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.

 

US too broke to go to war and asks Congress for money but not approval

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 07:12 PM
link   
Broke. Too poor for war. Is this a wake up call that we need to take care of our own house before beating down the doors of others maybe? The Pentagon is asking for money to wage the conflict in Syria. Not asking if they can do it, we do not need your approval, just your cash...

Link



The U.S. military, struggling after defense cuts of tens of billions of dollars, will be unable to pay for attacks on Syria from current operating funds and must seek additional money from Congress, according to congressional aides.

President Barack Obama, meanwhile, said on Friday he has not made a final decision on a military strike against Syria. He sought to play down both the scope and duration of the anticipated punitive missile and bombing campaign.

“As you’ve seen, today we’ve released our unclassified assessment detailing with high confidence that the Syrian regime carried out a chemical weapons attack that killed well over a thousand people, including hundreds of children,” Obama said.

The president said the use of the deadly weapons had violated international “norms” and that action was needed to prevent the further use of the arms.


Schools are closing. Unemployment is higher than ever. Obamacare can't make it's deadlines and they have the nerve to ask for money for another war we do not need nor can win?
edit on 30-8-2013 by matafuchs because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 07:19 PM
link   
We're to broke to harm anyone? Well, that's one upside to being a financially broken country!



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 07:19 PM
link   
Hi OP it took me a couple of reads to understand your thread title. Please edit and add the second "o" to the word to. It should read too. (as in too much or too many).

I would agree we are entirely too broke to fund yet another war.



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by matafuchs
 


I think The U.K and U.S and France already decided Syria is just not worth the risk of war with Russia and rather than admitting Russia is too big of a threat they fake congress and houses of parliament decisions and make it look like they are forced not to go to war.


our governments are cowards,and everyone knows it no matter how much they try to mask it.if the target has the capability to attack back and bring in allies and make the fight equal they swim back across the pond with their tails in between their legs.



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 07:24 PM
link   
Bout time, holy crap.

Can get some reality doses passed around please?



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by matafuchs
 


Our weapons, our troops salaries, our ships, planes, tanks, submarines, the bullets, the nukes, are already paid for, correct? Whether or not we use them, for drills, or actual war, they are available assets. I personally do not believe finances will keep whom ever is in charge of decisions such as the Syrian situation from doing what they already have decided they will do about it.
edit on 30-8-2013 by AlchemistSwami because: spelling



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by AlchemistSwami
 


No but the possibility of unintended outcomes from a limited strike would most definitely leave said strike open for review,esp against a state supported by America's fiscal life-line China.
edit on 30-8-2013 by all2human because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 08:19 PM
link   
reply to post by MsAphrodite
 


I realized that when it posted and did not know i could edit it. Thanks. This had become a cluster. Really. No one will back us up. Everyone knows it is a bad idea to do this. Plus, on the flip, we are going to Congress to ask for money to support the same organization that killed 4000 people 10 years ago. Syria has a connection to what happened in Benghazi. The state dept sold arms that it should not have to AQ and I think the CIA was trying to buy them back and our own administration stop them. What keeps troubling me is the why and the end game.



posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Hey look...we have a backer. Seems the Rothchilds want to sit this one out....
www.washingtonpost.com...-e012-476c-876e-2467ba30e5e3

washi ngton post



ecretary of State John Kerry said at Wednesday’s hearing that Arab counties have offered to pay for the entirety of unseating President Bashar al-Assad if the United States took the lead militarily.

“With respect to Arab countries offering to bear costs and to assess, the answer is profoundly yes,” Kerry said. “They have. That offer is on the table.”

Asked by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) about how much those countries would contribute, Kerry said they have offered to pay for all of a full invasion.


What is going on folks....
edit on Wed Sep 4 2013 by DontTreadOnMe because: well, tried to fix link



posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by matafuchs
Hey look...we have a backer. Seems the Rothchilds want to sit this one out....

[url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics-live/liveblog/the-houses-syria-hearing-live-updates/#e68f139f-e012-476c-876e-2467ba30e5e3]Link[ /url]




ecretary of State John Kerry said at Wednesday’s hearing that Arab counties have offered to pay for the entirety of unseating President Bashar al-Assad if the United States took the lead militarily.

“With respect to Arab countries offering to bear costs and to assess, the answer is profoundly yes,” Kerry said. “They have. That offer is on the table.”

Asked by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) about how much those countries would contribute, Kerry said they have offered to pay for all of a full invasion.


What is going on folks....


lol the Rothschilds own Saudi amigo. why do you think the Saudis are supplying so much already, including chemical weapons? of course they'll pay for it, they own most of the debt in this world, or better said most of the world owes them money.



posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 


Sorry, I should have been more explicit. I meant they were not going to finance it through the US but yes, you are right they are in the House of Saud.



posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by matafuchs
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 


Sorry, I should have been more explicit. I meant they were not going to finance it through the US but yes, you are right they are in the House of Saud.


indeed amigo and working on the house of Syria, Iran and i guess that's all that is left, perhaps the house of north korea, they got the house of Libya but i think they're loosing the house of Egypt?



posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 02:28 PM
link   
I been saying this. LEt's invest into our own infrastructure and create jobs and industry here. Pull out of Afghanistan, Iraq, and all thew other bases and lets rebuild here.


IF US wants to invade Syria, have to ask China to borrow $$$$$ for it

One big joke!!!!!!



posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Dominicus
 


A billion dollars in 1.5 years in aid to Syria. That could create quite a few jobs and schools in the US. The US Civil War was about the same thing but history tells you in school it was about slavery. Lincoln was killed because of opposition to big banks. The last sitting POTUS to oppose TPTB about the Fed Reserve.....Kennedy. I think Obama is crapping his pants right now because he does not know what to do or else he may wind up like those other historical figures who opposed the world banks.




top topics



 
4

log in

join