What % of the world should we police/contol?

weird question is weird. It is hard to know just what you mean. We should be in charge or ourselves and do as good a job of that as we can.

We should assist in taking care of issues like piracy and the slave trade on the high seas. As for what we can do on land, that is problematical.

We can't march in and take over every state if we don't like their government. But if some states are totally rogue we can't let thug states bully their neighbors.

And what your pie chart has to do with this discussion i have no idea.

there is always a method to my madness.

You might explain it it as it seems to have no relation to your argument.
 
None, we should stand by our allies against aggression, insure the trade routs are fee and clear, stand ready to defend our freedom and get out of the UN!
 
weird question is weird. It is hard to know just what you mean. We should be in charge or ourselves and do as good a job of that as we can.

We should assist in taking care of issues like piracy and the slave trade on the high seas. As for what we can do on land, that is problematical.

We can't march in and take over every state if we don't like their government. But if some states are totally rogue we can't let thug states bully their neighbors.

And what your pie chart has to do with this discussion i have no idea.

there is always a method to my madness.

So you advocate gutting the Military like Clinton and Obama?

What is your position on Treaty Obligations?

First, requesting fiscally responsible defense budgets has historically been a bipartisan effort:

To keep a balanced budget, President Dwight Eisenhower, a five-star Army general and lifelong Republican, slashed defense spending by 27 percent after the armistice ended the Korean War.
Richard Nixon, also a Republican and Eisenhower’s vice president, cut the budget by 29 percent as he withdrew from Vietnam.
Between 1987 and 1998 the defense budget fell for 11 straight years as Presidents Reagan, Bush, and Clinton—two Republicans and a Democrat—brought spending down to more sustainable levels as the Cold War wound down.
Second, despite claims to the contrary, previous spending reductions have not compromised U.S. national security or created a hollow military:

A Historical Perspective on Defense Budgets
 
there is always a method to my madness.

So you advocate gutting the Military like Clinton and Obama?

What is your position on Treaty Obligations?

First, requesting fiscally responsible defense budgets has historically been a bipartisan effort:

To keep a balanced budget, President Dwight Eisenhower, a five-star Army general and lifelong Republican, slashed defense spending by 27 percent after the armistice ended the Korean War.
Richard Nixon, also a Republican and Eisenhower’s vice president, cut the budget by 29 percent as he withdrew from Vietnam.
Between 1987 and 1998 the defense budget fell for 11 straight years as Presidents Reagan, Bush, and Clinton—two Republicans and a Democrat—brought spending down to more sustainable levels as the Cold War wound down.
Second, despite claims to the contrary, previous spending reductions have not compromised U.S. national security or created a hollow military:

A Historical Perspective on Defense Budgets

we're so far in debt that $ from every department will have to be cut. the problem is that many people think that cutting a reasonable amount, from a department that they think shouldn't be touched, is slashing or gutting it.
 

Forum List

Back
Top