Throwing good money after bad hasn't yeilded AYTHING since Saddam was hanged.
2007-10-22 11:39:48 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
The idea that these people would be our greatful allies was wrong from the start and if they want to kill each other who are we to stand in their way ?
2007-10-22 11:46:49 · update #1
promethius9594...when did you serve...retired navy here and you're 100% wrong
2007-10-22 11:50:57 · update #2
Agree completely.
All that good money after bad didn't yield anything before Saddam was hanged either.
2007-10-22 11:50:02 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
that's not a vote to decrease off money. that's a failure to vote for investment. in accordance to the form all tax law would desire to originate interior the homestead of Representatives and all spending authorizations would desire to come from the Senate. that's not precisely that sparkling decrease besides the incontrovertible fact that that's rather close and sufficient for this question. that's if truth be told what occurred while Vietnam fell. Our militia become out and the Vietnamese militia become doing the activity. Then, as now, a Democrat controlled Senate did not renew the spending bill that would desire to have endured to grant the South Vietnamese militia. the rustic fell very presently thereafter.
2016-11-09 05:35:03 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No I do not agree...they will pull that money from someplace else..such as our raises and BAH, and bonuses, and other benifets. My husband is a soldier and I of course do not want him over there agian...but the last time he was there we had to spend hundreds of dollars to make sure that he had the stuff he needed and cutting funding could jepordize that even more. Cutting money is not the answer.
2007-10-22 13:57:59 · answer #3 · answered by Heather D 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think approving withdrawal funds is the only way to go. So it would kind of go like this, for the next year the military gets x amount the half of that then half of that until all non domestic spending goes to zero.
2007-10-22 12:07:17 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
i think that they need to do something to get the attention of the administration. i think that they need to show how keeping the borders open while pouring money into iraq is utterly completely foolish and in keeping with bush's nonsensical planning of the war.
2007-10-22 13:50:18 · answer #5 · answered by tomjohn2 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no,why? do you want to see young people your age from the military committ suicide like during the vietnam war
2007-10-22 12:30:01 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The war is a waste of time.
Our govorment needs to die so we can work together to make a new one that we actually LIKE...
And president Bush needs to GO!
2007-10-22 11:52:13 · answer #7 · answered by Megan 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No, but I did think that the Democrats promised to do this if they gained control of Congress, so I am wondering why they haven't.
2007-10-22 11:42:55 · answer #8 · answered by Yo it's Me 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Right... let's cut funding... and let troops go without food, bullets, fuel, repaired equipment, armor, uniforms or even funding for withdrawing troops (Yes, in order to bring our troops home would still require money). You're basically proposing to let 125,000 American Troops die or surrender overseas. Thanks.
Cutting funding completely = dumbest, most sadistic, anti-american, anti-military idea ever.
2007-10-22 11:48:40 · answer #9 · answered by promethius9594 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
No, i don't. We should however, start with drawing troops now.
2007-10-22 11:58:02 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋