I don't believe he is asking for too much, besides it costs money to run a war. The no strings attached clause is to keep the democrats from tacking on one of their agendas as part of the military budget package.
Usually these parasite packages can't get passed ant other way, so they attempt to hide them in a much bigger package, such as the war budget.
2007-03-22 09:24:22
·
answer #1
·
answered by briang731/ bvincent 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
100B is nothing. We already have a 470B annual military budget, which accounts for 50% of our tax dollars and amounts to a bigger military budget than the world's top 25 military budgets combined.
The world views us as a militaristic nation.
We won the Revolutionary War, created modern democracy and then set about conquering the world. First we destroyed the native american civilizations to claim the modern american continent for ourselves under the guise of "Manifest Destiny." Then several strategically placed islands like Hawaii and the Philippines and the Caribbean were brought under our control, followed by the South American continent.
Our history is an aggressive and bloody one and ironically, not at all in keeping with the teachings of Jesus as written in the New Testament, upon which many claim our government and society are founded!
In our 230 year history we've never gone more than 7 years without being engaged in some aspect of war somewhere in the world. Very few have been justified.
We say we're a peace-loving people then act the opposite. Why should anyone trust us?
2007-03-22 16:34:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by BOOM 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
no he is asking for money to win the war and weak liberals are trying to conduct the war from the congress and they cannot. There is only 1 commander in chief. Furthermore to say that all the money comes with no strings attached is a lie, there are many strings attached like development of the Iraqi security forces, oil production, protection for American forces. He is not asking for the money without reason. you are wrong
2007-03-22 16:36:40
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
way too much, after 4 years he shouldn't be asking for emergency funds, it should be included in the military budget. Except for the fact that if it were in the budget it would be very clear how big our deficit is.
2007-03-22 16:20:48
·
answer #4
·
answered by Alan S 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Congress agreed with and voted YES on that war & funding it.
2007-03-22 16:18:51
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
It's why he was elected you infidel...
2007-03-22 16:19:41
·
answer #6
·
answered by Gilla 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
No
2007-03-22 16:18:47
·
answer #7
·
answered by "HKB" 2
·
0⤊
1⤋