1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Where are the clowns, bring in the clowns....

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by PLC1, Jul 31, 2009.

  1. PLC1

    PLC1 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    9,891
    Likes Received:
    484
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Golden State
    This is some expensive clowning around, it seems to me.

    400 out of 430 want to buy a helicopter fleet for the pres and fund a jet fighter that the Pentagon says is a waste of money. That's 93% in favor.

    Bring in the clowns.

    Let's spend a trillion, or $3,000 per person, for the war on terror, but not $100 million, or 30 cents each, to close what has become a symbol for the terrorists.

    Bring in the clowns.

    Isn't that the same John Murtha who has been lambasted as a pacifist in the so called war on terror? He's no pacifist when it comes to spending the taxpayer's money, is he?

    And that F-22, isn't that the airplane that the Pentagon, you know, the guys who actually know something about defense, say is a waste of money?

    Bring in the clowns.


    Don't bother, they're here.

    Oh, but there is hope!

    With any luck, they'll be able to inflate the bill to two trillion, easy.
     
  2. ASPCA4EVER

    ASPCA4EVER New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,555
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Land of the JAYHAWKS-ROCK CHOCK Jayhawk, KU
    Seems that we both posted an article about the defense bill and both have generated little or no attention at all...My topic lead in was: Mean While Back At The Ranch...this defense bill is headed for a veto!!


    Politics as usual from both sides of the isle...Senators with military manufacturers in their specific areas won't let go of the golden goose and they will see to it that this goes forth even with the President saying 'NO WAY'!!! ;)
     
    1 person likes this.
  3. top gun

    top gun New Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    4,940
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Ohio, USA
    Spot on ASPCA... and good thread PLC1.

    This is actually a designed tactic of defense contractors. They intentionally spread their manufacturing of any major weapons system to locations all over the country specifically so it gains major support & backing (because of the jobs) from multiple Senators & Representatives.

    This is all part of the vast military industrial complex President Eisenhower warned about and how it could easily bleed over into politics.

    Now I'm not saying we don't need defense contractors. But obviously the rules and requirements need changed so that we not only get the lowest bid on a project... but that a project is really seriously needed... and that it's building cannot be purposely spread out just to gain political back scratching.
     
  4. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    We have an entire administration of clowns.
     
  5. BigRob

    BigRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Messages:
    7,366
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    USA
    Not everyone in the Defense world agrees that the F-22 is a useless waste of money.

    What do you mean a "symbol for the terrorists." GTMO is well run at this point, it is transparent, and it is better than many of the alternatives.

    Again, not everyone in the Pentagon agrees with this. Further, don't kid yourself and pretend that politics is not running rampant in the DOD as well.
     
    1 person likes this.
  6. PLC1

    PLC1 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    9,891
    Likes Received:
    484
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Golden State
    Great minds think alike, you know.

    Only a mere trillion of our borrowed and tax generated money, ho hum, that's no big deal, I guess. I posted this one on Thursday before going camping for the extended weekend, and come back to three affirmations and one rebuttal, saying that politics are rampant in the DOD as well (which is true, of course).

    Now, had this been a thread about gay marriage, or evolution, or how liberals (conservatives) are ruining the country, then it would have gone on for at least 10 pages by now.

    It's only money, no big deal.
     
  7. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
  8. PLC1

    PLC1 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    9,891
    Likes Received:
    484
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Golden State
    This sums up the matter nicely, don't you think?

    From a Libertarian point of view, that is.

    [​IMG]
     
  9. top gun

    top gun New Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    4,940
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Ohio, USA
    True. There will always be someone who wants more no matter what the cost. Defense loves Defense. There's some who probably think almost all of our budget should be spent on Defense.

    But they are only being self serving and totally wrong IMO. I'd like to see us get out of Iraq and out of Afghanistan and cut military spending by 20% or more if possible. Call it a "peace dividend" like under President Clinton.

    We don't have a Super Power to have to worry about facing off with anymore. We need that money for other things here at home. We've been on our little 10 year Nation Building tour... it's time to come home and focus on problems here.


    It is a symbol for terrorist recruitment because of the way it was established under Bush/Cheney. I have no problem with the facility itself... and President Obama made sure we aren't TORTURING anyone anymore.

    But the symbol remains. (going big here) It's like if the Germans totally updated and made a state of the art modern prison out of the old Auschwitz location. It's just causes too many strong bad memories in a lot of people for that to be a good thing.

    Gitmo could have been operated successfully. No TORTURE... set up some type of justice system, trials or tribunals... formally sentence the guilty for a crime. But that didn't happen. Now we have a problem.


    You're right... there is politics at the Pentagon. But that only highlights how important it is to have the right person as President. I think the plan is to get out of Iraq... kick some butt in Afghanistan and kill off some of the most organized & radical. But always looking toward that big pull out ASAP.

    That's a better plan than what we had and I think the Pentagon is seeing that as well... or at the very least will go in that direction if that's what is really wanted at the White House.
     
  10. BigRob

    BigRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Messages:
    7,366
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    USA


    Well, the price tag to keep the F-22 line alive was only $1.75 billion. Seeing as how the Constitution does state "provide for the common defense" it seems that we could have found that money to at least keep the line alive in my view. We blew $787 billion on stimulus, even with the F-22 spending, the defense budget comes in far less than that.

    We cannot yet "get out" in the manner that you are advocating. Doing so, at least at this point, would in my opinion only increase costs over the long term.

    We do have two rising peer competitors (possibly three) that will directly challenge us. We have terrorism, rouge state proliferation. The Cold War is over yes, but the world is no less safe.



    Well we never were torturing down there, but that is not the issue. That said, I completely disagree that it is a symbol for terror recruitment. The manner that terrorists recruit has little to do with GTMO. If anything it has been demonized in the Western world, and I would wager many of those who are likely to be recruited for terrorism have never heard of the place.

    We have had the "torture" debate, so I will let this one pass. ;)

    It was the Bush White House that finalized the plan to get US troops out the cities. Additionally, it was the Bush White House that sent additional soldiers (before the latest round) into Afghanistan.

    No one wants to stay forever, but the object needs to be to win, not simply how to pullout.
     
  11. PLC1

    PLC1 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    9,891
    Likes Received:
    484
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Golden State
    I'm not so sure that no one wants to stay forever, but maybe. The question is, how will we know when we've won?

    Are the terrorists going to sign an armistice?
     
  12. top gun

    top gun New Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    4,940
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Ohio, USA
    Well I'm sure you don't believe that without the F-22 we can't provide for the common defense like a thousand times over.

    And we didn't "blow" money on the stimulous... we prevented The Bush Recession (the greatest economic downturn since The Great Depression) from quite possibly becoming another Depression.


    I agree. I'm saying in the next couple years I see us out of the region in a major military combat role.

    True. But without a Super Power threat unless we have more misguided dreams of continuing to invade and occupy entire countries once we get out of our current entanglements we can cut back then.

    I have to totally disagree on this one. I think you could search low and wide to never find a terrorist that hasn't at least heard tales of Gitmo. Now would they be against us either way... probably. It's to a great extent a twisted religion thing. But the damage to our reputation with Abu Grabe, Gitmo and TORTURING detainees in general was a huge black eye internationally without doubt.

    Thanks! That could go on for days.:)

    All true.

    BUT... he really had little choice in Iraq. They were kicking us out either way. We would have had to fight the very government we had supported if Bush had tried to stay a day longer.

    And Bush without doubt took his eye off of Afghanistan (and it's real 9-11 connection) for years while he pursued Mr. NO WMD's Hussein and implemented his Iraq Nation Building plan.
     
  13. BigRob

    BigRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Messages:
    7,366
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    USA


    Well, I suppose that depends on your definition of defense. I think a proactive approach abroad is a good defense at home. Additionally, without the F-22, in less than a decade, we would be directly challenged for air dominance by rising peer competitors.

    :)

    That is interesting, seeing as how we have yet to spend the vast majority of it.




    We have three easily identifiable major power threats on the horizon. Some view us as serious threat and are organizing their army to fight ours. We should not be cutting back in my opinion.




    I think it was a huge black eye, but not among those who you are saying. I seriously doubt anyone who did not hate us before started after GITMO.





    I can assure that in 2012, President Obama will take credit for "getting us out of Iraq" in his reelection campaign.
     
  14. pocketfullofshells

    pocketfullofshells Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    12,009
    Likes Received:
    203
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    land of 10,000 lakes and 2 senators again
    and if things get bad....the Right will say it was all his plan ....And only reason we are getting out is 1 Iraq said get out, and 2 The Left finaly pushed till Bush budged....though like always he did so far later then should have.
     
  15. BigRob

    BigRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Messages:
    7,366
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    USA
    The Left finally pushed until Bush budged? What do you mean by that?

    Many on the Left demanded that we leave Iraq before there was any "surge" or any "awakening." That is not really pushing for anything.

    It was never the plan of the Bush admin to stay in Iraq forever, and after the Awakening and the Surge, the situation became one that it was even possible to think about pulling back, which is what occurred.
     
Loading...

Share This Page