We all know how the Clinton adminstration downsized the military. But since the Bush administration increased military funds substantially, let's look at something more recent, relevant, and significant to United States citizens today.
The Bush administration has cut funds from everything you can imagine. Funding has been cut for hospitals, veterans' healthcare programs, pharmaceutical companies, schools, worker safety and health grants, cancer and AIDS research, public healch advocacy groups, fire prevention programs, flood prevention programs, airports, etc...
The list goes on. He has used this to fund his "War on Terrorism". Therefore, the extra funds have been wasted because he has only increased the terrorists' recruitment drive and viciousness.
2007-02-26 09:52:35 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Bush's cuts.
It is pathetic the way Republicans treat our veterans
2007-02-26 10:00:10 · answer #1 · answered by ♥ Cassie ♥ 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Clinton rightly downsized the military at the conclusion of the cold war. We no longer had to worry about fighting giant tank battles in Eastern Europe with the Soviet Union. Really. Truman did the same thing after World War II when the Germans and the Japanese surrendered. Why waste money on an enemy that no longer exists?
FYI - Clinton's military defeated the Taliban in less than two weeks without a single American casualty. Not too shabby. Luckily, Bush had only been in office for nine months and hadn't yet had time to strip all the armor off our fighting vehicles!!
2007-02-26 10:03:46 · answer #2 · answered by vt500ascott 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
you're pedaling nonsense. I grew to alter right into a veteran in 2005 and located that on the top of his so-called "VA cuts", they have been giving advantages away like candy. you want a catalog to benefit approximately each and all of the incredibly some issues we get! Now permit's take that intentionally minimized downsizing of Clinton! you comprehend, dont' you, that for the period of Reagan's final 365 days, the army had over one thousand blue-water vessels? In Clinton's final 365 days, we've been cut back over 75%! there have been 240 left. oftentimes, as quickly as I could splendid your data in the previous I answer, i think which you're a liberal, and as such, you're keen to apply fake techniques if it's going to make your ingredient. So your ingredient is incredibly a fable, isn't it? And it is not well worth addressing.
2016-10-16 13:31:39 · answer #3 · answered by rosen 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually, "Clinton downsizing the military" is a myth. 66% of the 90s military cuts were implemented by the Bush admin and Defense secretary Cheney. Nixon and Ford downsized military spending far greater than any president in American history
2007-02-26 09:58:18 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Bush is cutting funding to programs that are needed in this country for its citizens, in order to fund an increase in the military. The fact that you cannot fight extremists through brute military force means that Bush's cuts are by far worse.
2007-02-26 10:00:37 · answer #5 · answered by Andrew S 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
the Bush administration's funding cuts is my choice
2007-03-02 09:43:33 · answer #6 · answered by jerry 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the american military is ridiculously oversized and funded
sad the current government thinks killing enemies is more important than taking care of its own people
2007-02-26 09:59:44 · answer #7 · answered by kitty is ANGRY!™ 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The military should never be cut. The military should be bigger to protect our freedoms.
2007-02-26 09:57:40 · answer #8 · answered by J 2 · 2⤊ 3⤋