Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
February 14, 2012 - 6:08am
#1
Obama proposes $800 million to aid 'Arab spring'
Loudspeakers Amplification | Digital Sources Analog Sources Featured | Accessories Music |
Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | Analog Sources Accessories Featured | Music Columns Retired Columns | Show Reports | Features Latest News Community | Resources Subscriptions |
Sure, why not! What the fuck. I get nothing. They get $800 million for crimes against humanity.
You'd think we'd have learned a lesson after giving 3 billion dollar to Afghanistan during the Mujahideen era that something like this will probably bite us in the ass. but don't say i didn't warn ya.
You make a good point. Especially from somebody I would guess was just a kid at the time. Good job.
Exactly! That 3 billion given to Afghanistan was a joke! Unfortunately, the joke was on the American taxpayer. Which brings me to another point, during this so-called Arab spring, the radical organization called The Muslim Brotherhood rushed into Egypt to take over, and there was NEVER any question from ANY Obama Administration official; primarily, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, just who and what was behind the 'Arab spring' uprisings. All we heard was over-whelming support for the uprisings from the current Administration.
Funny thing, Wasn't it the liberals that were complaining about George W. Bushs' 'nation building' venture in Iraq? And rightly so in my opinion. So where is the outrage by the liberals for Obama's 'nation building' efforts? Moreover, while the current administration is cutting our military force world-wide, the same administration is empowering our enemies by funding them.
Back (many years ago) in a basic economics class we were taught:
1) Don't lend/give away money you can afford to loose.
2) Don't be a debtor.
3) Control your money, don't let your money control you.
This was taught in an elementary school. It's just common sense. Please excuse my logic, I forgot of whom we were speaking.
Yes. Now if we could get the self-appointed masterminds in government to accept these basic known facts, budgetary issues like spending $2.00 for every $1.00 taken in would not be a factor. Unfortunately, the global social engineers don't give a flying fuck about our collapsing economy and the extraordinary debt thay are incurring.
Remember back in Oct. 2008, it was Obama the wealth re-distributor who stated:
"My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody. I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
Obama would have certainly made Marx and Engels proud.
on the topic of being world nanny/world police, my roommate said he was upset that Obama has not yet sent troops to Syria to stop the violence against civilians there.
as armchair politicians, what course of action would you take? would you step in at this point as the United States, or would you seek allies to help stop the violence but thus risking more civilian deaths as the clock ticks away...
It doesn't really matter what our government states because it will not be an open book no matter who is in office.
NATO did a good job in Libya without much assistance from the U.S.A. Let NATO take care of the problem and secure the Mediterranean Sea. We have the Persian Gulf, Iraq, and Afghanistan. In between is Iran. So we have our own plans right now.
As for internal strife in these countries; is it really any of our business to intrude on them killing each other? I say let the invisible hand of supply and demand take care of itself in places like Syria and so forth. Nevetheless, I would love to be skinny like most of them but without all the death and flies and shit.
I agree with Lamont. NATO should intervene if there is to be any action taken against Syria.
A couple of reasons:
1. A formal declaration of war should be declared under the war powers act of the United States Constitution if the U.S. is to intervene. The Constitution does not give the Government the authority to 'police' the world in the name of 'peace keeping.'
2. Muslims are killing Muslims (civilian deaths). They have always been killing each other since the beginning of time, and intervention from the U.S. or any other Country will not make them stop. The muslim religion (Islam) is the foundation for these mideast uprisings and subsequent killings of their own people. If NATO wants to intervene, go ahead.
3. The Obama administration has defunded the military to a point that we cannot fight two wars at the same time if we needed to. ex: Japan and Germany. The Pentagon; for a long time, has employed the strategy of adequately funding the military to fight two wars simultaneously if needed, ie: Japan and Germany. This is only but one example of American exceptionalism when it comes to protecting it's citizens from enemies foreign and domestic, and has set the U.S. apart from other countries. Unfortunately when it comes to cutting government spending, liberals immediately start cutting the military first instead of the millions upon millions of dollars that fund the ever expanding governmental bureaucracies in our massive, bloated government.
Providing a strong military is the one thing the Government has the authority and responsibility to do for it's citizens. Instead, this administration wants to slash the military, which is a given whenever Democrats are in the White House.