the liberals want the money to fund their "pet projects" such as the one senator Kennedy has included on the bill for minimum wage increase , you know the one, for our tax dollars ( 1 Million dollars) to a company he has ownership in. to help pay the wage increase
2007-02-06 22:52:36
·
answer #1
·
answered by Insensitively Honest 5
·
2⤊
2⤋
I think this is a twofold issue. First and foremost, liberals are against military spending and always have been. They would prefer that the money be spent on social programs. They look at countries like France and see that they don't spend as much in this area, but fail to quantify the fact that countries like France are always the first to fall in any major war. Military defense is necessary and it does cost a lot of money, but if you are predisposed against a strong military you will never be able to properly accept the cost involved. The second is the way the numbers are reported. It is never reported in percentages, but rather actual dollars. Saying that we spent 4% does not carry the same weight with most people as reporting actual billions of dollars.
2007-02-06 23:00:19
·
answer #2
·
answered by Bryan 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
announcing that Iran will attack us is like announcing that Estonia will attack us, that is going to under no circumstances happen. they're to small, and don't have adequate factors and funding to fund a conflict between such foreign places. truth. If human beings may truly pay interest to Ahmadinejad, he's smart. I hate even as he says about whipping Israel off the map, yet he's ideal that the U. S. is between the numerous motives of the stress interior the middle East and how the U. S. needs to end blindly following Israel. i imagine that Israel and Palestine could develop into one usa, yet be ruled my the UN and no conflict/battles/guns might want to be saved interior of it, and no "Israeli in common words" progression and roads. this can get rid of countless stress interior the middle East. lower back to the difficulty. Iran only says issues, they comprehend that they could't make an attack on the U. S., and so do any smart human beings, that is in common words the Republicans operating to team up the human beings who've no theory what is going on, and the human beings probable imagine that Iran is part of Russia and they'll attack Alaska. heavily, the stupidity of a few human beings is only dazzling.
2016-11-25 23:12:21
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
well when you consider what else the money could go to if we were not in a war.... a. military familes, b. schools. c. lower income families... d. the national debt.... the list goes on and on! I have to add the liberals proposed a salary increase for the military this year, which passed. they also proposed not allowing tricare to raise prices, which passed...they proposed free life insurance for those fighting overseas, Better benefits for spouses who lose someone one while deployed. and increase in the BAH stipend... so don't say its liberals... liberals just don't like that all this money being allocated to the military is not benefiting the military while it takes from other things... Many units were not given proper equipment and were forced to improvise!
2007-02-06 22:53:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
The spending is usually counted on budget. USA has 16,2 percent on next years budget see http://watchingpolitics.com/?p=1159.
It will apparently increase to over 20 percent like in 2006 with Bush bringing forward extra needs.
To put it into perspective Russia and China have around 8 percent, most countries around 5 percent.
The money is covered by cutting on education and welfare programs, but mainly on foreign loan from China and Japan.
Loan China to fight Muslims in Iraq with no obvious end to it.
Maybe I'm too liberal to accept that.
2007-02-06 23:52:32
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Not only in Military spending only 4% of the GDP, people fail to mention how many stable jobs this creates in the economy, from computer technicians to mechanics to analyists.
But people will use the nominal amounts verses percentages to skew the debate their way. The same people who talk about our deficit being out of control fail to mention that it is only 2% of our GDP, which is one of the lowest in the world.
2007-02-06 22:49:34
·
answer #6
·
answered by jerry 5
·
5⤊
2⤋
I just read that a greater % of the GDP was spent under the Carter administration than it is today. Liberals' judgment is clouded by their hatred of Bush. Anything he does is wrong to them even it is to help America. It all goes back to 2000 when they claim he stole the election from Al Gore.
2007-02-06 23:01:22
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
Only because they're not getting a single cent of military spending!
Protecting America is not worth it to them, because we are the cause of the world's problems!
2007-02-06 23:00:03
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
Because liberals think military spending should be 0%. They think all other countries are right and we are always wrong so we should not have military because if we didn't the other countries would not be mad at us and we would not need the military anymore. It is all hogwash.
2007-02-06 22:52:42
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
3⤋
Historically speaking, money never kept any nation or empire secure. Egypt, Rome, Peria, Germany---they were all very wealthy and very powerful, but they all fell because of corruption within.
2007-02-06 22:57:28
·
answer #10
·
answered by Preacher 6
·
3⤊
1⤋