To the editor:
During the “fiscal crisis” dilemma, the U.S. secretary of defense went on record, saying that the automatic cuts to the defense budget would be catastrophic to our national security. The new appointee to that post flatly states the defense budget is bloated and needs to be drastically cut back.
Who’s lying to me now from Washington? It seems that this administration is no different, or better, than any other. They just lie to achieve their means and go about their merry way.
Impeach and fire the bums and start over. There is a quote floating around that says “A little revolution, every now and then, is not such a bad thing.”
Comments
Abdu Omar 2 years, 1 month ago
hairy, did you forget what GW Bush handed Obama when Obama took office. I know everyone thinks this is a bogus issue, but look at the facts, that is something we must look at. The two wars have taken their toll on the American People and one war wasn't against a country that threatened us, it was one who only threatened Israel. When it is right for Americans to die for Israel? Tell me ONE Israeli who has died for America!!!!! They spy on us, they kill our sailors, they steal our secrets, but they are our best ally? I think not.
jhawkinsf 2 years, 1 month ago
Yes, wounded, we all know your line of thought. The fiscal crisis is Israel's fault. Medicare and Medicaid spending, Israel's fault. Cuts to education, Israel's fault. Global warming, Israel's fault. A pothole an Mass. St., Israel's fault.
Thank you for once again enlightening us with your thinking. I look forward to your next anti-Israel rant when the topic at hand is the new rec. center.
avarom 2 years, 1 month ago
Wait until the New Huge Mosque is built in Overland Park.....Wounded may not be too far off!!
notaubermime 2 years, 1 month ago
a) The war in Iraq did not come out of the regular defense budget and therefore has nothing to do with current cuts to the defense budget. b) Saddam Hussein's Iraq threatened quite a bit more than Israel. He did, after all, invade Iran and Kuwait, then threatened Saudi Arabia to the extent that they allowed US troops in their country. Claiming that Iraq "only threatened Israel" is a far cry from factual. c) It is easy to find Israelis who died for US goals. The most readily available instance is of the two Israelis who died after the US started the first Gulf War. The US invaded Iraq (justifiably), Iraq fired missiles at Israel to provoke them, the US told Israel to back down and they did, even at a cost. That is an ally.
Calling wounded-soldier's anti-Israeli rant topical and factual stretches the meaning of the terms beyond their commonly accepted definitions. jhawkinsf's criticism is entirely on point.
Abdu Omar 2 years, 1 month ago
Is that what I said?
Mike1949 2 years, 1 month ago
Wounded and you both make good points. Personally I think we should keep Israel at arms length, as much if not more than Arabian countries. Getting tired of pulling all these knives out of our backs!
jhawkinsf 2 years, 1 month ago
A little revolution, every now and then, is not such a bad thing" Yes it is. The problem with that line of thought is you're assuming that the end result will be a functioning country that is better than the one we had before the revolution. I see no reason to believe that will be the outcome.
There is no reason to believe that our basic freedoms to remain intact. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press might well become a fond memory.
Even if a relatively small percentage of the population were killed or injured in such a revolution, in a country with over 300 million people, we're talking millions. And if this revolution spread to like minded democracies such as England, France, Canada, Australia, etc. as we saw the Arab Spring spread throughout that region, each with the potential loss of lives of a few million and coupled with the loss of their corresponding freedoms, and suddenly the toll become very high.
"You say you want a revolution, well, you know, ... Don't you know that you can count me out".
verity 2 years, 1 month ago
I only saw this today and you are dead on right. People speak of revolution as though it is automatically a good thing---just shed a little blood and everything will be great.
The U.S. Revolution and Civil War were extremely bloody and there was no guarantee who would win or what the outcome would be. Wasn't easy for thirteen states to agree on a constitution. Would we get anything better than what we have? Current events tell me it could, and probably would be much worse.
Let's try to progress from where we are. We complain with good reason, we dissent and so forth, but we still have it better than a lot of people.
boltzmann 2 years, 1 month ago
Two people having differing opposing opinions does not imply that one of them is lying. The authors logic is faulty. One of them is probably wrong, but being wrong is not the same as lying.
jhawkinsf 2 years, 1 month ago
The distinction you make is true, yet infrequently acknowledged, especially in this forum.
riverdrifter 2 years, 1 month ago
To you both, well said.
FlintlockRifle 2 years, 1 month ago
Not always-
Armstrong 2 years, 1 month ago
Who's lying ? Who cares. The auto answer is "blame Bush", hell Dobama has campaigned on that for 5 years and look at how clueless he is.
geekin_topekan 2 years, 1 month ago
Are we still paying private contractors $100 to do a single load of a soldier's laundry? That kind of bloat?
Commenting has been disabled for this item.