@TG:
hmmm… 1/2 of a percent of the entire budget goes to the military…
@TG:
On actual budget spent on new military hardware… that’s what I’ve heard.
Quite a difference between the two statements:
The second would not include paying for the staff, the maintainance of hardware, military research etc.
I must say, i think the first is way too low. The second explanations sounds more plausible.
I heard milatary was the first priortiy of the american budget
I heard milatary was the first priortiy of the american budget
As it should be.
Our government was not formed under the ideal that it would serve as a “supermarket” to provide citizens with a vast array of programs to accomodate everyone. OUR GOVERNMENT IS HERE TO PROTECT IT’S CITIZENS. That’s something I think people too often don’t understand.
In my opinion, our country would’ve been a lot more prepared for 9/11, had the government been able to pour it’s time and money into our defense (military, intellience, etc.) rather than wasting my money on the lazy bum down the street who could care less whether he got a job.
ya you can leave bombing countrys to the UN
HA! The UN won’t do shit when it comes to enforcing anything. Why would we leave the security of our country in the hands of an organization that is anti-American?
This country does spend quite a bit on defense. I’ve been reading books for my term paper, and I’ve found out that the Pentagon is always pushing for more while it’s losing money on the factories and things that they have. I agree that the politicians are
wasting my money on the lazy bum down the street who could care less whether he got a job.
I also beleive that these same politicians are the cause of losing money and all the while they are complaining that strengthening defense is bad and a waste of money. It would cost less if they would stop standing in the way.
The three major manufacturers of arms try to pander the politicians good will by setting up their plants in certain senators’/congressmen’s states, but they politicians in other states become unhappy and slow things down. Then these same manufacturers work together so they don’t have to compete for the government’s business, so the cost is driven sky-high. Then the government doesn’t charge rent on the buildings they let the manufacturers use. Before, the rent charge would be added to the cost of the arms. But recently (before the war on terrorism and after the end of the Cold War), the government wasn’t buying most of the arms these manufacturers were turning out. They were mostly going to foreign (albeit friendly) countries. So the government could have charged rent and not suffered the backlash. Anyway, they’re all in the wrong even though the politicians are blamed in general.
Anyhow, that was mostly to help me remember that for my term paper. Sorry if it was confusing or flawed. :)
@Deviant:Scripter:
Why would we leave the security of our country in the hands of an organization that is anti-American?
Paranoia?
@F_alk:
@Deviant:Scripter:
Why would we leave the security of our country in the hands of an organization that is anti-American?
Paranoia?
I doubt it.
I think the American people have more trust and confidence that our own country will protect us more than a coalition of other countries will.
@Deviant:Scripter:
@F_alk:
@Deviant:Scripter:
Why would we leave the security of our country in the hands of an organization that is anti-American?
Paranoia?
I doubt it.
I think the American people have more trust and confidence that our own country will protect us more than a coalition of other countries will.
Well, the paranoi was coined to calling the UN “anti-american”…. seems like a hell lot of things are anti-american.
i think anything non-american is “anti-American” according to Americans.
well alot of non-americans dont like americans and some go to the exetreme ofanti-american so in general non-americans dont like americans.
so in general non-americans dont like americans.
Gee-whizz… you think? That’s a great way of over generalizing things… :-?
I think we just see the pictures of the WTC being hit, or falling, too much. Let those pictures rest, we should be watching something more positive.
I find myself on to minds of thought. When it first happened I would agree with the fact that the news coverage was CRAZY. Network TV, NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX had some 72 straight hours of coverage.
On the other side of the coin I don’t mind seeing pictures of it from time to time. The same as I don’t mind watching pearl harbor or moon landing footage on occasion.
All things in moderation :)
