View Poll Results: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

Voters
130. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    1 0.77%
  • No

    110 84.62%
  • Yes, but only Special Forces troops

    6 4.62%
  • No. Maybe in the future.

    13 10.00%
Page 16 of 24 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 231

Thread: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

  1. #151
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,142

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    We no longer have a national debt problem?
    no. it's simply that the cost for utilizing airstrikes in Syria isn't significant, and the potential savings are immense.

    "This national myth is my all time favorite. Not only is Social Security NOT BROKE–IT IS THE ONLY FEDERAL PROGRAM WHICH IS FULLY FUNDED. I repeat–SOCIAL SECURITY IS FULLY FUNDED, ALWAYS HAS BEEN. (Source: Understanding Social Security in One Easy Lesson | Mother Jones) As for the claim that Social Security absorbs most of our GDP–that is patently false. Social Security presently costs approximately 4.5% of GDP and is estimated to increase to 6% of GDP by fiscal year 2030. (Source : Understanding Social Security in One Easy Lesson | Mother Jones) That is a far cry from the GOP and Wall Street claims that some 80% or more of GDP will be sucked dry by Social Security. In fact, the federal government OWES THE SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUND more than $2.669 TRILLION DOLLARS, according to the report issued by the Financial Management Service of the US Department of Treasury. The Medicare Trust Fund (hospital and supplementary medical) is also owed some $347, 521 BILLION DOLLARS by the feds. (Source : Social Security Institute | Trust Fund Bait and Switch) This was revealed by the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare. Somehow, this ‘inconvenient truth’ has escaped both the President’s and Congress’ attention. The real problem lies in the fact that the government has continually raided the fund all of us have paid into–to subsidize corporate tax breaks, unbridled Pentagon spending and what has become routine Wall Street bankster raids on the public dime."

    Lies Linking Social Security to the National Debt | MyFDL
    right. I think I'll go with the CBO and common damn sense rather than a liberal blogger using Mother Jones in his desperation to defend a failing entitlement system and pretend there is no little man behind the green curtain.

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor
    So they don't count interest paid to the SS Fund as part of the SS Fund even though those are T-bills sitting in there?
    given that drawing funds from the General Fund is drawing funds from the General Funds, no. Nor are those Treasuries sitting in the SS vault - they are, after all, non-tradeable. Else the SS Fund could have traded them long ago for something that would have actually secured a source of funding.



    SS could be fully funded by drawing out it's IOU's from the General Fund. For the next 20 years. If we were sitting on a $2.6 Trillion Surplus.

    Unfortunately, we aren't sitting on a $2.6 Trillion Surplus, and the hope is that the country will survive for more than just the next two decades. So the reality is that SS is currently running a deficit, forcing it to lean on the General Fund, and that when Medicare goes down (in ten years), it will drag SS with it.

  2. #152
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    no. it's simply that the cost for utilizing airstrikes in Syria isn't significant, and the potential savings are immense.
    Who has said our only involvement would be airsrikes? The Pentagon has said that ground troops would be necessary to secure the nuclear facilities.


    right. I think I'll go with the CBO and common damn sense rather than a liberal blogger using Mother Jones in his desperation to defend a failing entitlement system and pretend there is no little man behind the green curtain.
    Mother Jones says the same thing that Mother Jones says, that SS has a $2.6 trillion dollar surplus.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  3. #153
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    no. it's simply that the cost for utilizing airstrikes in Syria isn't significant, and the potential savings are immense.
    Who has said our only involvement would be airsrikes? The Pentagon has said that ground troops would be necessary to secure the nuclear facilities.


    right. I think I'll go with the CBO and common damn sense rather than a liberal blogger using Mother Jones in his desperation to defend a failing entitlement system and pretend there is no little man behind the green curtain.
    As of April 2012, Investments held by the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance Trust Funds:
    "
    2,696,489,127

    "
    Time series investments held at end of month
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  4. #154
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,047

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    The U.S. Federal Fund’s annual deficits are the sole cause of the increases in the national debt. The two largest disbursements are interest on the federal debt ($400 billion) and the defense budget ($800 billion), which combined is 44 percent of the total. Obviously, nothing can be done about the interest expense. The defense budget is another matter."
    So do we take the body armor, bullets, and maintenance parts away from the troop...or do we get the trillion dollar Defense Contracts under control? I'll tell you what they traditionally do.

    No Senator lobbies for the preservaiton of a program that actually locally affects the troop. There's no money in it. But there is plenty of money and jobs in programs like nuclear sub and F/A-22 programs for his state isn't there? This is why they will always strip the military bare while the average American supports cutting the "Defense."
    Last edited by MSgt; 05-09-12 at 06:34 PM.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  5. #155
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by MSgt View Post
    So do we take the body armor, bullets, and maintenance parts away from the troop...or do we get the trillion dollar Defense Contracts under control? I'll tell you what they traditionally do.

    No Senator lobbies for the preservaiton of a program that actually locally affects the troop. There's no money in it. But there is plenty of money and jobs in programs like nuclear sub and F/A-22 programs for his state isn't there? This is why they will always strip the military bare while the average American supports cutting the "Defense."
    The Presidents plan is to cut the number of troops since we have ended one war and are ending the second war, cutting our nuclear stockpile, so there should be more body armor to go around. We spend almost as much on military as the rest of the world combined. If we are ever to address our deficit spending, excessive military spending will have to be cut.

    If you are in favor of increasing federal spending and cutting revenues, vote for Romney.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  6. #156
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,047

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    The Presidents plan is to cut the number of troops since we have ended one war and are ending the second war, cutting our nuclear stockpile, so there should be more body armor to go around. We spend almost as much on military as the rest of the world combined. If we are ever to address our deficit spending, excessive military spending will have to be cut.

    If you are in favor of increasing federal spending and cutting revenues, vote for Romney.
    Cutting troop numbers is necessary. The Marine Corps is 30,000 too fat and the Army was fat to begin with. Romney would continue what is already happening. Cutting a nuclear stockpile does nothing but get rid of physical crap already paid for. And there is plenty of body armor now. But you're still not getting this. In the end, they will take from the troop and continue spending on Contracts that have long outlived their expiration dates. We spend more on our "Defense" than any other because we feed state businesses. Like I stated, when troops crossed the Iraqi border in 2003 without body armor and torn NBC suits, programs like the F-A-22 (never to be used for ground support) were getting trillions.

    The idea that "cutting defense spending" is going to be well thought out is criminal. It will be as it always is. The troop will suffer, while state business continue getting checks cut.

    Oh...and they will cut the throats of teachers as well. It doesn't matter who is in the White House. They all seek the protection of their states and the Contracts/Social Programs therein. All else is game.....which is education and the actual military.

    Are you voting for Obama because he is "liberal?" Perhaps the idea that we have to vote for either the "liberal" or the "conservative" is why we the people deserve what we get. In my opinion, I deserve beter than OPbama and Romney. I certainly didn't do my job for two decades so my country could be in the hands of these kinds of people.
    Last edited by MSgt; 05-11-12 at 11:38 AM.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  7. #157
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,574

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by MSgt View Post
    Cutting troop numbers is necessary. The Marine Corps is 30,000 too fat and the Army was fat to begin with. Romney would continue what is already happening. Cutting a nuclear stockpile does nothing but get rid of physical crap already paid for. And there is plenty of body armor now. But you're still not getting this. In the end, they will take from the troop and continue spending on Contracts that have long outlived their expiration dates. We spend more on our "Defense" than any other because we feed state businesses. Like I stated, when troops crossed the Iraqi border in 2003 without body armor and torn NBC suits, programs like the F-A-22 (never to be used for ground support) were getting trillions.

    The idea that "cutting defense spending" is going to be well thought out is criminal. It will be as it always is. The troop will suffer, while state business continue getting checks cut.

    Oh...and they will cut the throats of teachers as well. It doesn't matter who is in the White House. They all seek the protection of their states and the Contracts/Social Programs therein. All else is game.....which is education and the actual military.

    Are you voting for Obama because he is "liberal?" Perhaps the idea that we have to vote for either the "liberal" or the "conservative" is why we the people deserve what we get. In my opinion, I deserve beter than OPbama and Romney. I certainly didn't do my job for two decades so my country could be in the hands of these kinds of people.
    Right, and it won't really matter very much which one is elected because (1) there isn't really that much difference between their politics, and (2) nothing is going to change until Congress changes. Those "contracts that have long outlived their expiration dates" will continue because the big donors want them to continue, plain and simple. If we get into another war, and the troops are ill equipped, then there will be another push to increase defense spending, most of which won't go to the troops.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  8. #158
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,142

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by MSgt View Post
    Cutting troop numbers is necessary. The Marine Corps is 30,000 too fat and the Army was fat to begin with. Romney would continue what is already happening.
    and yet, in at least my MOS, apparently this year is going to be another Great SNCO Giveaway. It's almost as if we are trying to get people up into the "retirement secured" ranks before sequestration hits hardest in order to justify the money, rather than the other way round.

    The idea that "cutting defense spending" is going to be well thought out is criminal. It will be as it always is. The troop will suffer, while state business continue getting checks cut.
    True. The F-22 and F-35 won't risk severe cuts. The F-35 has a part made in what - 500 congressional districts? Tuition Assistance for force-professionalization and unit operational funding will get the ax instead.

  9. #159
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    09-10-12 @ 12:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    317

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by MarineTpartier View Post
    I will submit my personal opinion later in the thread. Simple question, complicated issue.
    I'm pretty much trooped out with deployments.

  10. #160
    Professor
    iacardsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Last Seen
    11-24-17 @ 09:51 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,981

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Just when I thought people had decided it was a bad idea to be the world police and people post questions like this -___-
    "Conservatism is the blind and fear-filled worship of dead radicals."
    - Mark Twain
    Run your own nation, play Cybernations.

Page 16 of 24 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •