2007 expected US military budget geared at making wars .
2007-10-26 09:36:18 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Wouldn´t it be a better world if we could live well and in peace?
2007-10-26 09:38:04 · update #1
Or perhaps if you don´t care about OUR enviroment,wouldn´t it be better to spending it on education and teaching the American people to think for themselves and learn about the rest of the world?
2007-10-27 08:50:58 · update #2
CaN I ADD "aRE WE BEING BRAINWASHED"?
2007-10-27 08:52:53 · update #3
The U.S. spends $1.3 trillion each year on handouts(welfare).
The primary purpose of the U.S. government is to have a strong military according to the writers of the constitution. The secondary purpose is to regulate commerce.
2007-10-26 09:39:54 · answer #1 · answered by a bush family member 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Unfortunately, the world isn't quite that simple. Money itself doesn't help the environment- we need a plan first. Unfortunately we aren't going to achieve peace by simply laying down our arms. I'm not trying to draw any connections between 9/11 and Iraq, because there aren't any, but we weren't at war with anyone on 9/11/01. That didn't stop Bin Laden from attacking us, for the second time. The entire world simply isn't in a state that we could survive without a military budget in place. I don't know if it needs to be as high as it is, and could probably come down a lot if we would just leave Iraq to it's own devices as we should, but we can't assume that money could actually fix the environment either.
2007-10-26 16:54:17 · answer #2 · answered by Beardog 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How can we live well and in peace with Muslims and terrorists trying to blow us up because we don't think and behave the way they want us to. They have declared us the enemy a long time ago. I'm not worried about the environment now. That's like watering your garden while watching your house burn.
2007-10-26 16:49:22 · answer #3 · answered by Derail 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No. Money can't save the environment, only people, one at a time - and even then, probably not. Just the little things, like disposing (properly) of cigarette butts, empty cups and containers, installing green light bulbs, etc. will make a difference - but not enough to do it alone. Not all problems can be solved by throwing money at them - and, after all, it is the citizen's money.
2007-10-26 16:42:54 · answer #4 · answered by Kelly T 5 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Yes. Let's give every barn owl and desert jumping rat a $20 voucher.
2007-10-26 16:44:15 · answer #5 · answered by Pancakes 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
they could be spending it on the study of Chinese Penquins ritual dances with the Russian Penquins at the South Pole, and that would be better then spending it on the war.
2007-10-26 16:45:01 · answer #6 · answered by BushMaster 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No. It isn't enough. Further, spending any tax dollars on the environment is a waste of money.
2007-10-26 16:39:59 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 3⤋
yeah lets concentrate on the environment. im sure al qaeda wont care. go ahead, give it a shot...see if its ok the them to put an attack on the us on hold for you to go green.
liberals...gotta love em.
2007-10-26 16:47:11 · answer #8 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
maybe each of us should start at home. and maybe if we ask the rest of the world nicely to stop, they would.
2007-10-26 16:54:59 · answer #9 · answered by BRYAN H 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Of course it would be great to "live well and in peace".
Except for one tinsy tiny little detail...
THERE ARE PEOPLE OUT THERE WHO WANT TO KILL ALL OF US IF WE DON'T SUBMIT TO THEIR RELIGION!!!
got it?
2007-10-26 16:54:09 · answer #10 · answered by Mark A 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋