• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. military criticized for purchase of Russian copters for Afghan air corps

They did with Reagan. "Reagan cut taxes and cut spending", completely forgetting that the military is spending...

And they also forget that actual domestic spending for non-military didn't significently change. I saw this one site which did per capita non-military domestic spending and Carter was actually lower then Reagan. That's HILARIOUS.

IMO, the only reason Reagan is so liked is because of his persona. Well that and his timing at the end of the Cold War.
 
And they also forget that actual domestic spending for non-military didn't significently change. I saw this one site which did per capita non-military domestic spending and Carter was actually lower then Reagan. That's HILARIOUS.

IMO, the only reason Reagan is so liked is because of his persona. Well that and his timing at the end of the Cold War.

And, even more of the, "anything Republican/Right Wing/Conservative is cocked up", number. Who was it complaining yesterday about Obama bashing? Was that you, or someone else? 'Twas you, wasn't it?
 
So you approve of the government spending money to stimulate the economy?

I approv of the government spending money on the military and agree that it helps th economy. However, the money has to come from the private sector to do so; a place that the government can't spend money to stimulate.
 
And, even more of the, "anything Republican/Right Wing/Conservative is cocked up", number.

I hardly consider someone who flooded an already inflationary market with more money to be Conservative. Conservatives are suppose to protect savings and fight inflation. Not boost it to new highs. Oh wait. I forgot, you don't know what inflation is.

Who was it complaining yesterday about Obama bashing? Was that you, or someone else? 'Twas you, wasn't it?

Incorrect. I was complaining about double standards. And you ignored how I blamed Clinton and Gringrich for the current mess because it's easier for you to sustain your ideology then actually address what people said.
 
I approv of the government spending money on the military and agree that it helps th economy. However, the money has to come from the private sector to do so; a place that the government can't spend money to stimulate.

Okay, I think I asked you this before and you ran as fast you could,

But....how did Lockheed Martin, for former McDonnell Douglas and Raytheon to name a few got so big? after all, you say that goverment cannot spend money to stimulate them, so how they get so big? Furthermore, how did agricultural giants like ADM get so big without massive corporate welfare?

(hint: it's time for you to leave the thread)
 
Okay, I think I asked you this before and you ran as fast you could,

But....how did Lockheed Martin, for former McDonnell Douglas and Raytheon to name a few got so big? after all, you say that goverment cannot spend money to stimulate them, so how they get so big? Furthermore, how did agricultural giants like ADM get so big without massive corporate welfare?

(hint: it's time for you to leave the thread)


How did you, "got", so good at changing the subject?

Now, on to the bigger question: where did the money come from? It was tax money, right?

Again, the government can't create wealth, nor jobs.
 
And that has what to do with anything?

Care to take on the task of answering where the stimulus money comes from? hmmm???

Well he was CEO of Halliburton a big recipient of government monies.
 
Well he was CEO of Halliburton a big recipient of government monies.

Oh, that bull****, again? Nevermind then. Shoulda known I was wasting my time asking for an honest answer. We all know how Libbos hate anyone who has made more money than Obama thinks they should.
 
Oh, that bull****, again? Nevermind then. Shoulda known I was wasting my time asking for an honest answer. We all know how Libbos hate anyone who has made more money than Obama thinks they should.

Well then stop with the bull that government can not create wealth.
 
How did you, "got", so good at changing the subject?

You changed the subject.

Now, on to the bigger question: where did the money come from? It was tax money, right?

So therefore you don't want to answer my questions because you know if you did, you'd have to admit you were wrong.

Got it.

Again, the government can't create wealth, nor jobs.

So you just think that the large defense contractors got rich by selling lollipops?

Okay, so tell me, all of the applied materials NASA discovered have added nothing to the wealth of the country? Right, after all, you say that government cannot create wealth. So All of the wealth represented by new fanged technology from NASA isn't actually real then? (you'd stop getting mocked like this if you dropped such asinine views)
 
Last edited:
Criticism is for those on the armchair. We needed those helicopters. My company uses them regular because I can't get air support as I need it.

By the way. Great to be back.
 
Oh, by the way. Great to be back after my 2nd banning. *winks* Alls well in Afghanistan despite what the peeps in media tell ya. Much more to tell, but, I ain't tellin' first. *winks*

Wait for US Geological survey report, then wonder, "Oh, so that is why we are there."

Ha-ha. Whoooooo-ah!
 
Last edited:
Oh, by the way. Great to be back after my 2nd banning. *winks* Alls well in Afghanistan despite what the peeps in media tell ya. Much more to tell, but, I ain't tellin' first. *winks*

Wait for US Geological survey report, then wonder, "Oh, so that is why we are there."

Ha-ha. Whoooooo-ah!

We heard about that. Welcome back.
 
Um...NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes. You keep changing the subject to avoid admitting you are wrong.

You changed the subject first to whether or not the government can stimulate the economy: http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...opters-afghan-air-corps-3.html#post1058814926

Then you changed it when challenged to where the money came from:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...opters-afghan-air-corps-4.html#post1058814956

Now you are changing it to the issue of endless money:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...opters-afghan-air-corps-5.html#post1058815012

You constantly change the subject every time you get challenged.
 
O'rly?

You can buy 3 Mi-17s for the price of a single blackhawk.

As opposed to how many UH-1 Iroquois Huey's?

Furthermore, delays in training aren't helping

If you can fly a helicopter you can fly a huey.

and shipping these things would be a colossal pain.

How much of a pain is it to put some boxes on a cargo plane?
 
How does buying used American choppers create jobs in America? They're already built. There's no chopper dealership that will make a few bucks selling them. The spare parts are already stacked in warehouses, already built. Anything they need over there they'll be going from stock or building themselves.

This thread is a great way to find the true partisans.

edit: Unless you want the Afghanis flying brand new state of the art America hardware... at many times the price. So much for too much spending!
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom