I am trying to figure out what you mean.

I think you mean that you want cuts in domestic spending and increases in military spending. For years I have pointed out that there is little public support for specific cuts in domestic spending.

 

What is distressing about the right wing posters here is that they hope Iran violates the deal that was negotiated with them. They want the economy to get worse. They desire these calamities because they think Obama will be blamed for them.

 

Obama has diverted 400 billion of the military budget to other things than the military......
which explains why only around 40%of our planes even fly.....
also explains the problem with Veterans Admin...

 

.

 

If the money that has JUST disappeared, let alone the blatant very over-charging or unneeded requisition that serve political than strategic needs could be saved over-and-above the pittance needed for hard and soft domestic infrastructure enhancement, makes the defense budget a black-box cloaked in fear and dissembling by posturing rhetoric

 

I don't sound like an American to you because I have a different opinion and I don't worship Deferment Donald. And I really don't give a shit if you pay attention to me or not, I'll survive.

 

THere have been problems with the VA going back decades. Republicans and Democrats are equally responsible for the mess that is the VA.

 

The VA is not the mess everyone says it is. In Shooters opinion they do a lot for our veterans; the media has overblown issues that every government bureaucracy suffers from.

 

If we keep down your path all we do is survive....I prefer to conquer ...

 

Your path leads to endless wars. I would prefer if we stopped being the world's policeman.

 

we can agree on that.......

I am talking about conquering the economy not going in the hole 2 trillion each year.....

 

A strong military does not lead to endless wars; it prevents them.
America has enemies. People who hate us, or want what we have, or both.
They are willing to kill us to get what they want.
If we appear weak they are emboldened to attack us. They make war on us.
If they believe that any aggression to America or American interests will bring terrible vengeance on them, that they will be utterly destroyed, they will not attack unless they see no other option. That they will die whether they attack or not attack.
Bin Laden and his followers were emboldened by Clinton's weak responses to terrorist attacks after 1996. Bush had the right idea, but the wrong strategy. He said, "You are either with us or against us" but he attacked the wrong people, and he did not set out to utterly destroy them. He set out to change them.
President Reagan had the right idea; Make America the baddest dog in the pen and make it clear that we will not surrender to aggression. Russia responded by trying to keep up, and it led to the end of the iron curtain.
Today we face an enemy we do not understand; but make no mistake, radical Muslims will gladly slaughter all of us and take what we have. And, they have demonstrated the ability to recruit many to their cause.
Shooter is beginning to think Trump's success is much like ISIS; against all odds their popularity continues to grow and the established power base is left wondering what the hell is happening.
A revolution is upon us; we are at war. To believe less is to invite defeat.

Shooter cannot imagine Sanders responding well to aggression. He would want to be friends. We cannot be friends with our enemies until we have a Marine boot firmly planted on their necks.
Shooter thinks Clinton would not respond to aggression until she knew if her popularity would suffer.
Trump might respond appropriately, but he doubts it. He certainly would not unleash the dogs of hell on our enemies; at best he would hope to hobble them economically.
Shooter can see a rocky 4 years for America.

 

The liberal mind readers are hard at work.

"We know what you're thinking. We know what you mean. We know what you hope for."


We don't have to hope.


Samantha Power: Iran violating U.N. Security Council resolutions

By Nick Gass 10/14/15 11:10 AM EDT



Iran's October missile test violated U.N. ban: expert panel

Reuters.com Wed Dec 16, 2015 5:20am EST

 

As a recipeint of both VA and military retiree health care, I can testify that sprinkled through out the system are those who THINK they're doing us more than a paid servie and that we should fall in line (rank) when it comes to asking about or questioning their authority..
I had good inpatient and surgical care there, but getting past the gatekeepers to the care that you need could kill ya

 

*not_secure_link*www.dailywire.com/...ation-admits-they-lied-about-iran-ben-shapiro

That is the craziest thing I've ever heard you say, and that's saying a lot. I don't hope the Iran deal fails, but I know it will. Iran has never done anything to prove they are trustworthy. They are the worlds leading state sponsor of terror, and the HATE America. They would like nothing more than to destroy Israel and then move right along to the US. They made no concessions in the deal. All the deal did was give them billions of dollars and a clear path to a nuclear bomb.

If this deal was such a good deal for the US and the world the Obama administration wouldn't have felt the need to lie about the deal. If it was such a good deal the process would have been open and transparent, not cloaked in secrecy like it was. Obama would have took the advise of Congress and other top national security leaders and not relied on a 30 year old novelist with no experience to spin the deal. This one is pretty obvious DL. Even you know that the administration lied and we got a bad deal.

 

Here's a little something I found that sheds some light on the missing WMDs. The reason the WMDs could not be found is because they were buried in the sand. Read what the New York Times has to say about it.
-------------------------------

The New York Times published an article on Oct.16, 2014, that has re-ignited a 14-year-old debate: Was then-President George W. Bush right about Iraq? The report examined U.S. service personnel's encounters with abandoned chemical weapons in Iraq (which they found buried in the sand.)– and some conservatives were quick to pounce on the story as evidence that claims by Bush in the lead-up to the war that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction were true and that the United States' 2003 invasion was justified.

The article by Times reporter C.J. Chivers focused on U.S. soldiers who suffered from exposure to the sulfur mustard and other nerve gases which emitted from the bombs. According to the story, about "5,000 chemical warheads, shells or aviation bombs" were found scattered across Iraqi soil. The U.S. government buried the cases from both the public and the troops. As a result, injured soldiers did not receive proper medical treatment.

 

Is this the same Ronnie Reagan who sold arms to Iran? Who sent Marines into Beirut, gave them shitty ROEs and then cut and ran after the Marine Barracks were blown up?

 

“Conservatives may hope to exploit the New York Timesreport, but the article references pre-1991 weapons,” wrote Steve Benen on the MaddowBlog. “Everything Republicans said in the lead up to the 2003 invasion is still wrong. Indeed, a little common sense is in order – if U.S. troops had found WMD stockpiles, the Bush/Cheney administration would have said so. Indeed, they were desperate to do exactly that.” *not_secure_link*www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/10/16/new-york-times-reports-wmd-found-in-iraq

 

Personally on the whole Iran deal I take the Rand Paul view. Let them build the bomb if they want but even a leak of any possible Iranian threat on Isreal AND definite leak or rumor of a a terroist plot. Have Israel and our military press imminent destructive force against them

 

Yeah, just like Vietnam was JFK's baby..... Then Lyndon B. Johnson took the ball and ran with it......