The USA steps down.

Question for the Constitutional Conservatives out there:

Is it Constitutional to use taxpayer money to help the Japanese in this situation?

no it's not. Which is why we should rely on donations which will be more than enough.

That's crap. It isn't money they need. It is expertise, equipment and people.

We have two carriers rendering assistance, with helicopters and planes and supplies and getting humanitarian aid to those in need.

We also have several bases in Japan. They are currently acting as a kick off point for international teams who are flooding in from around the world. Our people are helping those aid efforts to get where they are needed as fast as possible.

We are doing a substantial amount and playing our part in the international relief effort.
 
Question for the Constitutional Conservatives out there:

Is it Constitutional to use taxpayer money to help the Japanese in this situation?

As constitutional as a standing army.

The Constitutional Authority for Standing Armies? « The Political Inquirer

"....standing armies are a threat to liberty. It is through standing armies that the people are enslaved. Right now it is not overt, but a covert enslavement. Our money is squandered and spent all over the globe protecting not ourselves, but the interests of various international bankers and large corporate elite who are opposed to the free market....."
 
I always wondered what the world would look like if the USA were not there to help.
The protesters in Iran Libya and the victims in Japan know.
And so do you.

I think we are helping Japan. Screw Libya and Iran.
 
I always wondered what the world would look like if the USA were not there to help.
The protesters in Iran Libya and the victims in Japan know.
And so do you.

So, you don't think we're helping Japan??? Exactly where do you think the aircraft carriers went, along with other navy ships carrying supplies.
 
The government shouldn't be helping at all. Individuals donating to charity are helping the Japanese. I would hardly consider that as us stepping down.

As for the middle east, we really have no business getting involved in their internal politics anyway.

Both are happeningin Japan. Individuals are donating and the government is providing stuff that individuals donating could never hope to provide.
 
Question for the Constitutional Conservatives out there:

Is it Constitutional to use taxpayer money to help the Japanese in this situation?


Considering that we've been spending their money for decades, it's the decent thing to do, and in our own national interest.

At any given time, they are one of our top 3 debt holders.
 
Shouldn't it be the United Nations responsibility to respond in the way we always do. Individual nations should help but the majority of response should come from the UN. What are they good for if they can't provide assistance to member nations after a natural disaster?
 
Shouldn't it be the United Nations responsibility to respond in the way we always do. Individual nations should help but the majority of response should come from the UN. What are they good for if they can't provide assistance to member nations after a natural disaster?

The UN doesn't own the equipment, the people, or any tangible thing that can help. It's a talking shop.
 
Question for the Constitutional Conservatives out there:

Is it Constitutional to use taxpayer money to help the Japanese in this situation?


Considering that we've been spending their money for decades, it's the decent thing to do, and in our own national interest.

At any given time, they are one of our top 3 debt holders.

Then justify it constitutionally.
 
I always wondered what the world would look like if the USA were not there to help.
The protesters in Iran Libya and the victims in Japan know.
And so do you.

I think we are helping Japan. Screw Libya and Iran.

you dont help them in some fashion, oil goes up, You pay more at the pump, and you whine about Obama wanting higher gas prices......

the higher the gas prices the less chance he has for re election after all he's the one who is stopping drilling for our own oil.. yesssss he did and he's gonna get hammered for it too. :lol:
 
Last edited:
Shouldn't it be the United Nations responsibility to respond in the way we always do. Individual nations should help but the majority of response should come from the UN. What are they good for if they can't provide assistance to member nations after a natural disaster?

The UN doesn't own the equipment, the people, or any tangible thing that can help. It's a talking shop.

We seem to give them enough money, let them buy some.
 
I always wondered what the world would look like if the USA were not there to help.
The protesters in Iran Libya and the victims in Japan know.
And so do you.

I think we are helping Japan. Screw Libya and Iran.

you dont help them in some fashion, oil goes up, You pay more at the pump, and you whine about Obama wanting higher gas prices......

I guess you weren't listening to what Barry said during his massive 2 year, 730,000,000 dollar campaign. He said he didn't mind gasoline prices at 5 dollars a gallon. He also appointed a dumbass environmental twat to the Secretary of Energy post, Steven Chu, a guy who is well known
for his hatred for carbon based energy production.
 
Shouldn't it be the United Nations responsibility to respond in the way we always do. Individual nations should help but the majority of response should come from the UN. What are they good for if they can't provide assistance to member nations after a natural disaster?
1. Security Council - On any issue outside of 'agreeing on principle' to tackle climate change, one member always vetoes, making the UN ineffective to respond to genocides, wars, and acts of mass murder. To date the only actual conflicts have been resolved by acts of single nations, outside of the UN and followed by help from that nations friends/allies. :eusa_shhh:

2. Assembly - The majority of member nations are dictatorships and theocracies, thus they vote against human rights or anything that might undermine their personal power. Thus if the US and the west want anything they have to go by the back door and bribe all those nations to vote on our side. :lol:

3. UN aid is dependent on the bureaucrats at the UN, the same bureaucrats handing out the aid to dictators so that they can use the UN food aid and resources to exploit and murder their people, and as a result retain their power. They would hand out aid to Ghadaffi's govt, that's how pathetic they are. :cuckoo:

4. Nato - Many European nations would denounce or stand against intervention just like they did when the Serbs had a lovely genocide going down in Kosovo, Libya...they hardly shed a tear in private over it. ;)
 
Last edited:

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top