Another 556 billopn dollars? How many schools could be built on that money?
2007-12-26 08:01:45 · 41 answers · asked by Tom S 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
yes.
2007-12-26 08:04:32 · answer #1 · answered by brandon 5 · 4⤊ 4⤋
I agree! I like the alternative of tyrannical dictators murdering their own people for having so much as a free thought. If genocide doesn't bother you, then it doesn't bother me. Terrorists ruling the skies? Gotta love that one. Millions of people living in slavery? Okay, then maybe our Civil War shouldn't have been fought.
Why don't we ask the same question but replace Iraq with:
Welfare - Gee, poor people still exist. Haven't fixed that one yet. Breeding dependency.
Social Security - will fall, just another government giveaway
the Arts - WTF?! Yeah! That's of vital interest to our nation...NOT!
School lunches - I thought we had an obesity problem.
Disaster Relief - Well if the state (Louisiana) doesn't wish to help themselves, then why should we?
Foreign aid - yeah! Let them all suffer.
Corporate bailouts - let em fall
Subprime loans - The people were foolish to buy into them in the first place. It's not my problem.
Schools - More money yet schools just aren't putting out a quality education.
Global Warming - Let's wait til becomes a fact.
Alternative fuels - that's what we have private industries for. Government shouldn't be involved
Government grants - like I really care how much feces a rat excretes throughout its lifetime.
Medicaid - being used for illegals too? Where can I break the law and come out ahead receiving benefits.
Farm subsidies - Paying farmers to NOT grow anything? I want to get paid to do nothing...oh that's right, I can go on welfare for that (see WELFARE above)
again, the list goes on and on.
We're spending too much money on damn near everything the government gets its hands on.
2007-12-26 08:29:18 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Too much money and wasted lives.
Sadly there are former and active duty US military people that support wars only because they think it is patriotic to do so.
People that support war should be in the war and not making money like they are right now such Dick Cheney and Halliburton.
Max Rafael Waller,US Army 1984-1988, speaking to Dr. Robert Louis Pritchard,US Army 1948-1955 and fought in the Korean conflict 1950-1953. Dr Pritchard is at Los Angeles Valley College at http://www.lavc.edu/ where he is a Political Science and US Constitutional Law professor. Dr. RL Pritchard is well read regarding the USA PATRIOT ACTs and consulted Max regarding this site http://mariaisabelescobar.vox.com/library/post/david-versus-goliath.html
"The wars have nothing to do with National Security, but National Interest" Max Rafael Waller speaking to Dr. Robert Louis Pritchard's office at Los Angeles Valley College in September 2007
The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq resulted from US politicians from the 1970s and 1980s. The USA supported Afghanistan just because the were anti-Soviet Union. Also supported by the USA was Saddam Hussein since he was Anti-Ayatollah Khomeini.
US President GW Bush is just as guilty as the prior Republican president with the exception of Theodore Roosevelt
"War is a Racket" USMC Major General(retired and dead since 1940) Smedley Darlignton Butler who was a 2 time recipient of the US Congressional Medal of Honor
THE SMEDLEY BUTLER SOCIETY
Arbitrary and expensive wars, for corporate profit, constitute a racket according to General Smedley Butler, USMC, therefore people must be mobilized to ...
http://warisaracket.org/
Smedley Butler: War is a Racket
War is a Racket was published in 1935 by Round Table Press, Inc., New York. It was condensed in Reader's Digest as a book supplement, with an introduction ...
http://www.scuttlebuttsmallchow.com/racket.html
Be a hero and question to ensure the survival of the USA
2007-12-26 08:45:04 · answer #3 · answered by American Dissenter 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No... The whining you hear about welfare and public projects is bull$hit. The money spent on the war in Iraq was earmarked specifically for that in the defense budget. Welfare and other social institutions recieve their money from funds earmarked specifically for them. Government spending on welfare and those other institutions has not been reduced since the war began. Had the war not begun, that money STILL would NOT have gone to welfare... The money for the war is mostly financed based on the need for it through government bonds and many other means.
Think about this though, had we signed the Kyoto agreement like all you libs wanted so bad, we would owe the UN some $33 BILLION in fines just like Japan and Italy.
2007-12-26 08:13:02 · answer #4 · answered by Voice of Liberty 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Even a nickel is too much. This war, like Vietnam, is based on lies. Our soldiers are paying for the lies, just like they did in Vietnam. You gotta admit, though, Iraqis will never fly into the twin towers again. It's a joke. Stop. I always like the old saying about how the world would be a better place if schools got endless sums of money and the military had to hold a bake sale to raise enough money to build a bomber.
2007-12-26 08:14:09 · answer #5 · answered by Me again 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Cheapest War Ever!
You cite wrong numbers and then present them in a vacuum to boot.
We have been spending less than 1% of our GDP annually. Compare to 57% of GDP for WWII or 5% for Korea. Even Vietnam was right around 1%.
2007-12-26 08:50:57 · answer #6 · answered by RTO Trainer 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Nope, No way shape or form. I Understand that you want to show compassion for our own poor and our own needs, and there is nothing wrong with that.
But ask yourself, what price is your individual freedom worth?
I know that my freedoms and rights are absolutely priceless.
And here we have all these people wanting us to deny that same chance to 25 million people so that we can feed some poor people.
Guess what, welfare doesn't make poor people rich. It doesn't even make them self reliant. What it does is allow them to keep depending on the Government. We have the poor and we will always have the poor.
Schools however is a great Idea, when will congress fully fund the NCLB?
2007-12-26 08:26:39 · answer #7 · answered by SFC_Ollie 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
The war is costly because it was privatized by Cheney & Company.
Most of the money is spent not on soldiers & equipment for them, but for civilian contracts, mercenary pay, and suitcasefulls of cash given to the iraq puppet government.
Thats why soldiers are welding iron to humvee doors, borrowing money from their parents to buy vests, and the USA had to ask israel for more bullets.
2007-12-26 10:52:39 · answer #8 · answered by Monkey M 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
So many lives could be saved by that amount! Politicians need to look to the problems closer to home and take realistic measures to address these problems in their own country. of course we should not sit by and watch other suffer - but if you cant deal with your own problems how on earth are you going to fix someone elses problem. There are so many social factors that are affecting us as individuals and those who have the economy under control - I must say could do a lot more. War is stupid and some people the same way too!!
2007-12-26 08:08:16 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
Umm, 556 Billion is funding the ENTIRE federal government, thats war, defence, the CDC, forest department and so on. Check your facts.
2007-12-26 08:22:53 · answer #10 · answered by cheechalini 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
How many homeless people could have a warm meal, and a place to stay with what has been spent ? There would be no such thing as homeless people. All that the US has spent ? How about all the money that has been MADE on this war ? It makes me sick... all the contracts that have been given to a select few companies. Lining the pockets of politicians.
2007-12-26 08:08:03 · answer #11 · answered by crossfire04 1 · 3⤊ 4⤋