Mercnbeth
Posts: 11766
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rulemylife Do you not think we have an obligation to the 9/11 dead and the families of the dead to bring those most responsible to justice? Do you not think that a resurgent Taliban is a danger? Rule, After 7+ years - I've accepted the fact that "justice" isn't possible. My personal feelings and experiences can not be affected by any 'justice' gained now. We HAD an obligation - after this much time, we have a National embarrassment; which has nothing whatsoever to do with President Obama, or his action to send troops there today. Is it your argument that we have to fight them there so we don't have to fight them here? What happened to the idea being expressed not only on CM (not necessarily by you) but in Congress, that sending troops to Afghanistan and/or Iraq strengthened the resolve of the Taliban? Why is the clamor against escalating the war and sending more troops out of the US silent today? This is hypocrisy at its highest level. Much of the electorate identified bringing the troops home as a reason to support the winning candidate. This troop announcement came out two days ago and not one peep of complaint or dissent!? However this thread is about money. The Afghanistan reference was to another reference about the expense of foreign war, in particular Iraq, and how this President would not "waste" money the same way. Where is the outrage to this act of wasted resources, both collateral and human? Personally, I think sending troops into Afghanistan is as futile as sending, and keeping them in Iraq. The locals don't want us. It provides a target of opportunity, and will not resolve the ultimate issues of the region. People there have been killing each other for centuries longer than the USA has existed. There is nothing we can, or should do, to stop them. Regarding acts perpetrated on the US, as previously stated, my position is to use tactics similar to the Israeli approach. Strategic, definitive, over-blown, retaliation; if not directed to the specific source of the attack to people 'celebrating' it. Back in 2001, I supported blowing up a refinery or two in Iraq or any similarly happy land after 9/11 and announcing one more per day until Bin Laden was turned over to us. Was Iraq responsible - frankly I didn't care. My position was that if they didn't do it - they knew who did. Terror is the only thing with will combat terrorists and terrorism. The USA wasn't prepared to do that then, and are definitely not prepared to do it now. Instead, we put 17,000 men and woman at risk. Is their blood your path, and definition, of justice served? quote:
ORIGINAL: kittinSol quote:
ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Absolutely, farm subsidies, school lunch programs; both are forms of 'corporate welfare' because a corporation benefits from them. School lunch programs... you've got to be kidding me. That's small fry: irrelevant. The aggro and food industry, yes, because they're blood sucking leeches (read Fast Food Nation if you haven't already). No, Merc, I was thinking of the twenty to forty billion dollars in subsidies to the oil companies, I was referring to Walmart, and to the other free-market preacher clowns who beg for public money whilst keeping the myth of free-enterprise alive. ENOUGH. Kittin, Guess I'm not selectively prejudice regarding waste and welfare to suit any rationalized reasoning. The bottom line, is the bottom line; making any corporation 'more equal' is a path to the inequity that you claim to be adamantly against. We are also in agreement that any welfare makes the concept of "free-enterprise" a myth. For example and keeping it to an example given, a big company can spend any amount necessary to wine and dine school administrators, school boards, and mayors and produce an end product that makes a McDonald's 'Happy-Meal' seem gourmet. 'Mom & Pop' local restaurant can't afford the time or the PAC payment to compete with that. Good point!
|