You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Bin Laden dead
Buzz is right but the 9/11 attacks were predicted to cost us trillions and that was said before the smoke cleared and war plans put on the table. It was the World Trade Center for fucks sake. They didn't fly a toy plane into a Pizza Hut.
We were going into Afghanistan. Period. Whether it cost one dollar or ten trillion we were going in. Appeasement was not an option. That's something other countries like to do. 
The mistake was taking our eye off the ball and going into Iraq at that particular time. We should have taken a rain check on Iraq. Instead we walked into two money pits with an economy going on life support and our allies shaking in their boots to the point where Bush had to beg for a "coalition of the willing" to help us. All of our allies should be thankful for these neocons because any other president likely would have pulled out of NATO and other treaty obligations immediately. We spend billions a year protecting half the fucking planet and when crunch time hits, countries are hiding and bitching about the U.S.
Even when the economic collapse occurred, we're still here to defend these countries even though we're in three conflicts. If a 9/11 type attack happens in Toronto, Paris, London, Berlin, etc. tomorrow, can you guess which country's military goes on full alert and is gonna spend another few trillion on a credit card to take care of your problem, regardless of where those terrorists reside?
One way to an economic recovery isn't just winding down one of our current conflicts. It's either pulling out of these Cold War relics or making our allies pay the tab.
Re: Bin Laden dead
The U.S. economic collapse didn't have a thing to do with those wars.
It had to do with an absolutely greeding housing and bank institution that gave out loans to countless Americans who were totally un-qualified and un-able to ever dream of paying those loans off, which forced TONS AND TONS of people into foreclosure.
Had nothing to do with defense spending.
I remember 2005 & 2006, when you had fuckin' Wal-Mart door greeters getting approved for $350,000 dollar loans for homes that weren't even fuckin' built.
Then they were built, only for the bank to foreclose on them anyways.
Local governments went from having 2-3 foreclosures a month, to 50-60 a fuckin' week.
That's a BIG misconception here and especially outside of the U.S. that those wars hurt us economically.
BANKS and a free-market given carte blanche to run wild is what hurt our economy. No different than 1929. No different.
Re: Bin Laden dead
buzzsaw wrote:People think this all crept up overnight.
its been 10 nearly years since sept 11 dude .... if the govt didnt pour all that $$$ into the war where would USA be today? everythign may not be peaches and cream but i would wager that it wouldve been a sight better than it looks today
The wars played a significant role in our government's fiscal crisis (in fact I'd argue they were like throwing gasoline on a fire.) While some of this overlaps with out economic woes, it certainly was not the catalyst. I think James can attest to my constant bombardment of bellyaching in regards to Bush's war spending years ago (read: China ATM Card) and that eventually the bill would come due. That's one mess, and the economy is another.
Re: Bin Laden dead
The U.S. economic collapse didn't have a thing to do with those wars.
It had to do with an absolutely greeding housing and bank institution that gave out loans to countless Americans who were totally un-qualified and un-able to ever dream of paying those loans off, which forced TONS AND TONS of people into foreclosure.
Had nothing to do with defense spending.
I remember 2005 & 2006, when you had fuckin' Wal-Mart door greeters getting approved for $350,000 dollar loans for homes that weren't even fuckin' built.
Then they were built, only for the bank to foreclose on them anyways.
Local governments went from having 2-3 foreclosures a month, to 50-60 a fuckin' week.
That's a BIG misconception here and especially outside of the U.S. that those wars hurt us economically.
BANKS and a free-market given carte blanche to run wild is what hurt our economy. No different than 1929. No different.
All of the things you listed certainly played a role in the collapse but you've got to be kidding me if you think an almost trillion a year annual defense budget(and rising) and two wars that cost several trillion did not play a role in the downfall.
That's a LOT of money that could have went to other things. Just ONE year of that cash could have gave everyone with a pulse free medical care for a few years. Could have used a portion of it to shore up Social Security. Money could have been used in MASSIVE tax breaks to major corporations to bring jobs back from overseas. List goes on and on.
I think James can attest to my constant bombardment of bellyaching in regards to Bush's war spending years ago (read: China ATM Card) and that eventually the bill would come due.
Yeah we went a few rounds during those discussions. 
As the wars continued, I started moving towards your side of the issue. You cant throw money into black holes year after year while your economy is starting to collapse.
If we could ever go back to a peacetime status where we still fund the military and give it what it needs(several hundred billion), I think people would see some things start to improve, in the LEAST a reduction in our budget deficit.
Our military needs a rest anyways. This is about to drag out as long as Vietnam did. They are currently several flash points for war and I wouldn't be surprised to see the US bomb several more countries as it starts round two with Al Qaeda and of course the turmoil spreading across the Middle East and Africa, but we gotta start wrapping up this other stuff and just place Afghanistan in the victory column and come home.
I do agree with Bush that these terrorist organizations are like a cancer and are not going away and the fight may span several generations. However, we don't need to drop massive amounts of troops and equipment each time something flares up. The "Powell Doctrine" of using everything but the kitchen sink to insure victory is obviously a great war strategy, but in reality is more suited for Cold War type conflicts(or a NK or Iran conflict).
We need a new doctrine to go after these terrorists, NOT just Al Qaeda. Another reason I have always felt a US/Russian alliance would go along ways towards the goal of dismantling them and placing terrorism on what Reagan would call "the ash heap of history".
An example...
A joint US/Russian operation in Chechnya that obliterates them with special ops and limited air strikes. Would send a HUGE signal to everyone. Then do the same to Somalia, Sudan,etc.
Who's going to resist such a conflict? The UN? EU? They both need us and Russia so resistance would be futile.
Missile defense is a huge obstacle to the US and Russia working closer on this. While I do believe missile defense is something to attain, place it on the back burner.
Re: Bin Laden dead
Outsourced jobs was going on before 9/11 ever even happened.
Defense spending held us down, but it was not the cause.
Not to mention Unemployment, interest rates, were rock bottom when we were in the heart of the Iraq conflict, and banks were still spending money like it was going out of style.
Cheney also was selling out every fucking corner of the military to private security too, but still the absolute carelessness of fiscal responsibility in the U.S. to banks and their customers during the mid-2000's was THE crippler of the economy.
The U.S. didn't have the bail banks out left and right, and have major corporate scams of crooks committing suicide before they go to prison, banks trying to rip off other banks with bad paper, and the list goes on and on, because of DEFENSE spending.
Now we have to turn around and those same corporations that fucked us to begin with, we've got to turn around and give them tax breaks or otherwise they'll just pass the extra on to the consumer... FUCK THEM.
I may have to do business with them, but I don't have to lie about what they're doing and have been doing. The U.S. military, two wars, another conflict in Libya, and that's what's putting us into debt?
Maybe MORE debt NOW, but certaintly not then. We were spending cash like it was going out of style.
We're having to cut defense spending now, because we're having to cut everything at the government level. We're forced to. It's a Republican wet dream.
Their own financial philosophies DESTROYED the country, yet they're current philosophies are what is going to allow them to rebuild the country in their own image, and most likely is what will get us back on track.
I got to hand it to 'em, that's a move right out of 'ole JR's playbook. BRILLIANT fuckin' move.
Re: Bin Laden dead
Military spending has increased under Obama and is gonna continue to increase until something gives. Last year's defense budget broke records and makes Reagan's defense spending look like a blue light special at K Mart.
I never said outsourcing started after 9/11. We can thank Clinton for that brilliant move and Bush for taking it further. The only way that can be reversed is giving massive tax incentives to come back. Unlikely but possible.
Inject 3 to 4 trillion into this economy on life support instead of a 10 year war and it would turn around.
Re: Bin Laden dead
2011 defense budget: $712 billion
Obama's administration requests additional $159 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan. The budget also requests $19 billion for defense-related atomic energy programs, $8 billion for defense-related activities in other agencies, and $122 billion for veterans. Together these expenses total $861 billion.
2011 budget deficit: $1.6 trillion
