- Joined
- Apr 13, 2011
- Messages
- 34,951
- Reaction score
- 16,311
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Socialist
This isn’t even logical enough to bother with. I have no clue what your point is.
Corporations=SUCK
This isn’t even logical enough to bother with. I have no clue what your point is.
Corporations=SUCK
Why must we? Were in no serious danger what so ever! Were not in danger! If we wanna start cutting defense lets cut this.
Yea remote so why do we have to waste tax payer money on this? I seriously think they wont give weapons to anyone that wants to bomb us.. Sure Iran talks a lot of big game but in all serious do you think they are actually going to use these weapons?
Oh, and that has what to do with the missile defense system exactly, other than your hatred of everything America?
How is social programs considered wasteful but this not?
Why do we really "need" this?
Is Russia, Canada, China, or Iran going to invade us soon or are we on the threat of being invaded by them?
The threat of being “invaded” by a missile is real but I wouldn’t put Russia or China very high on the list of possible threats and only a buffoon would consider Canada a threat.
As to why this we should fund this vs social programs: Government is wasteful no matter what it does. Social programs aren’t constitutionally mandated but programs like this are. Besides, even if the government were capable of running every social program under the sun with 99% efficiency, they would all be worthless if/and when a nuke hit a major city.
Take your buddy Hugo Chavez as an example. If he builds utopia in Venezuela but the USA decides to bomb him into the stone age, his utopian programs will be pretty worthless at that point won’t they?
They won't have to steal it. Corporations are loyal to the strong currency and the renminbi is really comin' on. Corporations are in business to make money and if the Chinese offer the top dollar, they will own the technology. That is the American Corporate way. They don't live and breathe and I don't notice anything about patriotism in an accounting ledger. The sad facts!
Still we already spend 687,105,000,000, which is 4.7% of the GDP. China comes in second wayyyy behind us 114,300,000,000 which is only 2.2% of their GDP. Do we really "need" to do this. No matter what it states in the constitution that does not excuse the grave amount we spend on defense. Hell when our country was on the red button during the height of the cold way we did not even spend this much!
American corporations that work in the American defense sector aren’t about to sell America out to the highest bidder. You have some serious issues if you think otherwise.
How can we teachers teach kids when their parents don't push their kids to do homework and instead let their kids play basketball all hours of the night???
Here we go with "I hate everything America" talk again :roll
Work on this some, dude.
Social programs aren't constitutionally allowed to the federal government.
Period.
National defense is required.
That's utter bull****. Loral Corp under umm.. Bernie Schwartz gave China MIRV technology simply to close the deal on a single satellite launch, and the Clinton administations Department of Commerce, in exchange for campaign cash to the DNC, gave it the go ahead.
Missile defense systems are the most idiotic waste of taxpayer money imaginable. These kind of programs should be the first thing on the chopping block when we're looking at budget cuts. The threat from nuclear weapons doesn't come from nation-states with ICBMs, it comes from terrorists smuggling them into New York Harbor.
Ok, what do you love about America?
Thanks for the inaccurate opinion. The government, which you love and trust whole heartedly because you are a liberal, disagrees with you.
GPS_Flex said:Oh, news flash for the politically numb: the threat isn’t one dimensional. We live in the same four dimensional world that those who want to kill us live in. Thank God you aren’t in charge of defending America.
Missile defense systems are the most idiotic waste of taxpayer money imaginable. These kind of programs should be the first thing on the chopping block when we're looking at budget cuts. The threat from nuclear weapons doesn't come from nation-states with ICBMs, it comes from terrorists smuggling them into New York Harbor.
We need to do a cost/benefit analysis of these sort of things.
You mean that it would be more cost effective to rebuild New York City and repopulate it with clones of the people murdered in a ten megaton blast than to invest in the technology needed to protect the people in the first place.
Mayor Snorkum said:you're also neglecting the fact that irrational nations like North Korea and Iran are working their asses off to develop viable weapons delivery systems for the nuclear weapons they are building.
Mayor Snorkum said:Then there's the very good chance of a new caliphate arising in the Midde East.
Mayor Snorkum said:So, you don't want the nation to drill it's own oil domestically
Mayor Snorkum said:What should the United States do when the Middle East plays "Jimmy Carter Reprise" and shuts down the oil, and decides that this would be a good time to test their new rockets out?
Mayor Snorkum said:When the flames are lit under the bomb, it's too late to start researching how to shoot it down.
Unfortunately for whatever your desires are, and Obama's, the United States has developed an amazingly functional 747-based laser system for shooting down incoming presents, and it's also developing other systems as well, becuase the first priorty of the Constitution is the defense of the nation, not denial.
Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, our cultural diversity, democracy, our republic, our land, the idea that we will always have a say in this country, our constitution... Do you seriously want me to say more?
Okay, let's.
Cost of replacing New York City: Ten trillion dollars.
Cost of replacing New York City's population: Priceless.
Cost of protecting New York from ICBMs: $100 billion give or take some.
Mayor Snorkum said:Chances of terrorists (or, "freedom fighters" for you, since you like to pretend that the word "terrorist" is only applied to people we don't like. The Mayor won't like people who attack New York with atom bombs, but the Mayor isn't willing to presume for your position) stealing or being given a nuclear missile to play with is greater than zero.
Mayor Snorkum said:Chances of an upstart nation with new toys being willing to attack a prostrate US? Good.
Nope, I'm saying that it would be more cost-effective to take all that money we're spending on a retarded missile defense system, and instead increase port security, combat nuclear proliferation, and improve intelligence gathering so that we aren't the victims of a nuclear terrorist attack.
It doesn't change the fact that they aren't going to strike the United States with nuclear weapons. With both of those countries (as well as Pakistan), the greatest nuclear threat comes from the possibility of nukes ending up in the hands of terrorists as a result of political instability.
Funny, that.
It's been noted that the terrorists are not stupid, just barbaric.
They study us and strike our weaknesses. If we choose to select one mode of attack for defense and ignore the other, the enemy will choose the open door.
That arithmetic doesn't take a college diploma in double-speak to figure out.
Mayor Snorkum said:Did Allah write you a telegram promising you that his prophets won't attack the United States with the holy cleansing fire of fusing hydrogen? You stated a fact, what's your basis?
Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, our cultural diversity, democracy, our republic, our land, the idea that we will always have a say in this country, our constitution... Do you seriously want me to say more?