It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bush asking for $70 billion more to keep war going

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Am i reading this right : seventy Billions ?

I wonder where this amount of bucks would come from: monopoly gains?




posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Conspiriology
 


You are correct- you mentioned Blackwater. It hadn't been part of the discussion that you responded to though, and therefore wasn't relevant.

Soldiers are not hired killers. They are professionals, who sometimes have to kill in combat. They are not hired guns/thugs/murderers as the term hired killer would imply.

Whether the Wahhabists, or any other extreme Islamist sect is following correct doctrine is a moot point. They do follow that way of thinking, and present a threat to anyone that doesn't subscribe to it, be they Christian, Jew, or Muslim(or any other religion for that matter).

Dying in vain to me is tucking tail before the job is complete so that their death was without purpose. Should we have quit in WWII because we were taking a lot of casualties(on many occasions more in one day, than we've taken since '03.)

Arguing about whether we should've have gone in to Iraq is pointless. We are there, so we need to have a responsible exit strategy, not just pulling out without regard for the consequences of doing so.



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueRaja
 


Blueraja,
I can only hope you are polishing up your boots and preparing to deploy for your 4th tour of duty. In my dreams I see you in a Humvee with no up armor protection doing daily convoy escorts in Bagdad. Cause I know a guy like you would want to be "in the sh*t".

You may want to research the UN's position on the use of depleted uranium. Come to think of it ...that might be a better job for you evacuating wounded from equipment which has just been destroyed by DU. Then if your lucky enough to make it back alive you will develop symptoms of heavy metal poisoning perhaps have a deformed child, then you will get very sick and other big men will tell you to stop whining about the VA not providing any benefits for your mystery illness...and on and on and on...



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 02:02 PM
link   
just a little something to think about

this will put the cost of the war at over

500,000,000,000.00

and thats using the governments own accounting. I'm sure it's much much higher. We are approaching the cost per person (including every man woman and even child that just this second came screaming out of the womb) at approximatly 2000.00 each

Wow, talk about being born into original sin



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Leo Strauss
 


?

I'm not sure I'm getting where you're coming from. Which position that I've stated here would elicit that response? I have had a number of friends killed downrange, including several in the unit I was in downrange. Another friend was killed on Memorial Day last year leaving behind a wife and 4 kids. Another was killed 9 days before coming home.
I believe in fully funding the troops downrange, as well as those back home with injuries.



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 02:31 PM
link   
Then you believe in paying people to murder people . You just said so.

Killing someone is killing someone . I don't care what helps you sleep at night.



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by oLDWoRLDDiSoRDeR
 


No- not at all. Where we disagree is how the word kill is used. The word kill is a synonym with homocide. The word murder means unlawful homocide. You obviously believe there is no distinction.

Oh, and I sleep just fine.

[edit on 29-1-2008 by BlueRaja]



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by oLDWoRLDDiSoRDeR
 


'Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.'

—George Orwell

I think that about says it all.



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueRaja
 


We know you do .
Thats whats disturbing. Next thing you know we'll be paying some security firm to go over there and give them free reign.
Where is the line? The accountably? . The humanity?

kill=to end the life of another .
murder=to end the life of another . Without some "reasonable" backing by a flawed law.

If there was so big a difference . Lets let the people that were "killed" argue that point for ya .
Oh wait . Kill and murder are ways of ending a life. And here i though kill was a nice way of saying "hide"
Semantics never won a war.







[edit on 29-1-2008 by oLDWoRLDDiSoRDeR]



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by oLDWoRLDDiSoRDeR
reply to post by BlueRaja
 


We know you do .
Thats whats disturbing. Next thing you know we'll be paying some security firm to go over there and give them free reign.
Where is the line? The accountably? . The humanity?

kill=to end the life of another .
murder=to end the life of another . Without some "reasonable" backing by a flawed law.


Semantics never won a war.



[edit on 29-1-2008 by oLDWoRLDDiSoRDeR]


You're right. Words don't mean anything, and semantics are just an annoyance. I do agree semantics don't win wars. Setting conditions where your enemy can no longer resist you or conduct combat operations, is the preferred method.

If you can't see the distinction between what lawful and unlawful is, I'm not sure what to tell you.



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by COOL HAND
reply to post by oLDWoRLDDiSoRDeR
 


'Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.'

—George Orwell

I think that about says it all.


"War is Peace."

-George Orwell



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueRaja
 


Ok maybe i shoud have worded it as a question . Instead of an attack . And for that im sorry .

Answer me this if you have time.
Off the top of your head name 3 political figures that have served in office.
That you would trust to decide if you live or die. No hypothetical situations.
Just who you trust to decide who lives. And by what terms.

As my argument is . Who should be able to decide which life is more important than the next . And if they do . By what standard should your life be valued by?



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leo Strauss
"War is Peace."
-George Orwell


"Ignorance is Strength"

What is your point?



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 03:22 PM
link   
Just cause the government gave you a license to kill doesnt make it not a mortal sin.

and you dont have to murder to go to the dark place hell etc. the yang to be tortured forever.

you only have to agree with murder.

You can love to kill all the islamic people you want. and your prob jewish.

its pretty much the same thing hitler did to your race. in the 40's

its right cause were doing now right.

and anyone who disagrees is an enemy.

You can call me your foe I hate isreal they stole there land and are bound on nucleur war.

to take back land they lost 2000 years ago.

this does not give you rights to the land. far to long of time has passed for that oppertunity.

I will neve rmurder anyone or condone murder of any person.

And islam people dont suicide bomb cause they get 50 virgins that is a staff writers wet dream.

they suicide bomb because you killed there entire family with a bomb.

what would you do if china dropped a bomb on your mothers house while your wife and 2 children were in the house.

you would prob do the same.

I do not blame them for this I blame my own country.

shooting 8 yr old children in the face.[ Watch the you tube videos its reality]
Does not protect my freedom it never will never has it sonly your sadistic warped mind that this is permitted.

Plain and simple your soul is black and you will be in a dark place forever.

not matter how much the government pays you and what rank you are.

your soul rank is dark and will be in fire forever enjoy.



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by NWOmaskedman
 


I'm not sure if that was directed at me, but you and Oldworldorder are still not getting the point. Homocide isn't legal or illegal because the government says so. Murder is illegal because it's always wrong. Homocide on the other hand isn't always wrong. There's an important distinction needing to be made. No one here is trying to justify murder, or shooting 8yr olds in the face.



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja

You are correct- you mentioned Blackwater. It hadn't been part of the discussion that you responded to though, and therefore wasn't relevant.


Neither were the fireman and police,, until you introduced them. I merely did the same.


Soldiers are not hired killers. They are professionals, who sometimes have to kill in combat.


Soldiers ARE "Hired" (To engage the services of (a person) for a fee; employ: ) by the united states government, then they are trained in a variety of military functions all in the coordinated effort to kill the enemy and yes they are professionals. Yes they sometimes "HAVE" to kill in combat and the REASON they HAVE to,, IS BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE TOLD TO DO BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THEY HIRED THEM FOR AND THAT IS WHY THEY DO IT! Else it would be murder, you DO know the difference? They drive tanks to KILL THE ENEMY. The have field training with weapons M16's 50cal MG sniper training to do what?

KILL THE ENEMY

They wear Kevlar and body armor because they are trying to subjugate a people that want do what?

KILL THE ENEMY

I served six years and got my national defense ribbon over a war that everyone hated and everyone hated us, even Americans hated us.

Raji and I have known lots of soldiers with lots of confirmed kills and ya know what there biggest complaint was getting out?

That they couldn't find much employment because ALL THEY KNEW HOW TO DO WAS WHAT??

Thaaaaat's right,,


KILL THE ENEMY




They are not hired guns/thugs/murderers as the term hired killer would imply.


I don't care what it implies to you raja, If I wanted to say THUG, MURDERER, HITMEN WHATEVER I WOULD HAVE SAID IT, THE SUPERFLUOUS ADDITIONAL "MEANINGS" YOU PLACE ON THE WORDS ARE YOUR OWN, I'M SORRY IF THE PURPOSE OF THE SOLDIER DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH PRESTIGE BUT THATS WHAT THEY ARE.

GOT IT?



Whether the Wahhabists, or any other extreme Islamist sect is following correct doctrine is a moot point. They do follow that way of thinking, and present a threat to anyone that doesn't subscribe to it, be they Christian, Jew, or Muslim(or any other religion for that matter).


So,, what do you suggest we do?? Kill them all?



Dying in vain to me is tucking tail before the job is complete so that their death was without purpose. Should we have quit in WWII because we were taking a lot of casualties(on many occasions more in one day, than we've taken since '03.)


Ahh I see,, it's "quitting" you have a problem with isn't? the idea that we'd be seen as cowards and you wouldn't be a man anymore? "tucking tail" conjures up all those images of a scared rabbit or a dog about to get a whack on the rump from a rolled up news paper and that's failure and you have all this toxic shame attached to that. Look WWII was then and this is now and by NOW, we have learned a lot about wars but the meaning you place on things is far to unforgiving far too unfair and far too inaccurate.

Finishing the job in Iraq? Do you know what the REAL job in Iraq has been? Ill wait for you answer and please,, spare me the mundane platitudes about liberating the Iraqi people.



Arguing about whether we should've have gone in to Iraq is pointless. We are there, so we need to have a responsible exit strategy, not just pulling out without regard for the consequences of doing so.


Well I totally agree with you there but I'm afraid we aren't going to be leaving Iraq for a long long long time.

- Con


[edit on 29-1-2008 by Conspiriology]



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Conspiriology
 


First of all- Cool Hand brought up Firemen/Policemen, not me.
They were relevant to the discussion.

I've already stated this earlier-"As a soldier, I'd rather see a victory to honor the sacrifices made thusfar, rather than a capitulation, which would only serve to embolden fanatics, and would be thugs." Victory means Iraq can stand on it's own, with it's Army and Police forces able to handle all domestic security issues. If we leave before that, then the losses have been in vain.

You like to put words in my mouth- I have never once advocated eradicating every muslim, so please don't try to paint me with that brush.

If you can't make the distinction behind what the term hired killer means vs. a soldier's responsibilities during wartime(or a police officer, etc..), you'll never understand my objection to that term. Thanks for your service, but be careful with your depictions, as connotations are important.



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja
reply to post by NWOmaskedman
 


I'm not sure if that was directed at me, but you and Oldworldorder are still not getting the point. Homocide isn't legal or illegal because the government says so. Murder is illegal because it's always wrong. Homocide on the other hand isn't always wrong. There's an important distinction needing to be made. No one here is trying to justify murder, or shooting 8yr olds in the face.


This might help


Homicide is the killing of one person by another. At common law, homicide is classified in three ways:

Justifiable homicide, which is commanded or authorized by law, such as the act of a police officer killing an armed suspect who is shooting at him,

Excusable homicide, for which there is a legal defense, such as the act of a person shooting an armed intruder in his own home, and

Criminal homicide.

Criminal homicide is divided into many different categories.


Yeah I read his post too Raja,, and if I were you ,, I wouldn't even bother.
Ther is a few things he says are true but when he gets to the part telling you where you are going when you die.


well,,, you get what I mean

- Con



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Conspiriology
 


You're right. I doubt there's any use for trying to reason with that type of rhetoric.



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by themaster1
 


Unfortunately, the $70 billion comes from US.

In my humble opinion, the 70 billion isn't FUNDING the war on terror, it is FUELING the war on terror. Terror begets terror.
I support the troups. Bring them home now. I don't buy the argument that we need to lose more precious lives just because Bush can't admit he made a mistake.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join