Should congress approve a $200b supplemental for the war, as requested? (Poll)

[leftwinger]

citygator
Gotta replenish stock. You shamefully avoid the truth like a true FullStain on USA.

 

[citygator]

citygator
Gotta replenish stock. You shamefully avoid the truth like a true FullStain on USA.

You dont have to attack a nation across the world without congressional approval for no reason.

 

[toobfreak]

Should congress approve a $200b supplemental for the war, as requested?​

Without question. Failure is not an option here. If we don't win this war and drive the IRGC and mullahs out of existence, they and many other forces around the globe would only see this as proof of America's inability and lack of commitment and drive on to try to destroy us. If we defeat Iran, this puts forth a global reset on the planet and strategically changes everything for the getter for everyone but China, Russia, Nor.K. and Iran.

So if we spend about $11b a week, and we're out of targets already, why do we need $200b? That math doesn't work for me.​

It doesn't need to add up for you, it needs to add up for the military budget planners who know exactly what we need, why and how.

 

[kyzr]

Without question. Failure is not an option here. If we don't win this war and drive the IRGC and mullahs out of existence, they and many other forces around the globe would only see this as proof of America's inability and lack of commitment and drive on to try to destroy us. If we defeat Iran, this puts forth a global reset on the planet and strategically changes everything for the better for everyone but China, Russia, Nor.K. and Iran.

I agree with your analysis, just not the price tag.

It doesn't need to add up for you, it needs to add up for the military budget planners who know exactly what we need, why and how.

If one of those planners was called before congress and did a whiteboard presentation to justify the $200b I'd agree.
Until then, I'd say NFW, we don't have the money, we're $40T in debt.

 

[toobfreak]

You dont have to attack a nation across the world without congressional approval for no reason.

Spoken by the same person who happily sent upwards of 900 billion to Ukraine on the other side of the planet just a few years ago to fight a war of no concern to us where half the money never even made it there and just disappeared while half the people here flew the Ukraine flag as their avatar, yet condemn the USA now for tackling an intransigent, intractable nuclear threat whose stated sole mission for living was the destruction of America.

 

[toobfreak]

I agree with your analysis, just not the price tag. If one of those planners was called before congress and did a whiteboard presentation to justify the $200b I'd agree.

If I were forced to guess, I think it might go something like this--- 200 billion more for:

1. To rebuild our military stronger than it was before to replace all of the missiles and weapons used up in this war, plus that given away to Ukraine to end up better armed than ever so we are in an even stronger position should a superpower try moving against us.
2. Some money for helping rebuild/repair Iran after end of military operations.

Point is that we need to rebound AQAP after both all the Ukraine aid, the Venezuelan Heist, and now the Iran war so that we are 110% ready and as prepared as ever to leap into another military conflict from China perhaps. China is at the heart of most every problem for us around the planet.

Part of the problem with being too specific on what we need the allocations for is that it reveals to our enemies our vulnerabilities and plans. After throwing 300 billion at Ukraine at a time no questions asked, I'm good with Hegseth getting a mere 200 billion here.

We got nothing out of Ukraine but a world free of Iranian-sponsored terrorism is a dividend almost without limits.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I agree with your analysis, just not the price tag.

If one of those planners was called before congress and did a whiteboard presentation to justify the $200b I'd agree.
Until then, I'd say NFW, we don't have the money, we're $40T in debt.

That's less than 1/2 of 1% of the debt. Peanuts to eliminate a thorn in our side for almost 50 years. Cheap at twice the price!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Pentagon seeks $200 billion in additional funds for the Iran war, AP source says

A senior administration official says the Pentagon is seeking $200 billion in additional funds for the Iran war.

apnews.com

Pentagon seeking $200B more for Iran war, official says

"It takes money to kill bad guys," Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Thursday.

abcnews.com

The US spent $11.3b in the 1st WEEK of the war.

MSN

US spent $11.3 billion in first week of war with Iran​

So if we spend about $11b a week, and we're out of targets already, why do we need $200b? That math doesn't work for me.

Seems like we're hitting too many cheap targets with expensive weapons. Fine, better than sending in troops, but still, $200b? NFW

That is what costs? The article is very vague. The only real costs I can see is replacing ordnance used to break things in Iran and shoot down their missiles and drones. Everything else is accounted for in normal operations except maybe for the additional fuel required.

 

[leftwinger]

GOVT is just hosed top to bottom with grifting lying DEI fraudulet hofdovers every department. Eat it up sheeeaaatty Gator breath

Female Secret Service Agent Who Didn’t Secure Roof of AGR Building at Butler Rally on Day of Trump Assassination Attempt Suspended AGAIN – Hid Marriage to Foreign National

Female Secret Service Agent Who Didn't Secure Roof of AGR Building at Butler Rally on Day of Trump Assassination Attempt Suspended AGAIN - Hid Marriage to Foreign National | The Gateway Pundit | by Cristina Laila

One of the Secret Service agents who failed to secure the roof of the AGR building at the Butler rally on the day of the assassination attempt against President Trump has been suspended again.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

 

[leftwinger]

You dont have to attack a nation across the world without congressional approval for no reason.

You do after 47 years ot terrorism (7 other Presidents did nothing about it).

You do when the 40 top leaders are meeting in one site and Tucker leaked to them "no attack" so they eliminated them all at once. WINNING!!!

Congress lol! Bunch of 90yr old can't make it to the vote, demWitted morons like Crocket AOC and may D. Bunches of cross party phony R? If you can exlude all that sewage...maybe?but Trump regime can launch 90days on EO thank God.

 

[kyzr]

If I were forced to guess, I think it might go something like this--- 200 billion more for:

1. To rebuild our military stronger than it was before to replace all of the missiles and weapons used up in this war, plus that given away to Ukraine to end up better armed than ever so we are in an even stronger position should a superpower try moving against us.
2. Some money for helping rebuild/repair Iran after end of military operations.

Point is that we need to rebound AQAP after both all the Ukraine aid, the Venezuelan Heist, and now the Iran war so that we are 110% ready and as prepared as ever to leap into another military conflict from China perhaps. China is at the heart of most every problem for us around the planet.
Part of the problem with being too specific on what we need the allocations for is that it reveals to our enemies our vulnerabilities and plans. After throwing 300 billion at Ukraine at a time no questions asked, I'm good with Hegseth getting a mere 200 billion here.
We got nothing out of Ukraine but a world free of Iranian-sponsored terrorism is a dividend almost without limits.

1. The US military spends more than the next 10 militaries combined. Its time to say "no" to $200b, just give $50b.
2. No way do we rebuild/repair Iran. They have oil revenue to rebuild, especially with a smaller military.

Enough to replace the expended ordinance is all we need to do.

 

[kyzr]

That's less than 1/2 of 1% of the debt. Peanuts to eliminate a thorn in our side for almost 50 years. Cheap at twice the price!

Ok, $100b now, but not the $500b requested for 2027. We need to cut costs from all departments.

Trump proposes massive increase in 2027 defense spending to $1.5T

President Donald Trump is proposing setting U.S. military spending at $1.5 trillion in 2027, citing “troubled and dangerous times.”

www.militarytimes.com

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Ok, $100b now, but not the $500b requested for 2027. We need to cut costs from all departments.

Trump proposes massive increase in 2027 defense spending to $1.5T

President Donald Trump is proposing setting U.S. military spending at $1.5 trillion in 2027, citing “troubled and dangerous times.”

www.militarytimes.com

Changing the subject now?

 

[kyzr]

Changing the subject now?

No, the subject is how much of a supplemental does the military need.

A 3 or 4 week war shouldn't cost $200b based on the weekly numbers of $12b.
The $500b add for 2027 is ridiculous, we spend more than the next 10 militaries combined, enough already.

 

[g5000]

Absolutely, whatever the military needs.

When are you signing up to join the fight, comrade?

The military needs to be sent home. Iran was never a threat to us, and 13 Americans have died for nothing.

The USS Ford has been on deployment for 266 days, far beyond a standard deployment and fast approaching a record not broken since the Vietnam War our Coward-in-Chief dodged.

The ship and crew are exhausted. A fire ripped through the ship a few days ago that took 30 hours to extinguish, and now a large part of the crew is sleeping on the deck because their bunks are destroyed.

 

[toobfreak]

1. The US military spends more than the next 10 militaries combined.

Actually, about as much as the next 8.5 nations. But I take your point. Also, we need more high volume/low tech weapons and fewer bombs that cost millions of dollars apiece.

Its time to say "no" to $200b, just give $50b.

If I'm on the panel and the general can prove to me the need, I'm giving it. We are not talking about building better highways here, we are talking vital national security, and Biden depleted us of both oil and weapons.

2. No way do we rebuild/repair Iran.

Maybe not. But I'd like to see us get a cut out of their future profits to help pay for this war.

When I said that we might need this money for strategic uses, it occurred to me some of this money might be needed to shore up our defenses against hypersonic attack, golden dome, new types of jets, and other emerging strategic technologies seen as vital in the near future like more powerful directed energy weapons.

Put another way: if congress slashed some of the massive waste and fraud found by DOGE, we could pay for this easy.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Pentagon seeks $200 billion in additional funds for the Iran war, AP source says

A senior administration official says the Pentagon is seeking $200 billion in additional funds for the Iran war.

apnews.com

Pentagon seeking $200B more for Iran war, official says

"It takes money to kill bad guys," Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Thursday.

abcnews.com

The US spent $11.3b in the 1st WEEK of the war.

MSN

US spent $11.3 billion in first week of war with Iran​

So if we spend about $11b a week, and we're out of targets already, why do we need $200b? That math doesn't work for me.

Seems like we're hitting too many cheap targets with expensive weapons. Fine, better than sending in troops, but still, $200b? NFW

Sure it does. Either they are invading or this is lasting another six months.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Yes, Trump wants $1.5T for the WAR Dept for 2027, a $500b bump from this year.

So doubling the war budget.

 

[kyzr]

So doubling the war budget.

The 2026 budget is $839

The 2027 budget request is $1.5T, so yep, just about double. I'd say NFW.

 

[leftwinger]

You don't want any Enemy "knowing" (rumored, hoping, leaked) that the USA is out of weapons. So there's that angle.