Poll: Exit Syria & Afghanistan now or Stay to keep a lid on them?

Choose what spending items you support cutting

  • $24b to keep troops in the EU. (let the EU defend themselves, we'll be there if needed)

    Votes: 7 63.6%
  • End the war spending in Syria, keeping some troops in Iraq if needed

    Votes: 8 72.7%
  • End the war spending in AFG

    Votes: 6 54.5%
  • shrink the US footprint overseas in Japan, South Korea, Africa, Germany, Britain, Turkey

    Votes: 6 54.5%
  • Stop spending money on developing new weapons systems

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Cut Medicaid $412b a year

    Votes: 4 36.4%
  • Cut Welfare $462b a year

    Votes: 6 54.5%
  • Eliminate the Dept of Education $60b a year

    Votes: 8 72.7%
  • Cut more things, see my post

    Votes: 3 27.3%

  • Total voters
    11

kyzr

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2009
35,468
26,704
2,905
The AL part of PA
Trump probably doesn't like spending so much on "endless wars" that simply drain DOD funding, instead of developing better weapons. Similarly, why should the US spend $24b a year to keep troops in the EU? We have a spending problem, and need to start cutting spending. Lets vote on what to cut, but keep the $5.7b for border security.

This Is How the U.S. Military Wants to Shoot Down Russian or Chinese Hypersonic Missiles
3 thoughts on hypersonic weapons from the Pentagon’s technology chief
S2GHGV54VBDB3KNLBZDV4LB3QQ.JPG
 
Trump probably doesn't like spending so much on "endless wars" that simply drain DOD funding, instead of developing better weapons. Similarly, why should the US spend $24b a year to keep troops in the EU? We have a spending problem, and need to start cutting spending. Lets vote on what to cut, but keep the $5.7b for border security.

This Is How the U.S. Military Wants to Shoot Down Russian or Chinese Hypersonic Missiles
3 thoughts on hypersonic weapons from the Pentagon’s technology chief
S2GHGV54VBDB3KNLBZDV4LB3QQ.JPG

The United States needs to quarantine ourselves from the World until Jihad is resolved.

Disengaging our military is a necessary step because the military involvements make us liable for continued interactions and entanglements with Muslims and Jihad here in the USA.

(See how Muslims from the East Indian area colonies, who bravely served with British forces there, gained the "right" to emmigrate to England and that led to their being Islamized beyond hope.)

Once we have cut off any provocations and entanglements with Muslims then we can start legallly and peacefully reducing Muslim populations here.

And the $$$ savings are nice, too.

The biggest saving would be in saving our country from conquest.
 
Pull out of Global Defense
Isolate The US
Build a self contained US Economy
Deport All Illegals and VISA holders.
Shut off Immigration completely.
Build a Great Wall like China has on our North and South Borders

Rebuild America

Wait for WWIII
 
A Republican POTUS, G. W. Bush, got US into the war in Afghanistan back in October, 2001.

Why in Hell did we go there, and why in Hell are we still there after 17+ fvcking years?

Madness; just pure fvcking bullshit madness.
 
The bullshit artists whining in the Senate and/or Congress that keep lobbying for the US to stay all over the globe w/o looking at the cost are going to bankrupt the US, while China and Russia get stronger. Its downhill from here for the US unless we get a lot smarter about spending money we don't have.
 
Trump probably doesn't like spending so much on "endless wars" that simply drain DOD funding, instead of developing better weapons. Similarly, why should the US spend $24b a year to keep troops in the EU? We have a spending problem, and need to start cutting spending. Lets vote on what to cut, but keep the $5.7b for border security.

This Is How the U.S. Military Wants to Shoot Down Russian or Chinese Hypersonic Missiles
3 thoughts on hypersonic weapons from the Pentagon’s technology chief
S2GHGV54VBDB3KNLBZDV4LB3QQ.JPG
False dilemma fallacy.
 
Trump probably doesn't like spending so much on "endless wars" that simply drain DOD funding, instead of developing better weapons. Similarly, why should the US spend $24b a year to keep troops in the EU? We have a spending problem, and need to start cutting spending. Lets vote on what to cut, but keep the $5.7b for border security.

This Is How the U.S. Military Wants to Shoot Down Russian or Chinese Hypersonic Missiles
3 thoughts on hypersonic weapons from the Pentagon’s technology chief
S2GHGV54VBDB3KNLBZDV4LB3QQ.JPG
False dilemma fallacy.
False post dilemma fallacy non-sequiter...
 
No more Gold Star mothers to fight those stinking arab savages.....if they 9/11 us again, nuke the country of origin....and I mean nuke the shit outta it....kill everybody...that stops it.
 
A Republican POTUS, G. W. Bush, got US into the war in Afghanistan back in October, 2001.

Why in Hell did we go there, and why in Hell are we still there after 17+ fvcking years?

Madness; just pure fvcking bullshit madness.
Actually, it was bin Laden who got us into it by killing 3,000 Americans and the Taliban government of Afghanistan that continued to allow him to operate in Afghanistan, but Bush couldn't have done it without strong support for all the leading Democrats like Clinton, Biden, Kerry, etc.
 
A Republican POTUS, G. W. Bush, got US into the war in Afghanistan back in October, 2001.

Why in Hell did we go there, and why in Hell are we still there after 17+ fvcking years?

Madness; just pure fvcking bullshit madness.

Agree. If GWB and the NeoCons (Cheney, Libby, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld et al) wanted an excuse to invade Iraq, 9-11 gave them that opportunity. Bush II for revenge and the others who were members of the Principle for a New American Century (PNAC):

https://www.rrojasdatabank.info/pfpc/PNAC---statement of principles.pdf

See the plans for the Iraq invasion several years before 9-11, here:

Context of 'June 3, 1997: PNAC Think Tank Issues Statement of Principles'

[BTW, William Kristol was one of the founders of the PNAC, and today finds Trump anathema]
 
A Republican POTUS, G. W. Bush, got US into the war in Afghanistan back in October, 2001.

Why in Hell did we go there, and why in Hell are we still there after 17+ fvcking years?

Madness; just pure fvcking bullshit madness.

Agree. If GWB and the NeoCons (Cheney, Libby, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld et al) wanted an excuse to invade Iraq, 9-11 gave them that opportunity. Bush II for revenge and the others who were members of the Principle for a New American Century (PNAC):

https://www.rrojasdatabank.info/pfpc/PNAC---statement of principles.pdf

See the plans for the Iraq invasion several years before 9-11, here:

Context of 'June 3, 1997: PNAC Think Tank Issues Statement of Principles'

[BTW, William Kristol was one of the founders of the PNAC, and today finds Trump anathema]


From October 2015 to May 2016, the Washington Free Beacon, under Continetti's stewardship, hired Fusion GPS to conduct opposition research on "multiple candidates" during the 2016 presidential election, including Donald Trump. The Free Beacon stopped funding this research when Donald Trump was selected as the Republican Party nominee.

Continettis is married to Anne Elizabeth Kristol, daughter of William Kristol.
 
A Republican POTUS, G. W. Bush, got US into the war in Afghanistan back in October, 2001.

Why in Hell did we go there, and why in Hell are we still there after 17+ fvcking years?

Madness; just pure fvcking bullshit madness.
Actually, it was bin Laden who got us into it by killing 3,000 Americans and the Taliban government of Afghanistan that continued to allow him to operate in Afghanistan, but Bush couldn't have done it without strong support for all the leading Democrats like Clinton, Biden, Kerry, etc.

Read the links. Hate and fear created the climate which led to two wars of choice which killed many more than those killed by OBL. In fact, not all Americans were the victims of his horrific act:

(see: Casualties of the September 11 attacks - Wikipedia)

A distinction with this difference. Instead of calling this act an act of war against a noun (terrorism) it would have created a real commitment of the willing had the act been considered what it was: A criminal act of premeditated homicide. And instead of attacking a noun, began the response as a police action, unifying all of the countries whose citizens were murdered as members of this coalition.

I believe the world would be a better and safer place, if the perps were tried as criminals against humanity, and not be seen by the many as freedom fighter or martyrs.
 
Trimming dead weight where possible is always good. Including Congress perks...….let them all get the same 'benefits' as the rest of us have. :blowup:
 
A Republican POTUS, G. W. Bush, got US into the war in Afghanistan back in October, 2001.

Why in Hell did we go there, and why in Hell are we still there after 17+ fvcking years?

Madness; just pure fvcking bullshit madness.
Actually, it was bin Laden who got us into it by killing 3,000 Americans and the Taliban government of Afghanistan that continued to allow him to operate in Afghanistan, but Bush couldn't have done it without strong support for all the leading Democrats like Clinton, Biden, Kerry, etc.

Read the links. Hate and fear created the climate which led to two wars of choice which killed many more than those killed by OBL. In fact, not all Americans were the victims of his horrific act:

(see: Casualties of the September 11 attacks - Wikipedia)

A distinction with this difference. Instead of calling this act an act of war against a noun (terrorism) it would have created a real commitment of the willing had the act been considered what it was: A criminal act of premeditated homicide. And instead of attacking a noun, began the response as a police action, unifying all of the countries whose citizens were murdered as members of this coalition.

I believe the world would be a better and safer place, if the perps were tried as criminals against humanity, and not be seen by the many as freedom fighter or martyrs.
The fact is the war was strongly supported by both Democrats and Republicans. The major difference between the Democrats and Republicans on this issue was that the Republicans had a comprehensive vision of bringing peace and progress to to the ME and beyond and the Democrats simply didn't want to seem weak on national security after 911, however, some Democrats like Al Gore shared the Republicans vision and recognized it as a legitimate continuation of US global policy since WWII.
 
No more Gold Star mothers to fight those stinking arab savages.....if they 9/11 us again, nuke the country of origin....and I mean nuke the shit outta it....kill everybody...that stops it.

Oh...that's fucking brilliant.

So one, whacko, Indonesian, Muslim airline pilot takes control of his commercial aircraft (like the pilot of Germanwings Flight 9525 did) and flies it into the next Ohio State/Michigan football game? Killing 20,000 people.

So you want to then nuke all of Indonesia and kill well over 250 million, innocent people in retaliation.

What is in that space between your ears? Because it sure as shit ain't occupied with a properly, working brain.
 
Bring all the troops home, close all foreign military bases, cut all military aid and cut the military budget accordingly.

We save American lives, TONS of money and stop having SO many people hate Americans because her neocon leaders keep budding in where they are not wanted.
 
Bring all the troops home, close all foreign military bases, cut all military aid and cut the military budget accordingly.

We save American lives, TONS of money and stop having SO many people hate Americans because her neocon leaders keep budding in where they are not wanted.

"budding in"? We don't take advice from dipshit turds who call our First Lady a "whore"...you're not an American so keep your worthless opinions to yourself on US Military matters.
 

Forum List

Back
Top