Devil Wasp you posted:

"Maybe we should save money by cutting back the funding we give the UN, we are one nation, yet we pay 25% of their bill. "

I cant argue that one against you ..capital olde chap ..just capital.!!!

Also agree with SNAFUs reasoning..bravo.

Makes me think of a double standard as pertains to the concept of
" a heavy progressive and graduated income tax...or is it dues payments.????" What do they call that ..like the second plank of the manifesto???

Thanks,
Orangetom

I meant West Point...for some reason I get you two mixed up ..my apologies.

Orangetom

Originally posted by snafu7700
wait a minute....just so i understand you....

its ok that we are paying 25% of the UN's bill (and i'm taking his word on that figure because i havent had time to check it), because our economy is so much larger than everyone else's, but its not ok that we spend more than anyone else on our military because our economy is so much larger?

edited for typos

[edit on 6-11-2005 by snafu7700]

You agreed to the terms, frankly its there plain and simple.
BTW, the largest supplier of troops was pakistan I believe...the US I believe sent 100 men, the UK sent more...

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Maybe we should save money by cutting back the funding we give the UN, we are one nation, yet we pay 25% of their bill.

With the amount of money saved that way, you couldn't even cover a single week of the Iraqi occupation. By the way, make that 22% ever since Clinton tried to reduce the bill while as Japan pays about 20% of the budget with no permanent seat and no veto power.

Originally posted by devilwasp

You agreed to the terms, frankly its there plain and simple.
BTW, the largest supplier of troops was pakistan I believe...the US I believe sent 100 men, the UK sent more...

yeah, but you didnt answer my question. the whole contention of this thread is that the US Navy is too large. its ok that we foot 25% of the UN's bill because we have the worlds largest economy, but its not ok that we have the worlds largest Navy because we have the world's largest economy?

there's a word for that i think....what is it? oh yeah.....HYPOCRICY.

oh, and i didnt say anything about troops....that was westpoint.

Originally posted by snafu7700
yeah, but you didnt answer my question. the whole contention of this thread is that the US Navy is too large. its ok that we foot 25% of the UN's bill because we have the worlds largest economy, but its not ok that we have the worlds largest Navy because we have the world's largest economy?

No the US navy has everyright and still does have the largest MILITARY
[qoute]
there's a word for that i think....what is it? oh yeah.....HYPOCRICY.

Gee I didnt know the UN was now limiting the size of your navy..

oh, and i didnt say anything about troops....that was westpoint.

I know, but the point still remains

Originally posted by devilwasp

Gee I didnt know the UN was now limiting the size of your navy..

lol...good try. no where in any of my posts did i suggest the UN was involved in our military. the arguments have been that the US's navy, and military in general, is too large. i am merely stating that by your own argument here:

Originally posted by devilwasp
Yeah your also the biggest and most powerful, your country agreed to the terms which state that

...if we can pay 25% of the UN's bill because of how "big and powerful" we are, then it is reasonable for our navy and our military to be larger than everyone else's. you disagree?

I know, but the point still remains

then ask west point...he's the one that made the comment.