Even I May Vote 3rd Party!

Started by Yawn, January 07, 2013, 05:49:19 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Shooterman

Quote from: taxed on January 09, 2013, 12:24:00 PM
Where did I say anything about unwarranted wars?

They go hand in hand with what we have been involved in since the end of WWII. We could spend a crap pot full of less money, if we more wisely spent our tax dollars in the right places.

There's no ticks like Polyticks-bloodsuckers all Davy Crockett 1786-1836

Yankees are like castor oil. Even a small dose is bad.
[IMG]

taxed

Quote from: Shooterman on January 09, 2013, 12:47:45 PM
They go hand in hand with what we have been involved in since the end of WWII. We could spend a crap pot full of less money, if we more wisely spent our tax dollars in the right places.

Is your logic, then, to not have a defense so we don't get into wars?
#PureBlood #TrumpWon

AndyJackson

Quote from: CubaLibre on January 09, 2013, 11:19:20 AM
The dichotomy between morality and libertarianism is a false one. The libertarian does not reject a moral code, just the idea that the state should be used to impose that moral code on others.

This reminds me of the old saw "I can be just as dedicated to God without going to church, as everybody who does".

Technically, possible.  With normal human nature, very rare and unlikely.

People need the structure and discipline of a tangible system, and the support / accountability from others.

Show me the "Godly" man who hasn't gone to church in 5-10-20 years....I'll show you the guy who rarely thinks of God and has justified many, many shortcuts and excuses, for his tattered behaviors.

There are a few people out there who would pray and worship daily, and form all their other behaviors accordingly without any external influence.....but they are FEW and FAR between.  People are rife with failings and imperfections, even the really good ones.  And with no help, most won't defeat these things.

AndyJackson

Quote from: Shooterman on January 09, 2013, 12:47:45 PM
They go hand in hand with what we have been involved in since the end of WWII. We could spend a crap pot full of less money, if we more wisely spent our tax dollars in the right places.
Any system this gigantic will be full of corruption.  That's why it should be smaller too, but a war is a war.  By nature, a gigantic enterprise.  If they had trouble documented the expenditures in Iraq, imagine what a mess the two WW's were, and even Vietnam.

In a strange way, I'd guess that we get a bigger economy boost from defense spending than entitlement spending. Defense at least builds the technology and logistics bases, and creates a huge amount of R&D and manufacturing.  Libs and Liberts are just mad that somebody gets rich in the process.  Entitlement spending is about as perfect as you can get in burning money with no outcome.  It just results in people laying on a couch eating, smoking, and injecting shit into themselves.  And ingesting the mental poison of TV and hip hop, lol.

Shooterman

Quote from: taxed on January 09, 2013, 01:17:49 PM
Is your logic, then, to not have a defense so we don't get into wars?

A favor,  if you will, Taxed. Play your semantic bullshit with someone else.
There's no ticks like Polyticks-bloodsuckers all Davy Crockett 1786-1836

Yankees are like castor oil. Even a small dose is bad.
[IMG]

taxed

Quote from: Shooterman on January 09, 2013, 01:39:26 PM
A favor,  if you will, Taxed. Play your semantic bullshit with someone else.

I just mapped out your logic without semantics.  You say an increase in defense spending will cause unjust wars.  Therefore, it sounds like you want no defense spending for no unjust wars.  It is a pretty simple path to map out.

Defense spending doesn't have anything to do with Congress or the POTUS going to war.  If you can't lay out your reasoning, then that's OK.....
#PureBlood #TrumpWon

Shooterman

Quote from: AndyJackson on January 09, 2013, 01:36:19 PM
Any system this gigantic will be full of corruption.  That's why it should be smaller too, but a war is a war.  By nature, a gigantic enterprise.  If they had trouble documented the expenditures in Iraq, imagine what a mess the two WW's were, and even Vietnam.

Outside of WWII, which was an outgrowth of us fokking up and getting into WWI, and possibly even then, tricked into getting engaged, the last justified war was the War of 1812. Since WWII, not one has been declared and/or justified. It is not now, now has it it ever been part of our Charter to remake the world in our image. We have paid a tremendous price in lives, the maiming of good people, untold trillions of dollars of our wealth and resources, and a steady erosion of the very thing our Revolution was predicated on- namely the establishment of our freedoms and liberties.

I would suggest the price has been too damned high.

There's no ticks like Polyticks-bloodsuckers all Davy Crockett 1786-1836

Yankees are like castor oil. Even a small dose is bad.
[IMG]

taxed

Quote from: Shooterman on January 09, 2013, 01:56:22 PM
Outside of WWII, which was an outgrowth of us fokking up and getting into WWI, and possibly even then, tricked into getting engaged, the last justified war was the War of 1812. Since WWII, not one has been declared and/or justified. It is not now, now has it it ever been part of our Charter to remake the world in our image. We have paid a tremendous price in lives, the maiming of good people, untold trillions of dollars of our wealth and resources, and a steady erosion of the very thing our Revolution was predicated on- namely the establishment of our freedoms and liberties.

I would suggest the price has been too damned high.

So........ no defense spending?  I'm confused.
#PureBlood #TrumpWon

Shooterman

Quote from: taxed on January 09, 2013, 01:43:46 PM
I just mapped out your logic without semantics.  You say an increase in defense spending will cause unjust wars.  Therefore, it sounds like you want no defense spending for no unjust wars.  It is a pretty simple path to map out.

That is not what I said as you well know.

QuoteDefense spending doesn't have anything to do with Congress or the POTUS going to war.  If you can't lay out your reasoning, then that's OK.....

If you do not think defense spending has anything to do with Congress, the POTUS, or going to war, you have been living in a bubble.
There's no ticks like Polyticks-bloodsuckers all Davy Crockett 1786-1836

Yankees are like castor oil. Even a small dose is bad.
[IMG]

taxed

Quote from: Shooterman on January 09, 2013, 01:59:32 PM
That is not what I said as you well know.
I didn't say you said that. I was following your logic.  What are you saying??

Quote
If you do not think defense spending has anything to do with Congress, the POTUS, or going to war, you have been living in a bubble.
Now who's changing words?  I said Congress GOING TO WAR.
#PureBlood #TrumpWon

AndyJackson

I agree that we should have left the nation building off of the tail end of things.

But I don't think that a case can be made that stopping the carnage of WW1, Hitler, communism, muslim terrorism, or the destruction of Israel.....is a waste of time or pointless effort.

That just doesn't make sense.  Some stuff you can't just let happen, and affect us however it will.

Shooterman

Quote from: taxed on January 09, 2013, 02:04:55 PM
I didn't say you said that. I was following your logic.  What are you saying??
Now who's changing words?  I said Congress GOING TO WAR.

Have it your way, Taxed. Defending the country would take a hell of a lot less money if we confined ourselves to defending the homeland.
There's no ticks like Polyticks-bloodsuckers all Davy Crockett 1786-1836

Yankees are like castor oil. Even a small dose is bad.
[IMG]

taxed

Quote from: Shooterman on January 09, 2013, 02:24:23 PM
Have it your way, Taxed. Defending the country would take a hell of a lot less money if we confined ourselves to defending the homeland.

See, Shooter, you are linking defense spending to war.  We can have defense spending to protect the homeland.  You are just being emotional and not being rational.
#PureBlood #TrumpWon

Shooterman

Quote from: AndyJackson on January 09, 2013, 02:08:41 PM
I agree that we should have left the nation building off of the tail end of things.

But I don't think that a case can be made that stopping the carnage of WW1, Hitler, communism, muslim terrorism, or the destruction of Israel.....is a waste of time or pointless effort.

That just doesn't make sense.  Some stuff you can't just let happen, and affect us however it will.

It is pretty much accepted that until we stuck our noses into Europe during WWI, it was a stalemate or pretty much on its way to being so. We changed the balance of power in favor of the French and British, of whom it may be said, had no vested interest in some Serb malcontent killing Ferdinand and his bride. We changed what would be a stalemate into a victory that left a crap pot full of Americans dead and maimed, and the raping of Germany at Versaille. The Germans did not forget and it allowed Hitler to come to power, getting us eventually into the war because Japan attacked us ( because we had created an embargo, an act of war ) against their supplies of raw materials. At least FDR, as much as he wanted the war, asked from Congress and got a Declaration of War. .

I admit, hindsight is a marvelous thing, but the chances of Hitler coming to power, if not for Versaille, were pretty slim.

The rest, no matter how wonderful and emotional an argument it may be, could all have been assuaged by simple requests from and granting of war declarations by the Congress. Israel is no different than any other nation. If and when the brown stuff hits the twirly blades and we default on our debt, the Israelis, in my opinion, won't lift a finger to help. Borrowing money to support not only Israel, but their enemies as well, seems stupid and counterproductive to me.
There's no ticks like Polyticks-bloodsuckers all Davy Crockett 1786-1836

Yankees are like castor oil. Even a small dose is bad.
[IMG]

Solar

Quote from: Shooterman on January 09, 2013, 12:23:00 PM
Simple, our armed services, constitutionally, were charges with protecting the homeland. Even at that, standing armies were unkindly looked upon, with well equipped militias designated as the first line of defense, but still, if necessary, only to be funded for a two year period at a time. Offensive use of the armed services were not specified. Unlimited funding for military adventurism was also not specified along with any and all foreign aid and placing and maintaining troops in foreign lands.

So, a very strong military is necessary and required for 'DEFENSE', but damned sure not for unlimited, undeclared, and unwarranted wars that we have absolutely not one tinkers damn of business being involved in.
Wrong, they were charged with protecting American interests here and abroad.
Case in point, Barbary Pirates.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!