Now that we are getting out of Iraq, we can decrease defense spending right? (soldier, suspect)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm forgetting nothing. Congress is as guilty as the Executive Branch for allowing illegal participation in foreign conflicts. Nowhere in my post did I suggest Congress should be given a free pass.
As far as the defense budget goes I'm in favor of replenishing the munitions and supplies that have been expended in the last 10yrs of poorly managed conflicts while refraining from future attempts at nation building.
Is there a reason you opted to skirt the issue of the President involving our military in unconstitutional conflicts?
The reason is that I would have to look it up. I try not to post on things that I am not certain is correct. The President has the power to send troops and involve the U.S. in conflicts within a certain period of time. I am not sure how long that is, and I am not sure whether he exceeded that time or not, so I could not tell you whether it was unconstitutional or not.
I think it is either 90 or 180 days. I am just not sure. After that, he has to get congressional approval. At least that is my understanding.
The reason is that I would have to look it up. I try not to post on things that I am not certain is correct. The President has the power to send troops and involve the U.S. in conflicts within a certain period of time. I am not sure how long that is, and I am not sure whether he exceeded that time or not, so I could not tell you whether it was unconstitutional or not.
I think it is either 90 or 180 days. I am just not sure. After that, he has to get congressional approval. At least that is my understanding.
There is also a clause that specifies there must be a direct threat to national security for the President to act unilaterally. There was no direct threat from the Libyan hostilities.
My point is you seem willing to turn a blind eye to abuses that occur under a Democrat administration while attempting to assign blame to conservatives.
I'm in full agreement that there is substantial excess spending with regard to defense. That said, if your intent is to reign in the excess spending rather than attempt to score partisan points you need to direct the blame where it's due rather than attempting to assign the bulk of it to one political party.
Democrats share every bit as much blame for the current excesses as Republicans.
There is also a clause that specifies there must be a direct threat to national security for the President to act unilaterally. There was no direct threat from the Libyan hostilities.
My point is you seem willing to turn a blind eye to abuses that occur under a Democrat administration while attempting to assign blame to conservatives.
I'm in full agreement that there is substantial excess spending with regard to defense. That said, if your intent is to reign in the excess spending rather than attempt to score partisan points you need to direct the blame where it's due rather than attempting to assign the bulk of it to one political party.
Democrats share every bit as much blame for the current excesses as Republicans.
You must not read most of my posts. I am an anti-interventionalist unless we are directly threatened. Saying whether and an act is constitutional and whether that I support it or not are two different things. While Obama's actions may or may not have been constitutional in Libya I do not support them. I do not support still being in Afghanistan either. I am in disagreement with Obama and congress on these points.
I have been very vocal in my disapproval of Obama on still being in ME for this long. I have also been vocal that we are going to be getting out and I support Obama in that regard.
You must not read most of my posts. I am an anti-interventionalist unless we are directly threatened. Saying whether and an act is constitutional and whether that I support it or not are two different things. While Obama's actions may or may not have been constitutional in Libya I do not support them. I do not support still being in Afghanistan either. I am in disagreement with Obama and congress on these points.
I have been very vocal in my disapproval of Obama on still being in ME for this long. I have also been vocal that we are going to be getting out and I support Obama in that regard.
Then why start a thread that seems directed at focusing the majority of the blame on conservatives?
There will be no meaningful changes in government as long as those in power remain successful in keeping mindless partisan contention at the forefront of political discussion.
As an aside and in spite of my dislike of Bush, the planned troop withdrawal is in keeping with his projected timelines. Obama is by no means deserving of full credit for bringing the troops home.
Then why start a thread that seems directed at focusing the majority of the blame on conservatives?
There will be no meaningful changes in government as long as those in power remain successful in keeping mindless partisan contention at the forefront of political discussion.
As an aside and in spite of my dislike of Bush, the planned troop withdrawal is in keeping with his projected timelines. Obama is by no means deserving of full credit for bringing the troops home.
Conservatives harp on cutting govt., however have shown no desire to cut military spending. I have not seen any budget originating out of Republican controlled house that seeks to cut military spending. I am talking real cuts in spending and not cuts in projected increases.
Conservatives harp on cutting govt., however have shown no desire to cut military spending. I have not seen any budget originating out of Republican controlled house that seeks to cut military spending. I am talking real cuts in spending and not cuts in projected increases.
Conservatives support Ron Paul, your talking about Neo Conservatives...
Then there's Hillary and Barack, are they talking about cutting anything at all from anything???
All Im hearing is we have to keep borrowing and spending $$$ from just about all of em...
Conservatives harp on cutting govt., however have shown no desire to cut military spending. I have not seen any budget originating out of Republican controlled house that seeks to cut military spending. I am talking real cuts in spending and not cuts in projected increases.
Spending needs to be cut in far more areas than just the military.
I believe your focus on this issue is more than a bit myopic and largely partisan in nature.
Conservatives support Ron Paul, your talking about Neo Conservatives...
We can agree on that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
