The Political Discussion Thread

[Falcon Horus]

This would be a good thing to keep in mind whenever liberal democrats propose any sort of freebie. SOMEBODY has to pay for it, and that somebody is the middle or lower class working stiff, one way or another.

Trump ain't paying for it, that's for sure.

[thekillman]

Oh but of course....... And anyone that doesn't agree with that side is an elitist if you don't vote Trump.

That's how it seems to work, yea.

So, who's scarier? The man-child in the white house who dreams of gutting the US military, or Trump?

The USA spends the most money in the world on defense, and not all of it makes sense (for example, out-dated nuclear missile silos). You can gut your military by quite a large factor before it ever becomes a problem. And wasn't it trumps dream to reduce US involvement in the world? Don't you think that will cause gutting of the US military? Isn't "warhawk" Clinton the better option there?

[Coco Pops]

The USA spends the most money in the world on defense, and not all of it makes sense (for example, out-dated nuclear missile silos). You can gut your military by quite a large factor before it ever becomes a problem. And wasn't it trumps dream to reduce US involvement in the world? Don't you think that will cause gutting of the US military? Isn't "warhawk" Clinton the better option there?

Ssssshhhhhh don't bring logic and sense into this discussion.

[Annoyed]

The USA spends the most money in the world on defense, and not all of it makes sense (for example, out-dated nuclear missile silos). You can gut your military by quite a large factor before it ever becomes a problem. And wasn't it trumps dream to reduce US involvement in the world? Don't you think that will cause gutting of the US military? Isn't "warhawk" Clinton the better option there?

You think it's a good idea to gut our nuclear deterrent capability? And how are you going to convince the other nuclear powers to do the same?

The military is already starving; for example, there have been numerous articles about not having enough parts for military aircraft, leaving a fair number of military aircraft unable to fly.

We had the same problem in the late 70's, when President Peanut Farmer gutted the military budget.

[thekillman]

You think it's a good idea to gut our nuclear deterrent capability? And how are you going to convince the other nuclear powers to do the same?

A lot of the US nuclear launch capability is very old. It would be better to close a bunch of old ones and keep fewer (newer) ones in better condition. You know, so the missiles may actually be launched in stead of some piece of old irreplaceable hardware failing.

You also don't need 40 000 nukes by the way, so you can safely disarm to a much more manageable level. Disarmament is more about reducing access to nukes than removing our capacity to annihilate the earth 10x over.

The military is already starving; for example, there have been numerous articles about not having enough parts for military aircraft, leaving a fair number of military aircraft unable to fly.

Last time i heard, the Warthog basically cannibalizes old planes for parts because they weren't made anymore. Maybe the US military can be streamlined on such fronts? Of course it would help if replacement craft were actually good *Cough*JSF*Cough*. (NB: the JSF can't replace the Warthog but you get the idea)>

[mad_gater]

That's how it seems to work, yea.


The USA spends the most money in the world on defense, and not all of it makes sense (for example, out-dated nuclear missile silos). You can gut your military by quite a large factor before it ever becomes a problem. And wasn't it trumps dream to reduce US involvement in the world? Don't you think that will cause gutting of the US military? Isn't "warhawk" Clinton the better option there?

or maybe they should be doing a better job of nixing those strange military supply requisitions....like for example $500 "hammer" and stuff like that

[mad_gater]

Trump ain't paying for it, that's for sure.

yes.....precisely why I advocate for a simple flat tax rather than the bloated tax code we have now....everyone pays x-percent of their income, no ifs, ands, or buts....such a simple system we could probably do away with the IRS

[mad_gater]

A war, one Obama did not start.

may not have started it but didn't do a good job of remaining neutral either, did he?

[SoulReaver]

And anyone that doesn't agree with that side is an elitist if you don't vote Trump.

Trump supporters calling his opponents "elitists" is the real irony

[Womble]

Come on man, you know how bargaining and diplomacy work, you ask for everything and compromise down.

Not with Obama in the White House. When you bargain with Obama, you ask for everything and then push for more. Like the Iran deal.

[garhkal]

The military is already starving; for example, there have been numerous articles about not having enough parts for military aircraft, leaving a fair number of military aircraft unable to fly.

And imo that's cause of "Shiney-new-toy itus".. They seem to have no problem paying WAY more than originally agreed on for project after project many of which seem to never get off the table, than they do in keeping what they already HAVE working properly.

yes.....precisely why I advocate for a simple flat tax rather than the bloated tax code we have now....everyone pays x-percent of their income, no ifs, ands, or buts....such a simple system we could probably do away with the IRS

I am down with that. Everyone ponies up, everyone pays.. NO deductions of any sort.. Period!

[pookey]

or maybe they should be doing a better job of nixing those strange military supply requisitions....like for example $500 "hammer" and stuff like that

Somebody watched Independence Day

[aretood2]

Seeing as how his business are multi-billion endeavors, 1 bil loss in a year is not outrageous..
Heck look at all the car recalls we have had over the past 5+ years, and how much THAT has been costing all those automakers..

I'd buy that if it was a 1 billion dollar loss over the course of several years. But this was one year. I'm sorry, Trump's businesses (with their multitude of bankruptcies and failures from airlines to schools) are simply not worth enough for this to be a small issue. I mean, do you even have anything to base your assertion off or are you pulling that out of your rear end?

You sure do seem to put as much faith in Trump as I do in Jesus...

or maybe they should be doing a better job of nixing those strange military supply requisitions....like for example $500 "hammer" and stuff like that

The military has complained about how it is forced to spend money on things it doesn't want or need to the point where it can't maintain all of its stuff. Ike warned about this when he talked about the industrial-military complex.

[Gatefan1976]

Not with Obama in the White House. When you bargain with Obama, you ask for everything and then push for more. Like the Iran deal.

Errr, no.

[Gatefan1976]

may not have started it but didn't do a good job of remaining neutral either, did he?

Yeah, because republicans wouldn't have crucified him for not doing something.
Obama is the guy Republicans blame for -everything-, no matter what he does or does not do.
Republicans got you into an illegal war, It's his fault
The bill for that war has to be paid for, it's his fault.
Obamacare, gutted by Republicans, his fault.
ISIS, his fault.
Not taking troops out of Iraq, his fault.
Taking troops out of Iraq, his fault.
GFC, his fault.
Iran deal (of which America was one of 6 countries), his fault.

Any hair brained tinfoil coated conspiracy theory knocked out by the right, suckers buy it like it's candy and they don't bother to find out if any of it is true, better yet, call -facts- left wing bias.