Why not cut war spending instead of social spending?

What a snot . . . you got another little dig in, didn't you Miss Passive Aggressive. You need to lay off the cheap wine. I was discussing the topic, you were the one with the idiot interruption.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

I take it that this is what I said that was so bad -

http://able2know.org/topic/175503-1#post-4689044

Talk about interruption. Get a room with yourself.

0 Replies

@roger,

No, it's what he said about why we decided to bomb the crap out of Libya.

1 Reply

@Irishk,

So, wait, who is going to get to rebuild Libya as a new domino complex?

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

ossobuco wrote:

So, wait, who is going to get to rebuild Libya as a new domino complex?

Enron.

1 Reply

@dlowan,

Sigh, yes, it seems it's being worked up for the enron equivalent, in my view. Not entirely, but with this in mind.

Thus, endless forevermore interfering horribleness.
Which we will pay for, but that is subsequent.

1 Reply

@dlowan,

dlowan wrote:

Oh, and commies and girly men.

Indeed.

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

Boy, Osso, you can be mean with cheap wine. I was going to defend you against that brute, Set, but it's turned out that he needs my defense more than you.

0 Replies

@JLNobody,

Hear, hear JL!

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Quote:

It'd have the side effect of not killing a bunch of people as well and making America fewer enemies. Seems like a better idea to me.

It seems an excellent idea to me!

But let's not forget it is not only the US which has made so many enemies, its obliging allies have as well. (Including my own country & quite a few others.)

But, I'd be interested interested to know ....
To what extent does the US economy depend on the endless wars we have been living through?
Certainly ongoing war has been a huge drain on US government funds, say nothing of all the lost lost lives of US soldiers in Iraq & Afghanistan.
And let's not forget all those lost Iraqi & Afghan civilian lives ....

What exactly is the point of all this expenditure for all this carnage?

Just think of what could have been achieved in the US & elsewhere, if the billions which have been spent on war could have been spent to actually improve the lives of all the affected people!
A peaceful revolution, I think.

And did someone say Syria would be next?
Please, no!

2 Replies

@Ticomaya,

Ticomaya wrote:

dlowan wrote:
Oh, and commies and girly men.

Indeed.

You have a bat signal attuned to those words, don't you?

1 Reply

@Setanta,

You are so full of ****, Setanta. Osso was dead on the topic.

0 Replies

@msolga,

Quote:

What exactly is the point of all this expenditure for all this carnage?

Cheap oil.

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

Why not cut war spending instead of social spending?
* * *

It'd have the side effect of not killing a bunch of people as well and making America fewer enemies. Seems like a better idea to me.

Well the thing is, the US government is ran by the corporations so it is the defense contractors who want to keep the wars going so that they create profits. Since social security only helps the people, they don't care about it. The US isn't about the people any more, it is about the large scale businesses and corporations and banks. They have a priority, keep the wars going, make a bunch of money by funneling tax money into these defense contractors and when you cut back social security pay outs, you make even more money for the state. Win Win for government.

0 Replies

You can cut spending all you want, as long as we have a government like this, we never will go ahead. Look, how the federal reserve inspector general cannot even answer where the missing 9 trillions went. No wonder the stock market crashes...

Warning: please take your beta blockers before watching this!!

0 Replies

I agree with you Robert, but I'd like to see us take it a few steps further and start shutting down military bases in Europe. Europeans have been protected by our blanket of security for too long. The cold war is over and we really don't need such a large military presence in Europe anymore as we do in the Pacific. The threats have changed.

We could also do a 50% across the board decrease in foreign aide. I'm not suggesting becoming isolationists, but we do give out quite a bit of cash.

I have been keeping a list of things that would greatly help America and this is one point on the list.

3 Replies

@dlowan,

dlowan wrote:

Ticomaya wrote:
dlowan wrote:
Oh, and commies and girly men.

Indeed.

You have a bat signal attuned to those words, don't you?

http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/9530/girlie.jpg

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

. . . shutting down military bases in Europe. Europeans have been protected by our blanket of security for too long.

Indeed. From the end of the Second World War, the nations of western Europe had defense budgets in the low teens of a percentage of the gross revnues, and Germany in the single digits. Meanwhile the United States spent from 25% to 40% of gross revenues to confront the Soviet Union and meet all of its other military commitments. The Soviet Union has been gone for 20 years. It's certainly high time our military involvement in Europe were gone, too.

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

Quote:

We could also do a 50% across the board decrease in foreign aide. I'm not suggesting becoming isolationists, but we do give out quite a bit of cash.

Bullshit! The US is the greediest and the stingiest nation on the planet.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

I agree with you Robert, but I'd like to see us take it a few steps further and start shutting down military bases in Europe. Europeans have been protected by our blanket of security for too long. The cold war is over and we really don't need such a large military presence in Europe anymore as we do in the Pacific. The threats have changed.

If that narrative (the notion that we would be jerking off the "security blanket" of other countries) is what it takes for the American right to let go of military footprints around the world (that are really more about projection of American power and an expansion of our sphere of influence than any desire to protect anyone) then I can only encourage the misguided sentiment. But let's not stop at Europe, the war in Iraq was as much motivated by the desire to establish a new military footprint as anything else and the cost of doing so just doesn't begin to justify it. Let's stop trying to project military power to every corner of the globe.

I'm all for decreasing the US military footprint and if we have to start with Europe due to the anti-European sentiments of the right that works for me.

Quote:

We could also do a 50% across the board decrease in foreign aide. I'm not suggesting becoming isolationists, but we do give out quite a bit of cash.

Not really. This is one of the most popular budget to cut when polling Americans, for obvious reasons, but it's really not that much as it usually constitutes less than 1% of the federal budget. Defense spending and social programs constitute the majority of the budget, talking about anything else when it comes to a desire to balance the budget is just deflection from the elephants in the room.

2 Replies

Why not cut war spending instead of social spending?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know