it.

Thats because Obama had to deal with the late 2008 economic depression left by bush's 5.1 trillion spending

 

[Avorysuds]

1.4 Trillion dollar deficit Obama-bots... Lets say you get your 250 BILLION (half) cuts in military spending. 1,150,000,000,000 to go. Lets see it!

Or, we can pretend that you care deeply about wasted spending and deficits and you do not have to try and answer this question.

Bush increased Federal spending by as much as 2x than Obama

That has to be the worst argument I have ever seen... I'm not fucking around when I ask how old you are, I'm truly curious seeing as anyone that is an adult understand that 2 wrongs don't make a right. In this case Obama spending MORE than Bush is not good simply because Bush increased spending faster.

I honestly can’t tell you how ridiculous you sound. Think of this as constructive criticism, declaring you’re a hypocrite as a way to win an argument is mind numbing… Was it how fast Bush grew the deficit that you didn’t like or how much? Also Bush was in office 8 years and had 9/11 and a recession from the get go… I’m not defending Bush but Obama has had it pretty easy, he campaigned on fixing the recession and failed.

 

[Avorysuds]

Bush increased Federal spending by as much as 2x than Obama

Obama has increased deficit spending and the debt by more than the combination of all the other Presidents combined.

The spending is vote pandering, vote payoffs and bribes for future support.

It is time we stop sugar coating it.

Thats because Obama had to deal with the late 2008 economic depression left by bush's 5.1 trillion spending

You lost me again... So a depression was caused by spending, yet you support Obama who spends more....... You're currently stumbling over your own hypocrisy.

I wonder if Mitt wins if you will credit him the same leniency as you do Obama.

 

[Darkwind]

The wars were not constitutional so I agree that the issue is non constitutional spending. The war powers act is in fact not constitutional... If congress wants to concede it's powers to the President and make him King, amend the constitution and let the people have a fighting chance.

Of course the wars were mismanaged, they were money pits due to not being constitutional. The whole point of declaring war is to first establish a reason for the war. However this does not take away from the bigger issue, deficit spending, and that is what Obama-bots are attacking, the waste in military spending. So I ask, even if they got a 50% cut in military spending what do they do to balance the budget, 1.15 trillion to go.

The wars were Constitutional, and the War Powers Act is what it is. Congress still needed to authorize the action and to use the word 'war' is a semantic game that I long ago gave up playing.

There were solid national interests and security of the United States that was at stake.

However, I have joined the liberal camp in this regard. Future wars, if we are forced to have them, should be just our air superiority and bombing the other country from up high. No nation building. Just destroy the bastards and go home..

Regardless...Defense spending is the only real spending that the Feds have authority for. The rest of it is vote pandering.

I share your sentiments on not wanting to debate the constitutionality of the war powers act, for me it is clearly unconstitutional and costs the US money, lives and influence. I still feel we should get out of other countries and shrink military spending, I however do not have a number in mind on what would be adequate military spending.

In the end you are correct, military is a power enumerated to Government, welfare and many other programs, stimulus’s and so on are not and were not for good reason. The reason is that costs never stop going up.

Don't get Me wrong. I have thought about it for a long time and have come to a number of conclusions.

1. We spend far to much money protecting other nations; far to little protecting ourselves. To that end, I think that;

a. We should withdraw from NATO. It may be that Russia is resurging in aggressive stances with regard to the west, but it is time for Europe to protect itself. We no longer have the vested interest of allowing them to drain our precious resources for their decadence.

b. We should withdraw to strategic bases. Each Continent should have one, possibly two, American bases. These bases should be the center and sole operations of ensuring our interests around the globe. The dozens we have now should be shuttered, sold, and abandoned.

c. Our main objective should be this: Ground Forces for invasion should be the best in the world. But remain at home, training to the point that they can kill anything, anywhere. Air and Navel forces should be what we use to project our power to protect our interests. These forces can operate from friendly sites across the globe without the need of ground force encampments.

d. Any nation that wishes our protection from an aggressor will pay us for the protection. They will provide bases on their soil; they will get no say in the operations of those bases, and they will permit unfettered air access to their air space. Or they can go pound sand. When we eliminate the thread, we leave. No clean up, no hey, it was great. We just pack up and leave.

We need no more than 200k troops on the ground (total) for the entire world. The rest should be monitoring forces by air and sea.

2. We need a space program that allows us to monitor everyone. If nations complain, tell them to go get fucked.

3. All sea going vessels will have to enter American waters through specified shipping lanes that we monitor. Every ship will be sent through a set of 'gates' that will scan them for fissile material, and ships from suspiciou countries will be required to 'wet dock' for inspection prior to being allowed to proceed to American Ports. Our Coast Guard will earn their paychecks.


There is more...but that is a good summary.

 

[Unkotare]

what's your things should we cut the defense budget or not? ...

Of course not.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Obama has increased deficit spending and the debt by more than the combination of all the other Presidents combined.

The spending is vote pandering, vote payoffs and bribes for future support.

It is time we stop sugar coating it.

Thats because Obama had to deal with the late 2008 economic depression left by bush's 5.1 trillion spending

You lost me again... So a depression was caused by spending, yet you support Obama who spends more....... You're currently stumbling over your own hypocrisy.

I wonder if Mitt wins if you will credit him the same leniency as you do Obama.

Obama had to spend big and his plan extends to 2016 where He will bring spending down 22 percent, so yes he did spend and unemployment isn't getting that much better but don't expect a two year recovery lets see what republicans will do, oh wait Americans don't want republicans in office that must tell you something

 

[Avorysuds]

The wars were Constitutional, and the War Powers Act is what it is. Congress still needed to authorize the action and to use the word 'war' is a semantic game that I long ago gave up playing.

There were solid national interests and security of the United States that was at stake.

However, I have joined the liberal camp in this regard. Future wars, if we are forced to have them, should be just our air superiority and bombing the other country from up high. No nation building. Just destroy the bastards and go home..

Regardless...Defense spending is the only real spending that the Feds have authority for. The rest of it is vote pandering.

I share your sentiments on not wanting to debate the constitutionality of the war powers act, for me it is clearly unconstitutional and costs the US money, lives and influence. I still feel we should get out of other countries and shrink military spending, I however do not have a number in mind on what would be adequate military spending.

In the end you are correct, military is a power enumerated to Government, welfare and many other programs, stimulus’s and so on are not and were not for good reason. The reason is that costs never stop going up.

Don't get Me wrong. I have thought about it for a long time and have come to a number of conclusions.

1. We spend far to much money protecting other nations; far to little protecting ourselves. To that end, I think that;

a. We should withdraw from NATO. It may be that Russia is resurging in aggressive stances with regard to the west, but it is time for Europe to protect itself. We no longer have the vested interest of allowing them to drain our precious resources for their decadence.

b. We should withdraw to strategic bases. Each Continent should have one, possibly two, American bases. These bases should be the center and sole operations of ensuring our interests around the globe. The dozens we have now should be shuttered, sold, and abandoned.

c. Our main objective should be this: Ground Forces for invasion should be the best in the world. But remain at home, training to the point that they can kill anything, anywhere. Air and Navel forces should be what we use to project our power to protect our interests. These forces can operate from friendly sites across the globe without the need of ground force encampments.

d. Any nation that wishes our protection from an aggressor will pay us for the protection. They will provide bases on their soil; they will get no say in the operations of those bases, and they will permit unfettered air access to their air space. Or they can go pound sand. When we eliminate the thread, we leave. No clean up, no hey, it was great. We just pack up and leave.

We need no more than 200k troops on the ground (total) for the entire world. The rest should be monitoring forces by air and sea.

2. We need a space program that allows us to monitor everyone. If nations complain, tell them to go get fucked.

3. All sea going vessels will have to enter American waters through specified shipping lanes that we monitor. Every ship will be sent through a set of 'gates' that will scan them for fissile material, and ships from suspiciou countries will be required to 'wet dock' for inspection prior to being allowed to proceed to American Ports. Our Coast Guard will earn their paychecks.


There is more...but that is a good summary.

I agree with all of that except (B).

It should be added that we should only have bases in countries we are allied with.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

what's your things should we cut the defense budget or not? ...

Of course not.

Explain why

 

[Darkwind]

I share your sentiments on not wanting to debate the constitutionality of the war powers act, for me it is clearly unconstitutional and costs the US money, lives and influence. I still feel we should get out of other countries and shrink military spending, I however do not have a number in mind on what would be adequate military spending.

In the end you are correct, military is a power enumerated to Government, welfare and many other programs, stimulus’s and so on are not and were not for good reason. The reason is that costs never stop going up.

Don't get Me wrong. I have thought about it for a long time and have come to a number of conclusions.

1. We spend far to much money protecting other nations; far to little protecting ourselves. To that end, I think that;

a. We should withdraw from NATO. It may be that Russia is resurging in aggressive stances with regard to the west, but it is time for Europe to protect itself. We no longer have the vested interest of allowing them to drain our precious resources for their decadence.

b. We should withdraw to strategic bases. Each Continent should have one, possibly two, American bases. These bases should be the center and sole operations of ensuring our interests around the globe. The dozens we have now should be shuttered, sold, and abandoned.

c. Our main objective should be this: Ground Forces for invasion should be the best in the world. But remain at home, training to the point that they can kill anything, anywhere. Air and Navel forces should be what we use to project our power to protect our interests. These forces can operate from friendly sites across the globe without the need of ground force encampments.

d. Any nation that wishes our protection from an aggressor will pay us for the protection. They will provide bases on their soil; they will get no say in the operations of those bases, and they will permit unfettered air access to their air space. Or they can go pound sand. When we eliminate the thread, we leave. No clean up, no hey, it was great. We just pack up and leave.

We need no more than 200k troops on the ground (total) for the entire world. The rest should be monitoring forces by air and sea.

2. We need a space program that allows us to monitor everyone. If nations complain, tell them to go get fucked.

3. All sea going vessels will have to enter American waters through specified shipping lanes that we monitor. Every ship will be sent through a set of 'gates' that will scan them for fissile material, and ships from suspiciou countries will be required to 'wet dock' for inspection prior to being allowed to proceed to American Ports. Our Coast Guard will earn their paychecks.


There is more...but that is a good summary.

I agree with all of that except (B).

It should be added that we should only have bases in countries we are allied with.

Well, it is more expensive to have bases in enemy countries....

 

[Unkotare]

oh wait Americans don't want republicans in office that must tell you something

Did you forget the 2010 mid-term elections?

 

[Darkwind]

oh, and one last thing.

No more of this 'humanitarian war' shit.

We go to war, anyone gets in the way gets ghosted.

Our enemies should learn that it will not protect them to hide behind their sisters skirts. We see you, we kill you and anyone around you.

No fucking mercy. Destroy the country and then go home.