Do you believe that american welfare system should be eliminated for the sake of rebuilding Iraq? I read people here all of the time crying that american citizens are not worthy of having welfare programs, but that spending on war, and subsequent rebuilding for another's country is justifiable. Do these people hate americans? I personally would rather help our own citizens first...
2006-08-21 03:50:48 · 12 answers · asked by hichefheidi 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
uncleneal, that isn't an answer to my question...
2006-08-21 04:00:41 · update #1
shorebreak, I don't mind if you ask questions or insult me. But you didn't answer my question, you just tried to turn my words around to say that I don't support peace. I don't support WAR, and fighting for peace is the same as screwing for virginity. The people who are FOR WAR, are the ones who don't support the peacemakers...
2006-08-21 05:38:42 · update #2
no, wmcritter, you aren't the only person who has read the constitution, but you only want to take bits and pieces of it. It is the responsibility of the US govt to uphold the will of the people, and the people do not support the war. I won't even get into the parts of the constitution being 'put aside' for the sake of the war...
2006-08-21 05:43:38 · update #3
Wow, I think that for the first time ever, I 1/2 agree with you. Iraqis are not worthy of our hard earned Tax dollars. Where you are 1/2 wrong is that you believe Americans should be getting that as well. Live within your means, work hard, depend on no-one but yourself, and choose food and shelter over the DLP Plasma tv
2006-08-21 04:21:56 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
The welfare system as it is now should be eliminated, but it has nothing to do with Iraq. It is not the job, duty, or obligation of the federal government to administer welfare. This is the responsibility of the states, charities, and individuals. I swear I'm the only person that has ever read the Constitution.
As for rebuilding other nations, that does full under the responsibility of the federal government, as it is a matter of national defense. Saddam and others like him are a threat to Americans. It is the job of the government to remove these threats and prevent new ones from popping up. This is why the battle in Iraq is necessary.
Furthermore, if the government had to choose between the two (which it doesn't) then it is logical to choose spending money on defense. After all, what good is a welfare system if the people are under attack? It is better to be safe and hungry, than dead.
Currenly, the government does not have to abolish one program to fund the other, so it is a moot question anyway.
2006-08-21 04:57:40 · answer #2 · answered by Aegis of Freedom 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Great question. I too think we should help our own people first, but those that truly need it. The fact of the matter is our welfare system is still broken and seriously needs fixing. We have citizens here who do nothing but ride the government for free money when they are completely capable of getting off thier fat back-sides and earning thier own way. Until we have a system of checks in place to find these people there is absolutely no difference in the money we are wasting in Iraq and the money we are wasting on lazy people here in the States.
2006-08-21 04:02:18 · answer #3 · answered by stackman71 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Our own people should always come first. I hate the way this governement is always spending all of our money on other countries, especially Iraq. Cutting programs at home like welfare to pay for those people who hate us is just plain ridiculous!
2006-08-21 04:18:15 · answer #4 · answered by Lilith Phoenix 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Forgive my obvious sarcasm, but....
You obviously don't understand what it means to be a global socialist.
Don't you understand the concept of "From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs"?
Aren't you willing to become part of the collective? Or maybe you're a protectionist detractor?
Don't you agree with the policies of Stalin and Mao to forcibly remove entities who stand in opposition to the well being of the whole? After all, if we're going to be the leader in building a global economy, shouldn't we be willing to do the dirty work?
Besides, our goal is peace, isn't it? Why don't you support the peacemakers? Aren't Iraqi's safer and happier now than they were 4 years ago?
2006-08-21 04:04:37 · answer #5 · answered by shorebreak 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The true people that hate Americans are the extreme left-wing liberals of the Democratic party... they are taking away my rights and my taxes to help those who are too lazy to help themselves...
the Dems/libs just want to keep their constituent base in the same subservient manner and ensure their re-election.
Liberty Over Liberalism!
Fight Islamic fascism!
Political Correctness Kills!
Eliminate the anti-American ACLU!
2006-08-21 03:58:52 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
There's nothing wrong with this, BUT if you (the voters of the U.S.) allow your government to meddle with other nations' future than you have to pay (literally).
And no. I don't hate Americans. Although I wonder what kind of people voted W junior TWO times????
2006-08-21 04:01:15 · answer #7 · answered by W&W 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
ask the man who bought the presidency...I think he should be more focused on his own country, health care, education, GAS, crime, etc, etc but no. This country thrives on stick it's nose into other countries business-we are the teenagers of the world so we have to be nosey and bossy.
we cannot expect people to have respect for law and order until we teach respect to those we have entrusted to enforce those laws-hunter thompson
2006-08-21 04:00:10 · answer #8 · answered by scarlet_bat 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the welfare system for individuals and corporations and nations needs to be eliminated period.
are you going to play nice today?
2006-08-21 04:27:10 · answer #9 · answered by W E J 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
If you walk into another country uninvited, you are subject to certain responsibilities.
2006-08-21 03:57:11 · answer #10 · answered by JeffE 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋