Our Defense Budget Pours Trillions - Yes, Trillions - Down A Hole. Maybe It's Time To Fix That.
As David Sirota points out, here are some "objective, nonpartisan, non-ideological facts":
-- The 2010 Pentagon budget means "every man, woman and child in the United States will spend more than $2,700 on (defense) programs and agencies next year," reports the Cato Institute. "By way of comparison, the average Japanese spends less than $330; the average German about $520; China's per capita spending is less than $100."
-- "(The Pentagon budget) dwarfs the combined defense budgets of U.S. allies and potential U.S. enemies alike," reports Hearst Newspapers.
-- "President (Obama) is on track to spend more on defense, in real dollars, than any other president has in one term of office since World War II," reports National Journal's Government Executive magazine.
-- In 2000, the Pentagon admitted it has lost -- yes, lost -- $2.3 trillion. In 2003, the San Francisco Chronicle reported that a subsequent Department of Defense study said it was only $1 trillion. To put such numbers in perspective, contemplate what those sums could finance. $1 trillion, for instance, could pay the total cost of universal health care for the long haul. $2.3 trillion would cover universal health care plus the bank bailout plus the stimulus package.
Obviously -- obviously! -- these points are no cause for alarm and certainly no cause for defense spending reductions, right? All they must prove is that the archconservative Cato Institute, William Randolph Hearst's newspaper chain, National Journal employees and Pentagon officials are secretly America-hating liberals. And -- obviously! -- so are two of the most aggressive neoconservative hawks ever to hold government office, Sen. John McCain and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. After all, they're the ones who issued those scathing statements about wasteful defense spending in the pop quiz above. That means they're actually terrorist-appeasing lefties, right?
Really, how could anyone other than traitorous communists see the data and then consider backing the mildest Pentagon spending cuts? I mean, come on -- in a country whose paranoid conservative movement now makes a dead-serious ideology out of Stephen Colbert wisecracks, how dare any red-blooded American even think of pondering basic budgetary facts?
It is promulgated and perpetuated by regressive Republicans and conservatives. They are pro-death and anti-progress. They hate equality and empathy. They hate advancement and achievement. They hate governance, and they hate this country.
It is time to dismantle the malign entity so famously and presciently identified by Eisenhower nearly 50 years ago.
BID
"It is promulgated and perpetuated by regressive Republicans and conservatives."
Hey, if you believe no Dems or liberals are involved in the ongoing promulgation...Think again.
"For starters, the Democratically-controlled House Armed Services Committee (on which I once served) will authorize billions of dollars MORE for the national defense budget than George W. Bush ever requested from Congress. That's right-the Democrats want more military spending than George W. Bush ever thought necessary. Turns out that the Defense bill Congress takes up today is less about meeting the national defense needs of the United States and more about meeting the pork-barrel political needs of Washington politicians. Or, as Yogi Berra would put it: "It's Deja Vu all over again!"
"I can't keep doing this on my own with these...people."
Both Democrats and Republicans will continue to throw money down the defense hole as long as the defense industry continues to do such a successful job of spreading the defense contract jobs around to the various congressional districts. Every congressman wants to bring home the bacon.
The only way to get out of this military industrial complex stranglehold on the political process is to replace pork-barrel spending on the military with (and I hate to put it this way) pork-barrel spending on something that's actually useful, like medical research and/or green-energy technology. I think that's what some Democrats are trying to do, which is why I still support things like E80 ethanol research, even though it's not really as green as it appears to be. (Cellulose to ethanol fuels show promise, but starch to ethanol is a crock.)
What missing Pentagon trillions?
Rumsfeld Buries Admission of Missing 2+ Trillion Dollars in 9/10/01 Press Conference
"On September 10, 2001, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld held a press conference to disclose that over $2,000,000,000,000 in Pentagon funds could not be accounted for. Rumsfeld stated: "According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions."
"Such a disclosure normally would have sparked a huge scandal. However, the commencement of the attack on New York City and Washington in the morning would assure that the story remained buried. To the trillions already missing from the coffers, an obedient Congress terrorized by anthrax attacks would add billions more in appropriations to fight the "War on Terror."
"The Comptroller of the Pentagon at the time of the attack was Dov Zakheim, who was appointed in May of 2001. Before becoming the Pentagon's money-manager, he was an executive at System Planning Corporation, a defense contractor specializing in electronic warfare technologies including remote-controlled aircraft systems. 2. 3 Zakheim is a member of the Project for a New American Century and participated in the creation of its 2000 position paper Rebuilding America's Defenses which called for "A New Pearl Harbor."
http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd213.htm
Interesting?
There may be a different take on this.
Rumsfeld had an agenda in “disclosing” these figures. I’ve no doubt that the money Rumsfeld could not track according to his own accounting procedures was spent. He just didn’t know on what. It’s not as if a trillion dollars walked away (that DID happen in IRAQ, but not to that extent).
Remember that at the time, Rumsfeld wanted to change the structure of the military to include more contractors, private sector support, and mercenaries. He thought the military could be streamlined and more cost effective. This disclosure was probably his fore into that restructuring.
Then 2 things happened. 1) 9/11 2) Iraq. Rumsfeld then got EVERYTHING he wanted - AND WAS PROVEN WRONG ON EVERYTHING.
Is there waste and fraud in the DoD? There sure is – and cronyism, and no-bid perpetual contracts, and graft. Obviously we spend too much. I’m just not sure this 1-2 Trillion is what everyone thinks it is.
... Bush's military agenda.
They're also continuing his tax cuts.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
Obama is committed to get the troops out of Iraq by 2011 and now has outlined an exit from Afghanistan. That is a sea change from Bush's open-ended committments. I also doubt Obama will be starting any more wars or attacking Iran. Also, you cannot turn off the military spending tap on a dime. Lots of contracts in place. I would expect Obama and his budget team will do their best to try and tap down the defense budget over the next 8 years. They will likely have no choice with the exploding deficit. There are already signs of them moving toward doing this. Killing the F-22 contract was a huge symbolic achievement for Obama and something Bush did not have the balls to do.
The Bush tax cuts expire on January 1, 2011. My guess is they will not be renewed.
... or some teabaggers might have to provide the illusion of public opposition to taxing bankers and Obama would have to reluctantly capitulate in the name of "bipartisanship."
And as for his "commitment" to pull out: that's only as believable as any man's promise to pull out on time
Telecom immunity, habeas corpus, "open and transparent government".... We've heard his commitments before.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
You fail to understand how smart Obama is and what he announced at Westpoint on Tuesday night. His plan is brilliant and genius.
He promised that the troops would start to come out in 2011. By doing this, which I believe he did on purpose, he has put in place a promise or a marker that now cannot be broken by either the military and especially the politicians. Because if he fails to start pulling out troops out in 18 months as he promised there will be hell and high water from the American public and especially the left, which would especially hurt him in the soon after 2012 election. This is the same as what he did with the healthcare bill. By setting down the marker of it being at least deficit neutral, he forces the politicans to find a way to make it so. There is now no way in hell Obama can go back on his word to keep the troops in Afghanistan and not start pulling them out, as it would be political suicide for Obama not to leave. It also very smartly puts the Karzi government on notice, as it tells them the U.S. is leaving.
Their new Afghanistan plan is genius. It is a way to get around the hawks and the military by adding some more troops, but at the same time adds a deadline that will force the issue. The plan is really an exit plan for Afghanistan, while simultaneously putting the Afghanis on notice. Brilliant solution for a really tough situation.
So your point is Obama's playing politics with the lives of 30,000 American servicemembers? Why am I not comforted by your analysis.
You shouldn't be comforted...If that analysis is anywhere near right (not sure it is)...Its impeachable.
Committing +/- 50,000 new troops since last January along with over 100,000 "contractors" as a reelection strategy would be criminal. Hard to swallow that take.
"I can't keep doing this on my own with these...people."
Don't kid yourself politics factors into every single decision every politician makes. War is just politics through violence.
I would say that Obama is using politics or political pressure to end the war. He is setting up the marker of starting to withdraw just ahead of the 2012 election. This will force the issue. It is not a re-election strategy at all. In fact, it is completely the opposite of a re-election strategy. The re-election strategy would be to promise nothing, so there is no promise to break just ahead of the election.
I would also say that he is not only forcing the issue ahead of the 2012 election, but he is also giving the Karzi government one more chance to improve things before the U.S. gets out. Surge the troops to given the Karzi government some more limited space to prepare themselves for the inevitable U.S. withdraw. To me this is a more responsible response than simply immediately withdrawing. Genius!
Now go rob a convenience store and use as your defense everybody does it and see what it gets you.
Are you expecting that politicians will stop making decisions for political reasons? You would have to complete dismantle the U.S. political system for that to happen. Or have a rule that no politician can be re-elected and there was no political parties. The key is that the political decisions align with what is good for the country.
Spoken like one who wasn't one of the 30,000 sent to Afghanistan for what may have been as you said for political reasons. Would you consider it "genius" if you were one of the 30,000? If so, shut off your computer and go enlist.
the 30,000 are being sent to give the Karzi government a fighting chance ahead of a U.S. withdrawl. you can be against the 30,000. I have no problem with that. But, the judgement was made to surge to give the Afghan govenment a better chance over the next 18 months to survive on its own, ahead of a withdrawl. the bigger picture and important picture is the withdrawl. you can argue about giving the Afghanis a better chance to get their house in order ahead of a withdrawl if you want, no problem with that. I hardly think Kristol is happy about Obama forcing the withdrawl in 18 months.
By the way I think Bill Kristol should be put in jail or pushed out of this country.
Bad situation all around for those in the military. I don't think they should be there in the first place. It may not be right to keep them there to give the Afghanis a better fighting chance after the U.S. leaves...
Getting your points was what I was going for.
..from coming back in a year's time and saying, "we've really got them on the run now - we just need 10K more troops and another eighteen months!" thereby trumping Obama's "marker"?
That could happen, but that would be political suicide for Obama and the Democrats. The left would kill him and he would risk his re-election. Obama likely knows this. He is forcing the issue.
The right wants to force Obama to make a choice between his base and independents that might take "winning" quite seriously.
Meanwhile Obama has stretched the game out, given the hawks a stronger hand, and upped the ante (with lives).
I would say there are an increasing number of independents, although alot of them now are ex-Republicans, with less than 20% of Americans now saying they Republicans, want to get out Afghanistan. This will only grow over time.
The commander in chief could say, Hell no.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
McCrystal & Co. has show they're willing to play out the politics in public and I haven't heard many "hell no"s coming out of Obama.
You also have no idea what has been going on for the last two months. McChyrstal and the military leaders were told to go back and come back with more solutions on Afghanistan after McChyrstal presented his ideas in August. That was deemed to be a huge slap in the face to the military and it also said to the military, look the civilians are back in control. You have no idea how Obama has changed the environment. He gets no credit for this. He then goes to Westpoint and essential tells the military that you can fight your war, but I am yanking the rug out from under you in 18 months. Commanders I am sure did not like this, but the average grunt is happy as hell to get the hell out of there.
People are once again underestimating Obama. This guy is very smart and a cool cookie. The Republicans have absolutely no game versus Obama. All they can do is sit on the sidelines and whine and bitch and complain. If Lindsey Graham and Cheney is all they got, then that party is going to fade away. I think Obama is skating circles around them and is always one step ahead. The whole healthcare thing has been amazing and the Republicans are getting beat down on it. Sure it may not come with everything everyone wants, but if you think about where we are today compared to one year ago on healthcare it is amazing. The entire country has been thinking about it and debating it. That train has left the station. It is now a huge issue that will only grow.
"You also have no idea what has been going on for the last two months."
I guess you've been sitting in on the staff meetings.
I have not been in those meetings, but if you listen to the right people that really know what is going on...
It's been a complete fiasco in my opinion but I won't argue with you over Obama's style.
Sure the negative reaction to healthcare reform has been a fiasco. The mass lobbying by the healtchare industry, chamber of commerce, etc. has been a fiasco, but there can be no denying that the Dems and Obama have brought healthcare to the table and are close to giving millions of Americans healthcare coverage for the first time and eliminating the insurance industry from rejecting people.. that is huge in the context that we were not even discussing healthcare a year ago. Obama has started healthcare reform that will take many years to evolve. This bill does not simply static point in time. I do not think the Republicans saw healthcare coming. They have had absolutely no real strategy or answer to counter the Democrats on healthcare.
IF a bill passes, it will take many years until it actually kicks in!
... where Obama brilliantly maneuvers around today's solution seemingly giving conservatives exactly what they want only to trap them into solving the problem at some indeterminate point in a possible future.
Except while he's playing his supposed chess game: casualties mount in Afghanistan, mountains of foreclosures are filed monthly, the statute of limitations on torture ticks away, prisoners continue to rot without even the accusation of crime....
But hey, Goldman Sachs, Halliburton, and AHIP members will continue to rake in the cash.
He's playing chess alright, but his supporters just might be a bit confused on his objectives.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
Fix the economy. Well on the way and they have been doing a million things on this.
Healthcare reform. They have come a long way against big odds. They have made it an issue.
Get out of the wars. They now have fixed timelines to get out of both wars.
Make peace with the rest of the world. Nobel was symbolic.
Environment, cap and trade, immigration..etc. etc.
I would say some the security issue related stuff (although he had eliminated water boarding and will close Guantanmo) is likely in a holding pattern until they can figure out how to deal with this stuff. Some of it is not likely that easy to just shut down so quickly, but I imagine there are many things going on about this stuff that is bringing real change that we do not know about. The mentality is likely significantly changed in the security agencies and the justice department. There will be no lawyers (Yoo) essentially writing new laws behind closed doors to jusify torture.
These are all huge issues. It has only been one year in what I believe will be 8 years.
You expect a lot and get a bit stuck in the weeds.
"Fix the economy. Well on the way and they have been doing a million things on this."
"Healthcare reform. They have come a long way against big odds. They have made it an issue."
"Get out of the wars. They now have fixed timelines to get out of both wars."
I suppose we just have some very different views on policy. I was rather curious why items like immunity for war criminals and imprisonment without cause didn't make your list. For the record, I disagree with both and my answer won't change depending on who delivers the arguments.
Sorry, your edit beat my post. There is no "mentality change" at Justice. Obama's lawyers are making the same totalitarian arguments Bush's did.
Last I checked, Guantanamo was still open and we still have secret prisoners kept from the Red Cross. But hey, a promise is all that really matters.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
Last comment as getting completely off the topic of this thread.
I appreciate everything you are saying. I appreciate the hardline you are taking on Obama, but iit has been less than one year with so many fires to put out. Many of Obama's people have actually been in place much less than a year.
Economy. Appreciate comment on Goldman and foreclosures. Not sure how the goverment was easily going to stop foreclosures on a dime. We can argue whether it is even governments job to stop foreclosures. Goldman, can't say much, they make obsene profits, no doubt. But, you cannot deny what Obama has so far done with the economy which is unprecedented. We went from a nose diving economy to 3% GDP growth in less than one year. I hope it continues to grow and all indicators at this point are that it will. Job loss are terrible, but job growth will follow GDP growth. It always does. The economy has come a long way in the last year.
Healthcare reform. No doubt single payer would be best. But, you needed to face political reality or those who wanted single payer needed to be out in the streets screaming like the teabaggers were. The Democrats need the support of the people here and there really was not much. Blame yourself. The other side was more vocal. You needed to convince the Blue Dogs. I think Obama is clearly for single payer, but he is a realist at this time. I think the public option will lead to backdoor single payer. I think Obama knows this. Lets hope a few senators do not destroy the public option. That would not be Obama's fault.
Out of the wars instantly was never going to be easy. Not Obama's mess or fault. I think he is pulling them out as fast as he can given political realities. Troops in Iraq are now out of the cities and are starting to come home. Obama told us on Tuesday he will start to bring them home from Afghanistan in 18 mths. That is a huge sea change from the previous adminstration.
Holder has started an investigation on torture. Although they have said it many not include some, the reality is that once you start something like this you do not know where it may go. You open a can of worms That story has yet to be written and we may seen some justice here.
Not sure you are correct on the DOJ. You should do some reading about what is going on there. Night and day.
Guantanamo. The promise was one year. That is in January/February. I think the fact that they have announced that KSM will be tried in NY is some indication that they are trying really hard to close Guantanamo and maybe even make the deadline.
Foreclosures can be addressed by repealing Bush's bankruptcy laws. Obama has chosen to keep them - as well as Bush's tax cuts.
Health care reform? I do accept political reality - large majorities nationwide favor Medicare for all. Opposing these majorities is nothing more than bribe money from vested interests and a handful of teabagger pawns. Obama has clearly shown his preference.
But you argue that it's our fault? What gall. The President and Democratic leadership sell out the interests of their constituents and it's the constituents' fault. Just, wow.
On wars: "Troops in Iraq are now out of the cities..." I think our differences are becoming clearer. In reality, Camp Victory is in Bagdad; in Obamaland, Baghdad's boundaries have been redrawn so that it magically no longer includes Camp Victory. It's all about the rhetoric. Kind of like promising to reevaluate in about 3 Friedman Units.
As far as the DOJ investigating torture: only someone with a cover-up agenda would have an institution investigate itself. DOJ was a major participant in war crimes. Yet we are to trust its investigation of itself?
As far as Obama's DOJ arguing exactly like Bush's DOJ, I'll just make a blanket referral to Glenn Greenwald and/or Marcy Wheeler.
KSM gets a trial; those that Obama feels Holder might not convict in a fair trial get military commissions; those that Obama can't even convict in a military commission get detained anyway.
I suppose I can see why his supporters are so proud. When he's not feigning opposition, Dick Cheney is too.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
...he said any such thing, because he added the caveat; "depending on conditions on the ground". Where have we heard that before?
That caveat does not matter. What matters is what the public/voters hold him to.
Neil MacDonald of CBC News had an interesting story last night:
http://www.cbc.ca/video/news/player.html?clip...
this link isn't showing, doing something wrong. Gates saying time table flexible in NY Times.
Be as you wish to seem
with a specific agenda. Right?
"factually true, but not entirely true" Only in America, good grief!
Actually Greco-Roman historians felt much the same, they thought a historian should have a point that he's trying to support and prove, not just be a tape recorder.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Ah, there's the answer to all the jobless problems for the west: let's all become military contractors!
The defense budget before 9-11 was approaching $350 billion a year. In 2009 it is likely to be closer to $650 billion. Can you wrap your head around the fact that the U.S. spends almost 50% of the entire planet's military spending and the U.S. only has about 5% of the planet's population? To me that says Americans are very paranoid. The entire planet spends about $1.5 trillion on military expenditures.
You could cut the defense budget by $100 billion a year down to about $550 billion, which would still buy a lot of defense and be well above pre 9-11, and take the $100 billion and pay for healthcare for everyone.
The defense budget more than just about anything is killing this country.
We are in the industrial military complex. No need warning about it, it is here.
See:
http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-...
...play a role, but it's mostly about corruption in government and concealment of that corruption by the corporate owned MSM that will prevent and change from ever happening.
The reaction to 9-11 was blown way out of proportion for a single attack that killed nearly 3,000 people. The U.S. almost doubled its already huge military budget and then went on a global rampage likely killing 100,000s of people. And you wonder why the world hates Americans.
9-11 was really a crime and therefore more of an intelligence and police matter. Just like all the other supposive plots that have been unfoiled. There was no reason to completely decimate Iraq and then spend 8 years in Afghanistan fighting the Afghanis.
It is funny listening to all these idiots in the MSM and politicians.
They all say, including Obama, that we are in Afghanistan because of 9-11. The reality is, just read the government own reports, that Afghanistan had very little to do with 9-11.
1) not a single Afghani actually attacked the U.S. during the 9-11 attack.
2) most of the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia (15 were from Saudi Arabia, two from the United Arab Emirates, one from Egypt and one from Lebanon).
3) it was likely financed from Saudi Arabia, and certainly not finance by Afghanis
4) the key planning was done in Munich Germany, where the key success of the plan was the recruiting of two engineering students in Munich Germany.
5) a lot of the training was done in U.S. flight schools.
6) sure there may have been some very basic training in camps run by foreigners in Afghanistan, and there may have been some approvals by Bin Laden who may have been in Afghanistan, but the Afghanis themselves were not involved.
Saudi Arabia, Germany, Egypt and the U.S. were the actual countries where most of the 9-11 plan was hatched.
"4) the key planning was done in Munich Germany, where the key success of the plan was the recruiting of two engineering students in Munich Germany."
Wow those Students Engineers were geniouses and were capable of demolishing 3 skycrapers with only two planes: 1+1=3
And also were capable of making disappear a WHOLE Boeing 757 (In a 15 feet hole) and documents related to the 2.3 Trillion Missing this post is about.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkYlbpS-vVI
I agree that afghans have nothing to do with the attack.
You obviously do not know who the key people were who lead the attack.
And I doubt they thought the towers would fall. It was more likely a lucky shot. I don't think the original engineer that built the towers even thot they would fall.
A few well placed explosives could have given the collapse a nudge. If you believe those wacky conspiracy theories.
paranoia is always at a freefall rate of descent.
"You obviously do not know who the key people were who lead the attack"
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3776...
I do my homework and i don't believe everything the CIA says in particular the covert operation branches
Regarding the "They were lucky theory". Can you explain me why all fighters were playing war games even in the Alaskan Seas:
Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney grills Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on the Pentagon's missing trillions, DynCorp's slave trade, and the 9/11 wargames
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eootfzAhAoU
They were protecting the Polo Bears!
on his mama's grave it was unsinkable. And we all know how that turned out.
I think at this point the reaction to the attacks has been so overwhelmingly out of whack an disproportionate, that the events themselves that lead to the reaction have become secondary really.
We could pay for "Cadillac" healthcare for all Americans and cut it out of the over-bloated military budget and even the military would never notice because it would be such a small percentage of what they waste.
But for the RW we have to have our war on, it's just business and the most profitable business going these days.
It only there was a way to take the profit out of war?
Seems like profit is the real enemy.
"I know that there are people who do not love their fellow
man, and I hate people like that! " ~ Tom Lehrer (1928 - )
Do they ever audit the defense dept? If they did there would probably be some pretty unimagined numbers there.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
"it will take six days, six weeks, I doubt six months."
Donald "666" Rumsfeld on the upcoming Iraq "war".
Time to invade them again already?
Didn't we purchase the extended occupation warranty from Blackwater? Where the country invaded is guaranteed to be free of evil doers for at least 3 years or your money back?
No one read the fine print on that warranty.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
extended warranties are a bunch of hooey. Never buy them.
they probably make more economical fill than does dirt.
"Parachutes are allowed in checked or carry-on baggage, but may not be worn in flight."
---Southwest Airlines
Freedom isn't free.
Will that be Visa or Discover?
You would think with the economy where it is and all the Christmas sales going on now we could get bullets and bombs a little cheaper right now.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
At least a bulk discount for Costco® members. But no. Its just like the drug manufacturers. Same price no matter how big of a customer you are.
I cannot even find any coupons. No buy one get one free. Nothing.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
"Freedom isn't free.
Will that be Visa or Discover?"
And China is our Wilmington, Delaware.
But...but...don't you feel safer knowing that the jihadist that wants to hide under your bed, spring out, and decapitate you are being kept in check by this massive spending? If we cut one penny out of the "defense" budget we'd be leaving ourselves wide open to grisly deaths at the hands of islami martyrs.
How could you sleep with that on your conscience and worse, moose-lims under your bed? Won't somebody think about the children?
Damn, I thought it was all the dollars I had stuffed there for padding...
"Parachutes are allowed in checked or carry-on baggage, but may not be worn in flight."
---Southwest Airlines
With this kind of spending, how are they going to raise their children, have a pension and Social Security benefits. DA< I know you are joking with us. You don't have to retort.
Leave those defense contractors alone! Every nickel their companies make goes *right* back into protecting our troops! Why, just look at this:
Defense Contractor Throws $10 Million Bat Mitzvah, invites Rockstar Celebs
The right-wing response? "Hey, leave him alone -- it's HIS money!" Yeah, it is *now*...
I kid! I kid! ;)
That right there is a crime...
The Republicans are not acting in good faith
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
Wow Alice, I've never seen you speechless before.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
Wrong button.
|
|
v
v
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
That's comforting. For a moment we thought you fell down the rabbit hole.
Different Alice, similar story.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
I was going to ask how many former Bush officials you saw when you were down there.
Well at least you pushed your own wrong button this time and it wasn't me who did it. :)
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
;)
Who says the Democrats are not capable of being just as corrupt, every bit the war mongers and even the war criminals that the Republicans were (and are).
Not me!
Not Chalmers Johnson
Give them a chance!
It is a trillion dollar per year one way ticket to bankruptcy.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
Bush was the greatest president ever.
And Obama is getting to be just as great.
It's not REAL money anyway...right? It's just that fake Federal Reserve stuff.
Government + the Federal Reserve = organized crime
is to serve the military money pit, exxon, big pharma and all other masters. that's why we exist.
Like Durbin said "they" own the place and he was not joking , the Military Industrial complex / Pentagon along with the rest of the corporate lobbyists . " For and by the people " ? What a friggin joke !Ike warned about this but the whores in DC are just that , low life self serving whores , for sale to the highest bidder . And we can't afford to fund social security , medicare , health care reform etc. , you think just maybe that it's really a matter of their priorities and values being just a little f'd up ?
Insanity , it is what it is , there is no understanding it .
http://therealnews.com/t/index.php?option=com...
When can we just start rebuilding this party? It is clear to me now that the people we have supported are just not cutting it. This is more of the same to me. I see no change do you? The job President Obama has done is nothing but more of the same and he is going to have to do something drastic now for him to win my dollar of support. At this point I am starting to believe a primary challenger may be in order for President Obama. He is not change but the status quo. I encourage everyone reading Elizabeth Warrens piece at huffpo. I have never felt more anxiety over the future of America. I'm hoping for a primary challenge from Dr. Dean.
LOL!
...it's probably been dropped into the black hole that funds all the Petagram's off the books projects like, for example, D.U.M.B.'s.:
http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=d...
I love exposing a big "sekrit" as much as the next person but some of these images look like the LHC in Europe.
Aren't some of these images where GI Joe trains, down in the Pit?
To marry Courtney Love?
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
The Cato Institute may be drawing attention to this, but the Heritage Foundation is still pushing their "Four Percent for Freedom" campaign, as far as I know.
http://www.heritage.org/fourpercent/
Meaning they want the U.S. to continue spending at least 4% of its GDP on defense, in perpetuity, regardless of what the rest of the world is doing. But that's already far out of proportion to any and all of the perceived threatening boogeymen they're using to justify that spending.
Military expenditures:
USA: 630 billion
Axis of Evil club:
China: 85 billion
Russia: 59 billion
North Korea: 5 billion
Iran: 4.5 billion
Venezuela: 1.6 billion
Combined: 155 billion.
So, the current U.S. military budget alone (not counting NATO partners) is still more than four times larger than all of the scary villains they're using to justify military spending combined.
The 630 billion is just the DoD, however the Department of Defense doesn't actually do defense. That is the Department of Homeland Security.
Nukes are in the Dept of Energy
Vets have their own Department.
It is all about a trillion per year.
Then there is the NSA and the CIA, and however much that is.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
$2,700 per American for defense is a steal if, one only considers the technology the military has developed and introduced. Granted we would be better served and further along if we concentrated these dollars into private sector development... health care, energy, education, food production, jobs... but, the Military Industrial Complex has had Treasury tied up & gagged since WWII.
This wouldn't be so unpalatable if our military didn't suck but, they do. We have many great individuals in the armed services but, a vast majority are total assholes who couldn't make it in the private sector being better suited to prison so yes, as a whole, they fucking suck. The Military is the US biggest welfare program.
The four armed branches lack coordination and continually in fight for tax dollars willingly cutting at each others throats fielding troops that are under equipped, ill prepared, ill educated, ill fed, ill treated and grossly undermanned to be successful in roles to which they are tasked.
This is a military that gets it's ass kicked by 3rd World non-states. We are paying Taliban in Afghanistan NOT to fight us and Iraq is the wild west with our troops holed up behind concrete blast walls unwilling and unable to engage the populace. The only nations we can push around on the battle field are the likes of Haiti or Panama. We lost in Vietnam, ran hide in Lebanon, backed down from Cuba and in no way could we face off with Russia or China in any conventional conflict.
American's are asked daily to kiss the ass of the military... Support the troops, Veteran's Day parades, color guards, positive media spin, Marine One...
Why? If the US Military was so awe inspiring fucking great why the 24/7/365 sales pitch?
For $2,700 a year I'd expect us to place a better product on the field.
Frank Zappa - Make A Jazz Noise Here
... a model of efficiency where hard work and talent always rise to the top.
Just ask its most avid proponents - those born into it. /snark
Please, go Galt. All of you. It will be difficult to survive without the genius of men like George W. Bush or Bill Kristol, but we'll try. Just go Galt, pleasepleaseplease.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
is always more expensive than preventing it.
Can I withhold $2,700 from my income tax because I don't want my tax dollars paying for something I think is immoral. You know, like the anti-choice crowd gets to ban abortion coverage because they don't approve.
because for as many tax revolt talkers that dump tea, I don't recall anyone coming to the aid of a countryman by the name of Wesley Snipes.
appropriation bill: we would like an amendment to the next spending bill which prohibits the use of public funds to conduct abortions on live people in Afghanistan. I am sure the pro-life contingent will not have any problem getting behind that, right?
And I am sure the Dems will make a point that they can't pass the next military budget unless the amendment is ratified and they get 60 votes in the senate.
I am further confident in Obama's leadership skills to come through and fully compromise with us on that point. Just like he does with all those wonderful pro-lifers in the right for whose feelings and needs he cares so much about...
I don't mean to sound thick, but how can you just lose $2.3 trillion dollars? Seriously... how does that much money become lost? Stolen... I'd understand that; lost... not so much!
How can so much money just vanish without any accountability? Mindboggling.
Oh, and the timing of Rumsfeld's announcement is highly suspicious.
budgetary "misplacement" by the pentagon, right before 9/11?
but I wouldn't be surprised in the least.
Comments are closed on this entry