4 ms·
So you think we should gamble the national security of the entire nation based on your (unqualified) opinion? Do you seriously not see the problem with that?
by Turing_Machine 9y ago
So you think we should gamble the national security of the entire nation based on your (unqualified) opinion?
Do you seriously not see the problem with that?
- toomuchtodo 9y agoI don’t see the problem with having the discussion. The US military is a disgustingly wasteful (pallets of cash in the desert “go missing”! [1]) organization that has squandered trillions of dollars. Dollars that could’ve been spent on something useful. It’s time for accountability and responsibility. Do you seriously not see the problem with not questioning that? We can’t afford universal education and healthcare, but we can afford aircraft carriers that are obsolete for force projection (inexpensive surface cruise missiles from China) and F35s that can’t fly, kill their pilots, and are generally speaking not fit for purpose? [2]. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/feb/08/usa.iraq1 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/feb/08/usa.iraq1 [2] https://www.thedailybeast.com/military-admits-billion-dollar-war-toy-f-35-is-fked https://www.thedailybeast.com/military-admits-billion-dollar...
- Turing_Machine 9y ago>We can’t afford universal education and healthcare Countries can exist without universal education and health care. They cannot exist without national defense (whether provided on their own or through an ally). Sorry, that is simply a fact. Also, national defense is a clearly enumerated function of the federal government per the Constitution. Neither of the other two is.
- toomuchtodo 9y agoI never said no military. I said a reduction in spending. We overspend and egregiously waste on ours. That’s my point. Good chat.