| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 8:02 am Post subject: Obama plans to send 34,000 more troops to Afghanistan |
 |
|
| Quote: |
Obama plans to send 34,000 more troops to Afghanistan
WASHINGTON � President Barack Obama met Monday evening with his national security team to finalize a plan to dispatch some 34,000 additional U.S. troops over the next year to what he's called "a war of necessity" in Afghanistan, U.S. officials told McClatchy.
Obama is expected to announce his long-awaited decision on Dec. 1, followed by meetings on Capitol Hill aimed at winning congressional support amid opposition by some Democrats who are worried about the strain on the U.S. Treasury and whether Afghanistan has become a quagmire, the officials said. |
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/79380.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
RufusW
Joined: 14 Jun 2008
Location: Busan
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 8:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Wait for Dec 1st sheeple. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Reggie
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 7:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
The chairman on the Senate Armed Services Committee is proposing an extra tax on Americans earning more than $200,000 to $250,000 per year to fund more troops.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aPO6Hrw_x85A
As a senator from Michigan, it seems like he more than anyone else should be aware of the unemployment problems in America and particulary the state he represents.
If Congress takes more money from the only Americans who have the money to hire other Americans and pisses that money away on the Afghanistan Circle Jerk, we deserve the high unemployment we'll get from such a crappy law. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 7:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| The chairman on the Senate Armed Services Committee is proposing an extra tax |
From what I've read about this, the aim is to stop the deployment of more troops based on the allergy Americans have to paying taxes.
Personally, I wish there were some kind of automatic 'war tax' that would kick in any time we send the troops off to fight. If fact, it wouldn't be a bad idea to have all funding for defense catagorized as such on payroll slips so people know just how much is being spent each year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
| The chairman on the Senate Armed Services Committee is proposing an extra tax |
From what I've read about this, the aim is to stop the deployment of more troops based on the allergy Americans have to paying taxes.
Personally, I wish there were some kind of automatic 'war tax' that would kick in any time we send the troops off to fight. If fact, it wouldn't be a bad idea to have all funding for defense catagorized as such on payroll slips so people know just how much is being spent each year. |
Sounds like a great way to ensure we never send troops anywhere again, which both makes it an excellent idea, and something that will never happen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Reggie
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 26, 2009 3:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
| The chairman on the Senate Armed Services Committee is proposing an extra tax |
From what I've read about this, the aim is to stop the deployment of more troops based on the allergy Americans have to paying taxes.
Personally, I wish there were some kind of automatic 'war tax' that would kick in any time we send the troops off to fight. If fact, it wouldn't be a bad idea to have all funding for defense catagorized as such on payroll slips so people know just how much is being spent each year. |
If that's the strategy, I like it, except that too small of a percentage of Americans earn over $200,000. They need to put the surtax on everyone.
Also, they need to start drafting people who have the "I support the war" magnets on their SUVs.
"You support the war? Fine, we can accomodate you. Here's your draft notice. Report to Paris Island for basic training 0800 Monday."  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 26, 2009 7:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ummm...I had in mind something around $24,000 a year. As I remember, Vietnam became truly unpopular when not just the working class kids, but the spoiled middle class kids became eligible for the draft. Mom and Dad didn't really object to war as long as someone else was paying the price. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 27, 2009 1:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here's a post further discussing the war tax.
| Quote: |
| Consider the price of war. There are no official projection of war costs -- how would the CBO score a war? -- but the Congressional Research Service estimates the cost of sending one soldier to Afghanistan for one year is approximately $1 million. A 30,000-troop escalation, which sounds like Obama's ceiling, would require a $30 billion yearly tax. That would be about four-times the proposed tax on soda drinks, or three-times the proposed taxes on soda and alcohol. |
Lovely. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 27, 2009 10:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
I sort of supported the surge in Iraq, but I don't support this as much. The Afghani government is much worse than the Iraqi Government, there is no development there, and bullets won't solve this problem. You have a hugely corrupt government and Karzai's brother is a major drug dealer.
I am not crazy about US Government in Afghanistan. If there was real development, a real fight against corruption, then okay. Otherwise, get out of there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoholDiver
Joined: 03 Oct 2009
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2009 3:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
They'd be best off securing the borders of Pakistan and other neighbouring countries, and abandoning the country altogether. Just make sure they keep their garbage in their own backyard.
In the end, the Afghani people have to settle this problem, and as long as they don't, this crap will continue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2009 8:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Adventurer wrote: |
I sort of supported the surge in Iraq, but I don't support this as much. The Afghani government is much worse than the Iraqi Government, there is no development there, and bullets won't solve this problem. You have a hugely corrupt government and Karzai's brother is a major drug dealer.
I am not crazy about US Government in Afghanistan. If there was real development, a real fight against corruption, then okay. Otherwise, get out of there. |
I agree. I really don't foresee "victory" in Afghanistan and think it is a waste of money and resources.
And I really don't think any outsiders would be able to effectively root out corruption. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
