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.

 

Pentagon’s Christmas Present: Largest Military Budget Since World War II

page: 1
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 06:55 AM
link   

On December 22 both houses of the U.S. Congress unanimously passed a bill authorizing $725 billion for next year’s Defense Department budget.


infowars

Let's use the low attendance holiday season to pass some bills that nobody would agree on otherwise..

Is this a precurser of thing to come in 2011? I mean, with all the budget cuts and the likes, China totally unhappy with the dollar value and the fact they will most likely never see a penny of their credit back, is it safe to assume that this is in preparation for war?

With all the tension in the middle east at the moment i find it hard to believe there would be any other reason for this..




posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 07:04 AM
link   
to assume? no need to. it's obviouos. i have a feeling it'll start much sooner than later... if timewave zero is correct, in january.

S&F



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 07:36 AM
link   
There IS a complete breakdown of how the 725b is calculated but that's probably just propaganda to save face. How does the US govt keep justifying this to the people? Here in NL the populace totally freaked when our royal prince spent a few tax euro's too much (below 100K) on a private trip/vacation. We're talking billions here and it's not the first time this happens.

In my opinion the US got themselves into a vicious circle of budget cuts, and then defense budget boosts to cope with the rising unrest in the nation.

It makes me wonder when people in the US will actually have had enough.
When the television starts showing actual news and reports about current events again instead of "Supermodels dancing on ice", that day might actually come sometime.



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 07:40 AM
link   
From the link in the OP:

In addition, Pentagon spending has increased by 100 percent since 1998 and “the Obama budget plans to spend more on the Pentagon over eight years than any administration has since World War II.”

And Obama received a "Peace Prize"? Wonder what's up the Dem's sleeve?

Oh, I know... 2011 had the largest military budget since WWII... and the Republicans had control of the House in 2011 so it must be their fault.

... and the people will not realize that it was the Democrats that enacted this budget.


edit on 12/26/2010 by abecedarian because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 07:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Romekje
 


If that is the biggest budget since WW2 it makes me wonder what you guys spent 2 trillion on before 911?
If that is the budget for a big war then what could you have possibly spent that much money on back then?



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 07:51 AM
link   
I think it's good. Too many times, the folks in our military have been trashed and left behind. Hopfully it'll go towards better tools, equipment, food, housing and anything else that can benefit the men and women who fight and protect our freedoms.



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 07:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Romekje
There IS a complete breakdown of how the 725b is calculated but that's probably just propaganda to save face. How does the US govt keep justifying this to the people? Here in NL the populace totally freaked when our royal prince spent a few tax euro's too much (below 100K) on a private trip/vacation. We're talking billions here and it's not the first time this happens.

In my opinion the US got themselves into a vicious circle of budget cuts, and then defense budget boosts to cope with the rising unrest in the nation.

It makes me wonder when people in the US will actually have had enough.
When the television starts showing actual news and reports about current events again instead of "Supermodels dancing on ice", that day might actually come sometime.


The problem is that, unlike Europeans, U.S. citizens do NOT have a voice in what goes on in U.S. politics. What needs to happen is more than 50 percent of Congress needs to be fired, reduce the power of the Federal government, shrink the military industrial complex, accountability for the government's crappy spending, and get corporate interest out of politics. You can use the same old argument "Americans are too busy watching blah blah blah..." but the reality that the U.S. government has done a good job keeping Americans distracted and blind of their government's actions. Even when Americans do their opinions, the media will trivialize it, slap "Tea party" on the voice, or whatever is necessary. America is a prison.
edit on 26-12-2010 by DevilJin because: no reason



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 07:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
I think it's good. Too many times, the folks in our military have been trashed and left behind. Hopfully it'll go towards better tools, equipment, food, housing and anything else that can benefit the men and women who fight and protect our freedoms.


No! It'll go on "military contractors" services. Haliburton, Bechtel, Xe, Boeing, Northrop-Grumman etc, to provide outsourced services - war is a great cash cow for the private sector, more so when the big corporations have so many embedded lobbyists and bribed politicians signing the cheques.



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 08:08 AM
link   
I become alarmed when I see people not realizing the conspiracy behind the conspiracy.


Next year’s defense authorization of $725 billion compares to, according to the Center for Defense Information, a Pentagon budget of $444.6 billion in 1946; $460.4 billion in 1968, the highest yearly amount during the Vietnam War; and $443.4 billion in 1988, the highest during the eight years of the Ronald Reagan administration’s massive military buildup. (Numbers in 2004 constant dollars.)

So, corrected for inflation, Obama's administration and the current Democrat Congress are proposing spending more on defense than Reagan did. "Reagan's defense budget" is one of those (arguably) mediocre and meaningless talking points Dem's use to justify their need to be in power.

Point being "who is in bed with whom"?



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 08:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Britguy
 

Perhaps, but any aid to the military is a good thing. IMHO. I don't like what our government does 99.9% of the time. But when it comes to the military, I gotta be in support of it. Agree or disagree with the war, with their ideologies, but these folks AND contractors go out and do things so that we can be safe here at home.

Now NEA, EPA, and a dozen other government agencies could dry up and vanish and I wouldn't shed a tear. But anything that goes towards protecting american folks from thir enemies, I'm all for.



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 08:24 AM
link   
reply to post by DevilJin
 


Yeah the "on ice" reference was kinda unasked for. I realise very well that this isnt the fault of the American people, but it IS up to them to do something about it.

And about Europeans (or at least the Dutch), as long as stuff doesnt hurt us in our wallets we tend to be very gullible also, though this would definately spark interest/unrest and not be dealt with lightly.



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Britguy
 

Perhaps, but any aid to the military is a good thing. IMHO. I don't like what our government does 99.9% of the time. But when it comes to the military, I gotta be in support of it. Agree or disagree with the war, with their ideologies, but these folks AND contractors go out and do things so that we can be safe here at home.

Now NEA, EPA, and a dozen other government agencies could dry up and vanish and I wouldn't shed a tear. But anything that goes towards protecting american folks from thir enemies, I'm all for.



Things like mobile watchtowers and fusion centres you mean?



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 08:32 AM
link   



Things like mobile watchtowers and fusion centres you mean?


That's more government than military. Ask any common military folk and they'd probably agree with most everything on this site!
The government can plan all they want, they can play their games all they want. But anything THAT draconian would have to involve the bread and butter military folks and THEY would not go along with that.

Again, just my two cents.



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 08:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Romekje
 


If you all notice that as we spend more and more on death and war, we fall farther and farther from greatness.
Time to bring all the baby killing hero worshipping soldiers home and use his life for something positive.
OR CONTINUE TO CRASH IN THE LONG SLOW DECLINE. WAKE UP PEOPLE!

Which path do you think we will take??
Yea, i think people are to stupid to take the right road. sheeple
Get of your asses and fight this government --cost them all the money you can till the crash is complete.



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by itsawild1
 


Let me ask you something. If we left all the battlefields do you honestly believe that they (islamic jihadists) would stop trying to kill us? That we'd see no more 9/11's. No more railway bombings? No more marketplace bombings?

If al it took for wars to end was one side just "leaving" don't you think we'd have done that already?

I mean, seriously!



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 08:54 AM
link   
I mean,.....really...when does this stop and what or who can stop what is going on in the US government?

Second line...



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by itsawild1
 


Let me ask you something. If we left all the battlefields do you honestly believe that they (islamic jihadists) would stop trying to kill us? That we'd see no more 9/11's. No more railway bombings? No more marketplace bombings?

If al it took for wars to end was one side just "leaving" don't you think we'd have done that already?

I mean, seriously!


And do you have any factual PROOF other then MSM spewed garbage about said terrorist attacks?

So far there has been more proof towards government involvement in ALL cases (madrid, new york, london, oklahoma just for starters) then any religious/political fanatics



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 08:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Romekje
 


I suppose the underwear bomber was a government shill?
How about that idiot in Oregon who wanted to blow up the Christmas tree lighting ceremony.
Just yesterday a bomber killed 43 people in Pakistan.

Did they all work for the CIA?

*sheesh!*



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 09:01 AM
link   
Judging by the fact that "the underwear bomber" had some very dubious credentials and got put on the plane at the very last moment, completely ignoring customs in Amsterdam, makes me believe there was more involvement there then just some "funding"

Not saying CIA but there are more 3 letter agencies in the world

And since when does bombing targets in PAKISTAN justify US defense spending? Ow wait, you are meddling in affairs there so i guess that would make sense indeed..


edit on 26/12/10 by Romekje because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Romekje
There IS a complete breakdown of how the 725b is calculated but that's probably just propaganda to save face. How does the US govt keep justifying this to the people? Here in NL the populace totally freaked when our royal prince spent a few tax euro's too much (below 100K) on a private trip/vacation. We're talking billions here and it's not the first time this happens.

In my opinion the US got themselves into a vicious circle of budget cuts, and then defense budget boosts to cope with the rising unrest in the nation.

It makes me wonder when people in the US will actually have had enough.
When the television starts showing actual news and reports about current events again instead of "Supermodels dancing on ice", that day might actually come sometime.


No one listened to the warning we were given by pres. Eisenhower.

edit on 26-12-2010 by buster2010 because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-12-2010 by buster2010 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join