Balancing the Budget? Less Waste? National Security? F That!

[Kennedy 0]

Army says no to more tanks, but Congress insists

This is the kind of stuff that really makes me hate Washington.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[mistercwood 287]

You are playing chicken with a planet - you can't dodge and planets don't blink. Act accordingly.

[Andy9o8 1]

Quote

Army says no to more tanks, but Congress insists

This is the kind of stuff that really makes me hate Washington.

That's because the military-industrial complex's momentum isn't driven just by the military, it's also driven by the industrial. Who do you think contributes to political campaigns? And who do you think gives politicians the means to enrich themselves via insider trading? The military? Nope.

[regulator 0]

I understand what you just said but my question is if they are going to go out and spend all this $$$ on something as needless as tanks why not invest that money in something the army could actually use instead.

I watched a show on the history channel and it was about a place in alabama that rebuilds used Abrams tanks. Within a week or so they can completely rebuild it to looking like brand new.

What suprises me is that obama isnt using this money on more drones.

[jakee 1,379]

Quote

I understand what you just said but my question is if they are going to go out and spend all this $$$ on something as needless as tanks why not invest that money in something the army could actually use instead.

Like airshows.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Andy9o8 1]

Quote

I understand what you just said but my question is if they are going to go out and spend all this $$$ on something as needless as tanks why not invest that money in something the army could actually use instead..

Because the military will always find a way of spending money allocated to it, and rationalize it quite convincingly. At some point the US military becomes a saturated sponge, and after that, all the additional money spent on equipping and staffing it does not go to true "defense", it goes to boondoggle.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I'm sick of American tax dollars being spent for the security umbrella over Europe, freeing up the European taxpayers' money so they can all afford their social service nets. Unlike in the US, when a European gets laid off, he & his family aren't faced with loss of their health insurance. This is why.

So no, don't just spend it on something else the Army will tell us it "needs", spend it on something outside the military.

[champu 1]

...or just don't spend it...

I think we're largely on the same page, but for me, the buck stops with the politician who can't see past his or her next reelection. It's really the heart of why I don't like the, rather dismissive, "military-industrial complex" term. Industry and the military can get together and do exactly squat, productive or otherwise.

And so, when you implement something like sequester you have no shortage of programs/capabilities that the military wants and congresspeople see as a good taxpayer investment, but they go unfunded because some short-sighted assholes aren't creative enough to give people who build tanks another reason to vote for them, and whine louder about it on the floor.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

I understand what you just said but my question is if they are going to go out and spend all this $$$ on something as needless as tanks why not invest that money in something the army could actually use instead.

Like airshows.

And White House tours

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

...or just don't spend it...

THERE IT IS!!!

(I'm amazed at how this single simple point is just so blithely missed. Saddened that the default is 'spend it where I want it spent' instead of "it's a cut, pay off the debt with it, or don't take it from the people in the first place")

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[champu 1]

Again, with the theme of creative language use, cough, to sell people things or sell them against things, everything is "spending." See: "Tax expenditures."

[billvon 2,772]

>And White House tours

They cut them already.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

>And White House tours

They cut them already.

I know
They need to bring them back
It is just a PR show after all

Show the pain
Make it hurt (if you can) and all that BS

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,772]

>I know . .. . They need to bring them back

You willing to pay for them?

[rushmc 18]

Quote

>I know . .. . They need to bring them back

You willing to pay for them?

I already am
As are you

Also, on a side note
Many like S Hanady wrote the WH and stated he would pay for a week or so
We was not the only one who's offer was rebuffed

The WH declined

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

I understand what you just said but my question is if they are going to go out and spend all this $$$ on something as needless as tanks why not invest that money in something the army could actually use instead.

I watched a show on the history channel and it was about a place in alabama that rebuilds used Abrams tanks. Within a week or so they can completely rebuild it to looking like brand new.

What suprises me is that obama isnt using this money on more drones.

What you're missing is the fact that NOT spending for new tanks could cost jobs in Ohio at the factory that builds the tanks. The politicians won't let the federally funded factory close in their jurisdiction any more than they will let unnecessary military bases in their area close. It would cost some folks their jobs, hurting supprt area jobs, and it would piss off lots of "I want cuts but NIMBY". All of that adds up to a threat to their reelection campaign. Can't have that when we can just spend the plebes money, or put them more in debt.

And yes, the people making drones are still getting theirs (just a little less). Boeing, GE, et al are not in any danger.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

What you're missing is the fact that NOT spending for new tanks could cost jobs in Ohio at the factory that builds the tanks.

There's a factory that depends on these federal dollars else close-up shop?


The tanks will be built.
They are needed.











By DHS, IRS, INS, FBI, and the like.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[billvon 2,772]

>I already am

No, they've been cancelled. We can reinstate them, if you want. And if you want to pay for it, or raise a collection for them, go for it! I'd even shoot you a few $$ for your quest. That's going in the right direction - funding what you want yourself, instead of asking the government to tax everyone for it.

[Kennedy 0]

BearCats and MRAPs are made at different factories. I don't see even DHS ordering an Abrams. I doubt they'd go beyond a Bradley. They can get all their toys of war without an actual main battle tank.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

BearCats and MRAPs are made at different factories. I don't see even DHS ordering an Abrams. I doubt they'd go beyond a Bradley. They can get all their toys of war without an actual main battle tank.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[rushmc 18]

Quote

>I already am

No, they've been cancelled. We can reinstate them, if you want. And if you want to pay for it, or raise a collection for them, go for it! I'd even shoot you a few $$ for your quest. That's going in the right direction - funding what you want yourself, instead of asking the government to tax everyone for it.

No
we are still paying for them
Regardless of whether or not they are doing them

And as I stated, many HAVE offered to pay for them

The WH has rejected those offers
Why do you now think they would take your money or mine now?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[regulator 0]

MRAPs have a v shaped underbelly that is resistant to IED blasts and the glass can take a direct hit from a .50 BMG and not shatter. Wonder why the government needs to be protected from RPG's IED's and small arms fire on US soil. I could see on the border...but these have been seen in multiple places throughout the us not remotely close to the border.

[billvon 2,772]

>No we are still paying for them

No, you're not, because they are not there.

(Unless this is some new right wing math, 0 is not greater than 0.)

[rushmc 18]

Quote

>No we are still paying for them

No, you're not, because they are not there.

(Unless this is some new right wing math, 0 is not greater than 0.)

The money is still there
We are still paying taxes
They are still getting the money as none was taken from this. (the only thing affected was the size of the increases but, they still have more money than last fiscal year)
So we are paying for these regarless of whether they are actually performing them

Unless they are taking less taxes now ?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,772]

>The money is still there . . .We are still paying taxes

Yes, we are. And right now spending greatly exceeds income from taxes. The solution? Raise taxes and CUT SPENDING.

And to do that you have to CUT SPENDING. (I'll say it one more time - you have to CUT SPENDING.) And that means not spending more on meaningless crap like White House tours for gawkers.

>Unless they are taking less taxes now ?

No, the deficit is just growing more slowly.

[lawrocket 3]

It's not about "military-industrial." It's about pork

[Quote]eeping the Abrams production line rolling protects businesses and good paying jobs in congressional districts where the tank's many suppliers are located.


This is no different from any other pork, only it is about a military topic.

My wife is hotter than your wife.