So to paraphrase you admit this is the first time in history a foreign state kills American servicemen and instead of retaliating, it was covered up and a pitiful small amount of restitution was paid to the families. An amount that the Israeli's received back 100 million times since from the American Tax Payer....

How exactly was justice served here?

And you people wonder why "antisemitic" conspiracy theories float around the internet.

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

And I am honestly sickened this post got any likes... I suggest those posters move to Israel if they care more about Israeli lives than American lives.

---

Lighten up, Francis.

---

Listen to this before you tell anyone to lighten up.

U.S. National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan stated today that they are not Ruling Out the possibility of Strikes inside of Iran or against Iranian Assets in the Middle East if the Situation in the Region continues to Escalate, with him further stating that the Strikes on Friday… pic.twitter.com/VpdUClrD9W

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) February 4, 2024

whiterock said:

---

Israel is a fantastic return on investment, as far as allies go...

---

More Boomer bull*****

Tell this to any American under 40 and there is a 99% chance they will disagree with you.

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

America responds to terrorism at the place and time of our choosing. We chose to strike 85 places simultaneously in two countries to tell the Iranian regime that the #IRGC is just the start … & we didn’t break a sweat doing it.

— Malcolm Nance (@MalcolmNance) February 3, 2024

---

Is that fat **** back from Ukraine?

---

To his credit, at least he went over there if only to stage some photos to look like he was doing something.

None of the Slava Ukraini's on this board like Trey or ATLbear did ***** They want other people to pay for and die for their wars.

---

Oh, this argument? Some of us did things for this country and others you'll never see or hear about on social media. Get a job or go down and stop some brown men from entering this country (your big gripe), or patrol your neighborhood, or do anything productive instead of hiding behind the freedom and privilege others afford you as you do nothing but cowardly whine about.

---

I must have touched a nerve?

How am I being a coward by taking to unpopular opinion in a thread where the majority of posters would sacrifice their first born children for Israel?

I'm not the one advocating for foreign wars and more spending that has depleted the generational wealth of the vast majority of Americans.

Whatever you think you've done has probably done more harm than good. You are a dummy with an inflated sense of self-worth.

We haven't had the draft since Vietnam so no one asked you to do anything other than not make life more difficult for the rest of us... but even that seems to be too much to ask.

---

Well I certainly don't overinflate my worth to believe I could make yours or many others lives more difficult, although my wife might disagree.

I don't care about the popularity of your opinion. Redbrick and others express opinions different than mine, but at least there's a level of cogent rationale even if I disagree. You operate from a place of personal grievance and character anger that is hard to palate much less engage. So I'll try to do better and not take it to a more personal level and stick with the debated issues. But I'll still call a spade a spade if you put it out there.

And to get back to the issues, generational wealth has been minimally if at all impacted by government expenditures on foreign nations or conflicts within the last 50 years.

---

That is total bull*****

A can of coke cost 5 cents in 1970.

Inflation, caused be insane spending, is the silent killer of generational wealth.

---

Agree, inflation is absolutely at issue. But what you don't seem to contemplate is that discretionary spending as a whole over the years, which foreign aid falls under, has been a small contributor to deficit spending over those 50 years. It is entitlement spending which has compounded our deficits and led to the inflationary impact of our monetary policy. I keep mentioning this but no one wants to talk about it because I think no one wants to admit our "America first" part of our budget is what's drowning us.

---

I am support you in cutting Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security... but those are harder cuts to make bcs Americans will directly suffer for these spending cuts.

Americans will not directly suffer if we refuse to send another $15 billion to Israel next week.

---

You can't say that blanketedly as it depends upon what the 15 Billion is spent on (admittedly I don't know the details). However if it involves shutting down weapons production or shuttering support operations for U.S. military personnel it could be Americans losing jobs. Reality is sometimes it's just shifting around existing resources and putting a price tag on it and we actually don't save anything on a real dollar basis. Unlike direct reduction in transfer payments from entitlements.

---

Weapons manufacture doesn't enrich us in any real sense. Its purpose is, or should be, to protect the productive economy. The more paper you have to spend on bullets, the less you have for bread and butter. Saving jobs has zero weight as an argument for defense spending.

---

Ironic as we communicate via something developed through defense spending.

You'd think you could grasp at this point we spend the paper on both without the discipline to sacrifice either. One we actually attempt to pay for, the other we just add to its cost.

---

I can grasp it, though I don't know where you get the idea that we're attempting to pay for either. It's all supported by borrowing to a great extent. The difference is that welfare at least has tangible benefits. The only benefit of defense is protection from threats that may or may not exist.

---

No, I don't think you actually grasp it. Do you know how the Federal Budget works? We have direct payroll taxes ($1.4 Trillion) for SS, Medicare, and income security that are woefully below costs. It's a $75 Trillion accruing liability. We have income and related taxes ($3+ Trillion) to pay for discretionary spending that more than covers both defense and non defense spending ($1.7 Trillion). The balance of those taxes then go to cover the massive shortfall of mandatory (entitlement) spending ($4.1 Trillion consisting mostly of SS/Med). The shortfall is then borrowed. If we cut 100% of the defense budget ($700 Billion) we would still have to borrow nearly $800 Billion dollars. That's how out of whack it is.

While there is a minimal short term benefit of the type of welfare we have institutionalized, the long term impact has been a subtle destruction of the middle class and a societal dependency that is a frightening cycle hurting Americans from an inflationary perspective which in turn puts pressure on increasing required entitlement spending. In essence, a death circle of dependency and liability.

So keep the global dominance of our military and the dollar, or the music stops and there will be no chairs to sit in for this welfare. Or we can get serious about entitlements.

---

Well, this is a whole new discussion. If we're going to admit that defense spending is really about propping up the dollar, then sure, I'll agree there's a short-term benefit. The problem is, it's having the opposite effect in the long term. People are starting to see that it's a bad idea to have their wealth held hostage to the whims of American policy. As for your numbers, the dollars are fungible, so we're not really saying anything different.

---

Defense spending is only part of the equation, and the cost piece is a minority expense of the budget. The combination of economic interests and strategic stability is what allows it to happen. Defense is only part of that, and it's been and is critical to our global position, but not that we can't argue refined policy positions.

What's for certain is that no one's being held hostage. We've fallen victim to the complacency that relative peace and prosperity provide over long periods, along with the comfort of first world lifestyles. Social economic expectations are elevated well past the struggles (effort) required to attain them. It's our moral hazard and is reflected in areas like savings rates and personal debt. And our government follows that pattern in its own fiscal behavior in the interest of assuaging their electorate.

The false dilemma is looking at foreign lands, people, or expenditures for the blame when it's our own internal reflection and evaluation that is necessary. But that's much harder than pointing a finger away from us.

---

When I say held hostage I'm talking about other countries not wanting to do business in dollars. All these failed wars and sanctions are going to backfire bigly. The blame is here in the US, but don't blame Americans who struggle to do as well as their parents (if that). You ship the jobs overseas, and people still have to live. Entitlements are built into the neoliberal order just as much as defense, like it or not.

The_barBEARian said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Israel is a fantastic return on investment, as far as allies go...

---

More Boomer bull*****

Tell this to any American under 40 and there is a 99% chance they will disagree with you.

---

Which means it is correct. right? The under 40 crowd has a good grasp of the situation. The under 40's I know, most don't know where Israel is on the map, never mind the Cost/Benefit of whether supporting them is in America's interest. They couldn't tell you anything about Israel, yet they know policy. But, hey 99% are against it.

“Chicago became the largest U.S. city to call for a cease-fire in Gaza.

And in return, Gaza called for a ceasefire in Chicago.” pic.twitter.com/lGaSypVwyG

— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) February 4, 2024

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

America responds to terrorism at the place and time of our choosing. We chose to strike 85 places simultaneously in two countries to tell the Iranian regime that the #IRGC is just the start … & we didn’t break a sweat doing it.

— Malcolm Nance (@MalcolmNance) February 3, 2024

---

Is that fat **** back from Ukraine?

---

To his credit, at least he went over there if only to stage some photos to look like he was doing something.

None of the Slava Ukraini's on this board like Trey or ATLbear did ***** They want other people to pay for and die for their wars.

---

Oh, this argument? Some of us did things for this country and others you'll never see or hear about on social media. Get a job or go down and stop some brown men from entering this country (your big gripe), or patrol your neighborhood, or do anything productive instead of hiding behind the freedom and privilege others afford you as you do nothing but cowardly whine about.

---

I must have touched a nerve?

How am I being a coward by taking to unpopular opinion in a thread where the majority of posters would sacrifice their first born children for Israel?

I'm not the one advocating for foreign wars and more spending that has depleted the generational wealth of the vast majority of Americans.

Whatever you think you've done has probably done more harm than good. You are a dummy with an inflated sense of self-worth.

We haven't had the draft since Vietnam so no one asked you to do anything other than not make life more difficult for the rest of us... but even that seems to be too much to ask.

---

Well I certainly don't overinflate my worth to believe I could make yours or many others lives more difficult, although my wife might disagree.

I don't care about the popularity of your opinion. Redbrick and others express opinions different than mine, but at least there's a level of cogent rationale even if I disagree. You operate from a place of personal grievance and character anger that is hard to palate much less engage. So I'll try to do better and not take it to a more personal level and stick with the debated issues. But I'll still call a spade a spade if you put it out there.

And to get back to the issues, generational wealth has been minimally if at all impacted by government expenditures on foreign nations or conflicts within the last 50 years.

---

That is total bull*****

A can of coke cost 5 cents in 1970.

Inflation, caused be insane spending, is the silent killer of generational wealth.

---

Agree, inflation is absolutely at issue. But what you don't seem to contemplate is that discretionary spending as a whole over the years, which foreign aid falls under, has been a small contributor to deficit spending over those 50 years. It is entitlement spending which has compounded our deficits and led to the inflationary impact of our monetary policy. I keep mentioning this but no one wants to talk about it because I think no one wants to admit our "America first" part of our budget is what's drowning us.

---

I am support you in cutting Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security... but those are harder cuts to make bcs Americans will directly suffer for these spending cuts.

Americans will not directly suffer if we refuse to send another $15 billion to Israel next week.

---

You can't say that blanketedly as it depends upon what the 15 Billion is spent on (admittedly I don't know the details). However if it involves shutting down weapons production or shuttering support operations for U.S. military personnel it could be Americans losing jobs. Reality is sometimes it's just shifting around existing resources and putting a price tag on it and we actually don't save anything on a real dollar basis. Unlike direct reduction in transfer payments from entitlements.

---

Weapons manufacture doesn't enrich us in any real sense. Its purpose is, or should be, to protect the productive economy. The more paper you have to spend on bullets, the less you have for bread and butter. Saving jobs has zero weight as an argument for defense spending.

---

Ironic as we communicate via something developed through defense spending.

You'd think you could grasp at this point we spend the paper on both without the discipline to sacrifice either. One we actually attempt to pay for, the other we just add to its cost.

---

I can grasp it, though I don't know where you get the idea that we're attempting to pay for either. It's all supported by borrowing to a great extent. The difference is that welfare at least has tangible benefits. The only benefit of defense is protection from threats that may or may not exist.

---

No, I don't think you actually grasp it. Do you know how the Federal Budget works? We have direct payroll taxes ($1.4 Trillion) for SS, Medicare, and income security that are woefully below costs. It's a $75 Trillion accruing liability. We have income and related taxes ($3+ Trillion) to pay for discretionary spending that more than covers both defense and non defense spending ($1.7 Trillion). The balance of those taxes then go to cover the massive shortfall of mandatory (entitlement) spending ($4.1 Trillion consisting mostly of SS/Med). The shortfall is then borrowed. If we cut 100% of the defense budget ($700 Billion) we would still have to borrow nearly $800 Billion dollars. That's how out of whack it is.

While there is a minimal short term benefit of the type of welfare we have institutionalized, the long term impact has been a subtle destruction of the middle class and a societal dependency that is a frightening cycle hurting Americans from an inflationary perspective which in turn puts pressure on increasing required entitlement spending. In essence, a death circle of dependency and liability.

So keep the global dominance of our military and the dollar, or the music stops and there will be no chairs to sit in for this welfare. Or we can get serious about entitlements.

---

Well, this is a whole new discussion. If we're going to admit that defense spending is really about propping up the dollar, then sure, I'll agree there's a short-term benefit. The problem is, it's having the opposite effect in the long term. People are starting to see that it's a bad idea to have their wealth held hostage to the whims of American policy. As for your numbers, the dollars are fungible, so we're not really saying anything different.

---

Defense spending is only part of the equation, and the cost piece is a minority expense of the budget. The combination of economic interests and strategic stability is what allows it to happen. Defense is only part of that, and it's been and is critical to our global position, but not that we can't argue refined policy positions.

What's for certain is that no one's being held hostage. We've fallen victim to the complacency that relative peace and prosperity provide over long periods, along with the comfort of first world lifestyles. Social economic expectations are elevated well past the struggles (effort) required to attain them. It's our moral hazard and is reflected in areas like savings rates and personal debt. And our government follows that pattern in its own fiscal behavior in the interest of assuaging their electorate.

The false dilemma is looking at foreign lands, people, or expenditures for the blame when it's our own internal reflection and evaluation that is necessary. But that's much harder than pointing a finger away from us.

---

When I say held hostage I'm talking about other countries not wanting to do business in dollars. All these failed wars and sanctions are going to backfire bigly. The blame is here in the US, but don't blame Americans who struggle to do as well as their parents (if that). You ship the jobs overseas, and people still have to live. Entitlements are built into the neoliberal order just as much as defense, like it or not.

---

So you have empathy for other nations to the detriment of the U.S.? Interesting. We lose the dollar as the primary global reserve currency and the fat lady starts singing.

Technology and not outsourcing is the primary culprit of those "lost jobs". And it's those parents who are costing us the most in entitlements.

The US workforce and education system has failed to keep up/adjust with the changing requirements of work. Some of it is on the individuals and some of it is on the institutions. As the quote on historical cycles go, "hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, weak men create hard times". We're somewhere in phases 3-4.

boognish_bear said:

---

“Chicago became the largest U.S. city to call for a cease-fire in Gaza.

And in return, Gaza called for a ceasefire in Chicago.” pic.twitter.com/lGaSypVwyG

— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) February 4, 2024

---

Someone stole that from Babylon Bee.

https://babylonbee.com/news/gaza-votes-for-ceasefire-in-chicago

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

America responds to terrorism at the place and time of our choosing. We chose to strike 85 places simultaneously in two countries to tell the Iranian regime that the #IRGC is just the start … & we didn’t break a sweat doing it.

— Malcolm Nance (@MalcolmNance) February 3, 2024

---

Is that fat **** back from Ukraine?

---

To his credit, at least he went over there if only to stage some photos to look like he was doing something.

None of the Slava Ukraini's on this board like Trey or ATLbear did ***** They want other people to pay for and die for their wars.

---

Oh, this argument? Some of us did things for this country and others you'll never see or hear about on social media. Get a job or go down and stop some brown men from entering this country (your big gripe), or patrol your neighborhood, or do anything productive instead of hiding behind the freedom and privilege others afford you as you do nothing but cowardly whine about.

---

I must have touched a nerve?

How am I being a coward by taking to unpopular opinion in a thread where the majority of posters would sacrifice their first born children for Israel?

I'm not the one advocating for foreign wars and more spending that has depleted the generational wealth of the vast majority of Americans.

Whatever you think you've done has probably done more harm than good. You are a dummy with an inflated sense of self-worth.

We haven't had the draft since Vietnam so no one asked you to do anything other than not make life more difficult for the rest of us... but even that seems to be too much to ask.

---

Well I certainly don't overinflate my worth to believe I could make yours or many others lives more difficult, although my wife might disagree.

I don't care about the popularity of your opinion. Redbrick and others express opinions different than mine, but at least there's a level of cogent rationale even if I disagree. You operate from a place of personal grievance and character anger that is hard to palate much less engage. So I'll try to do better and not take it to a more personal level and stick with the debated issues. But I'll still call a spade a spade if you put it out there.

And to get back to the issues, generational wealth has been minimally if at all impacted by government expenditures on foreign nations or conflicts within the last 50 years.

---

That is total bull*****

A can of coke cost 5 cents in 1970.

Inflation, caused be insane spending, is the silent killer of generational wealth.

---

Agree, inflation is absolutely at issue. But what you don't seem to contemplate is that discretionary spending as a whole over the years, which foreign aid falls under, has been a small contributor to deficit spending over those 50 years. It is entitlement spending which has compounded our deficits and led to the inflationary impact of our monetary policy. I keep mentioning this but no one wants to talk about it because I think no one wants to admit our "America first" part of our budget is what's drowning us.

---

I am support you in cutting Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security... but those are harder cuts to make bcs Americans will directly suffer for these spending cuts.

Americans will not directly suffer if we refuse to send another $15 billion to Israel next week.

---

You can't say that blanketedly as it depends upon what the 15 Billion is spent on (admittedly I don't know the details). However if it involves shutting down weapons production or shuttering support operations for U.S. military personnel it could be Americans losing jobs. Reality is sometimes it's just shifting around existing resources and putting a price tag on it and we actually don't save anything on a real dollar basis. Unlike direct reduction in transfer payments from entitlements.

---

Weapons manufacture doesn't enrich us in any real sense. Its purpose is, or should be, to protect the productive economy. The more paper you have to spend on bullets, the less you have for bread and butter. Saving jobs has zero weight as an argument for defense spending.

---

Ironic as we communicate via something developed through defense spending.

You'd think you could grasp at this point we spend the paper on both without the discipline to sacrifice either. One we actually attempt to pay for, the other we just add to its cost.

---

I can grasp it, though I don't know where you get the idea that we're attempting to pay for either. It's all supported by borrowing to a great extent. The difference is that welfare at least has tangible benefits. The only benefit of defense is protection from threats that may or may not exist.

---

No, I don't think you actually grasp it. Do you know how the Federal Budget works? We have direct payroll taxes ($1.4 Trillion) for SS, Medicare, and income security that are woefully below costs. It's a $75 Trillion accruing liability. We have income and related taxes ($3+ Trillion) to pay for discretionary spending that more than covers both defense and non defense spending ($1.7 Trillion). The balance of those taxes then go to cover the massive shortfall of mandatory (entitlement) spending ($4.1 Trillion consisting mostly of SS/Med). The shortfall is then borrowed. If we cut 100% of the defense budget ($700 Billion) we would still have to borrow nearly $800 Billion dollars. That's how out of whack it is.

While there is a minimal short term benefit of the type of welfare we have institutionalized, the long term impact has been a subtle destruction of the middle class and a societal dependency that is a frightening cycle hurting Americans from an inflationary perspective which in turn puts pressure on increasing required entitlement spending. In essence, a death circle of dependency and liability.

So keep the global dominance of our military and the dollar, or the music stops and there will be no chairs to sit in for this welfare. Or we can get serious about entitlements.

---

Well, this is a whole new discussion. If we're going to admit that defense spending is really about propping up the dollar, then sure, I'll agree there's a short-term benefit. The problem is, it's having the opposite effect in the long term. People are starting to see that it's a bad idea to have their wealth held hostage to the whims of American policy. As for your numbers, the dollars are fungible, so we're not really saying anything different.

---

Defense spending is only part of the equation, and the cost piece is a minority expense of the budget. The combination of economic interests and strategic stability is what allows it to happen. Defense is only part of that, and it's been and is critical to our global position, but not that we can't argue refined policy positions.

What's for certain is that no one's being held hostage. We've fallen victim to the complacency that relative peace and prosperity provide over long periods, along with the comfort of first world lifestyles. Social economic expectations are elevated well past the struggles (effort) required to attain them. It's our moral hazard and is reflected in areas like savings rates and personal debt. And our government follows that pattern in its own fiscal behavior in the interest of assuaging their electorate.

The false dilemma is looking at foreign lands, people, or expenditures for the blame when it's our own internal reflection and evaluation that is necessary. But that's much harder than pointing a finger away from us.

---

When I say held hostage I'm talking about other countries not wanting to do business in dollars. All these failed wars and sanctions are going to backfire bigly. The blame is here in the US, but don't blame Americans who struggle to do as well as their parents (if that). You ship the jobs overseas, and people still have to live. Entitlements are built into the neoliberal order just as much as defense, like it or not.

---

So you have empathy for other nations to the detriment of the U.S.? Interesting. We lose the dollar as the primary global reserve currency and the fat lady starts singing.

Technology and not outsourcing is the primary culprit of those "lost jobs". And it's those parents who are costing us the most in entitlements.

The US workforce and education system has failed to keep up/adjust with the changing requirements of work. Some of it is on the individuals and some of it is on the institutions. As the quote on historical cycles go, "hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, weak men create hard times". We're somewhere in phases 3-4.

---

I have empathy for all nations involved, particularly my own, but we can't postpone the reckoning forever. The longer we do, the worse it will be. The idea that we can rob and kill our way back to prosperity just continues to feed our illusions. I think we all know this on some level. I'm struck more and more by the undercurrent of despair running through these debates. Other countries have faced fiscal problems and solved them. Everyone has to eventually.

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

America responds to terrorism at the place and time of our choosing. We chose to strike 85 places simultaneously in two countries to tell the Iranian regime that the #IRGC is just the start … & we didn’t break a sweat doing it.

— Malcolm Nance (@MalcolmNance) February 3, 2024

---

Is that fat **** back from Ukraine?

---

To his credit, at least he went over there if only to stage some photos to look like he was doing something.

None of the Slava Ukraini's on this board like Trey or ATLbear did ***** They want other people to pay for and die for their wars.

---

Oh, this argument? Some of us did things for this country and others you'll never see or hear about on social media. Get a job or go down and stop some brown men from entering this country (your big gripe), or patrol your neighborhood, or do anything productive instead of hiding behind the freedom and privilege others afford you as you do nothing but cowardly whine about.

---

I must have touched a nerve?

How am I being a coward by taking to unpopular opinion in a thread where the majority of posters would sacrifice their first born children for Israel?

I'm not the one advocating for foreign wars and more spending that has depleted the generational wealth of the vast majority of Americans.

Whatever you think you've done has probably done more harm than good. You are a dummy with an inflated sense of self-worth.

We haven't had the draft since Vietnam so no one asked you to do anything other than not make life more difficult for the rest of us... but even that seems to be too much to ask.

---

Well I certainly don't overinflate my worth to believe I could make yours or many others lives more difficult, although my wife might disagree.

I don't care about the popularity of your opinion. Redbrick and others express opinions different than mine, but at least there's a level of cogent rationale even if I disagree. You operate from a place of personal grievance and character anger that is hard to palate much less engage. So I'll try to do better and not take it to a more personal level and stick with the debated issues. But I'll still call a spade a spade if you put it out there.

And to get back to the issues, generational wealth has been minimally if at all impacted by government expenditures on foreign nations or conflicts within the last 50 years.

---

That is total bull*****

A can of coke cost 5 cents in 1970.

Inflation, caused be insane spending, is the silent killer of generational wealth.

---

Agree, inflation is absolutely at issue. But what you don't seem to contemplate is that discretionary spending as a whole over the years, which foreign aid falls under, has been a small contributor to deficit spending over those 50 years. It is entitlement spending which has compounded our deficits and led to the inflationary impact of our monetary policy. I keep mentioning this but no one wants to talk about it because I think no one wants to admit our "America first" part of our budget is what's drowning us.

---

I am support you in cutting Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security... but those are harder cuts to make bcs Americans will directly suffer for these spending cuts.

Americans will not directly suffer if we refuse to send another $15 billion to Israel next week.

---

You can't say that blanketedly as it depends upon what the 15 Billion is spent on (admittedly I don't know the details). However if it involves shutting down weapons production or shuttering support operations for U.S. military personnel it could be Americans losing jobs. Reality is sometimes it's just shifting around existing resources and putting a price tag on it and we actually don't save anything on a real dollar basis. Unlike direct reduction in transfer payments from entitlements.

---

Weapons manufacture doesn't enrich us in any real sense. Its purpose is, or should be, to protect the productive economy. The more paper you have to spend on bullets, the less you have for bread and butter. Saving jobs has zero weight as an argument for defense spending.

---

Ironic as we communicate via something developed through defense spending.

You'd think you could grasp at this point we spend the paper on both without the discipline to sacrifice either. One we actually attempt to pay for, the other we just add to its cost.

---

I can grasp it, though I don't know where you get the idea that we're attempting to pay for either. It's all supported by borrowing to a great extent. The difference is that welfare at least has tangible benefits. The only benefit of defense is protection from threats that may or may not exist.

---

No, I don't think you actually grasp it. Do you know how the Federal Budget works? We have direct payroll taxes ($1.4 Trillion) for SS, Medicare, and income security that are woefully below costs. It's a $75 Trillion accruing liability. We have income and related taxes ($3+ Trillion) to pay for discretionary spending that more than covers both defense and non defense spending ($1.7 Trillion). The balance of those taxes then go to cover the massive shortfall of mandatory (entitlement) spending ($4.1 Trillion consisting mostly of SS/Med). The shortfall is then borrowed. If we cut 100% of the defense budget ($700 Billion) we would still have to borrow nearly $800 Billion dollars. That's how out of whack it is.

While there is a minimal short term benefit of the type of welfare we have institutionalized, the long term impact has been a subtle destruction of the middle class and a societal dependency that is a frightening cycle hurting Americans from an inflationary perspective which in turn puts pressure on increasing required entitlement spending. In essence, a death circle of dependency and liability.

So keep the global dominance of our military and the dollar, or the music stops and there will be no chairs to sit in for this welfare. Or we can get serious about entitlements.

---

Well, this is a whole new discussion. If we're going to admit that defense spending is really about propping up the dollar, then sure, I'll agree there's a short-term benefit. The problem is, it's having the opposite effect in the long term. People are starting to see that it's a bad idea to have their wealth held hostage to the whims of American policy. As for your numbers, the dollars are fungible, so we're not really saying anything different.

---

Defense spending is only part of the equation, and the cost piece is a minority expense of the budget. The combination of economic interests and strategic stability is what allows it to happen. Defense is only part of that, and it's been and is critical to our global position, but not that we can't argue refined policy positions.

What's for certain is that no one's being held hostage. We've fallen victim to the complacency that relative peace and prosperity provide over long periods, along with the comfort of first world lifestyles. Social economic expectations are elevated well past the struggles (effort) required to attain them. It's our moral hazard and is reflected in areas like savings rates and personal debt. And our government follows that pattern in its own fiscal behavior in the interest of assuaging their electorate.

The false dilemma is looking at foreign lands, people, or expenditures for the blame when it's our own internal reflection and evaluation that is necessary. But that's much harder than pointing a finger away from us.

---

When I say held hostage I'm talking about other countries not wanting to do business in dollars. All these failed wars and sanctions are going to backfire bigly. The blame is here in the US, but don't blame Americans who struggle to do as well as their parents (if that). You ship the jobs overseas, and people still have to live. Entitlements are built into the neoliberal order just as much as defense, like it or not.

---

So you have empathy for other nations to the detriment of the U.S.? Interesting. We lose the dollar as the primary global reserve currency and the fat lady starts singing.

Technology and not outsourcing is the primary culprit of those "lost jobs". And it's those parents who are costing us the most in entitlements.

The US workforce and education system has failed to keep up/adjust with the changing requirements of work. Some of it is on the individuals and some of it is on the institutions. As the quote on historical cycles go, "hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, weak men create hard times". We're somewhere in phases 3-4.

---

I have empathy for all nations involved, particularly my own, but we can't postpone the reckoning forever. The longer we do, the worse it will be. The idea that we can rob and kill our way back to prosperity just continues to feed our illusions. I think we all know this on some level. I'm struck more and more by the undercurrent of despair running through these debates. Other countries have faced fiscal problems and solved them. Everyone has to eventually.

---

Despair? We have self loathing guilt aggregation fomented by an unscrupulous mosh pit of social media echo chambers. Welcome to an era where our strengths are positioned (propagandized) as our weakness or something to be disdained while our weaknesses should be lauded as noble. Rob and kill? Classic example.

We get most of our power through our economic might and our projection of power, not the actual utilization. That's a fact.

The_barBEARian said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Israel is a fantastic return on investment, as far as allies go...

---

More Boomer bull*****

Tell this to any American under 40 and there is a 99% chance they will disagree with you.

---

Americans under 40 might be the softest punk ass b8tches ever raised. They are so uneducated a good chunk of them truly think communism is as good as capitalism.

Thanks I prefer to listen to people who have some clue *** they are talking about.

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

America responds to terrorism at the place and time of our choosing. We chose to strike 85 places simultaneously in two countries to tell the Iranian regime that the #IRGC is just the start … & we didn’t break a sweat doing it.

— Malcolm Nance (@MalcolmNance) February 3, 2024

---

Is that fat **** back from Ukraine?

---

To his credit, at least he went over there if only to stage some photos to look like he was doing something.

None of the Slava Ukraini's on this board like Trey or ATLbear did ***** They want other people to pay for and die for their wars.

---

Oh, this argument? Some of us did things for this country and others you'll never see or hear about on social media. Get a job or go down and stop some brown men from entering this country (your big gripe), or patrol your neighborhood, or do anything productive instead of hiding behind the freedom and privilege others afford you as you do nothing but cowardly whine about.

---

I must have touched a nerve?

How am I being a coward by taking to unpopular opinion in a thread where the majority of posters would sacrifice their first born children for Israel?

I'm not the one advocating for foreign wars and more spending that has depleted the generational wealth of the vast majority of Americans.

Whatever you think you've done has probably done more harm than good. You are a dummy with an inflated sense of self-worth.

We haven't had the draft since Vietnam so no one asked you to do anything other than not make life more difficult for the rest of us... but even that seems to be too much to ask.

---

Well I certainly don't overinflate my worth to believe I could make yours or many others lives more difficult, although my wife might disagree.

I don't care about the popularity of your opinion. Redbrick and others express opinions different than mine, but at least there's a level of cogent rationale even if I disagree. You operate from a place of personal grievance and character anger that is hard to palate much less engage. So I'll try to do better and not take it to a more personal level and stick with the debated issues. But I'll still call a spade a spade if you put it out there.

And to get back to the issues, generational wealth has been minimally if at all impacted by government expenditures on foreign nations or conflicts within the last 50 years.

---

That is total bull*****

A can of coke cost 5 cents in 1970.

Inflation, caused be insane spending, is the silent killer of generational wealth.

---

Agree, inflation is absolutely at issue. But what you don't seem to contemplate is that discretionary spending as a whole over the years, which foreign aid falls under, has been a small contributor to deficit spending over those 50 years. It is entitlement spending which has compounded our deficits and led to the inflationary impact of our monetary policy. I keep mentioning this but no one wants to talk about it because I think no one wants to admit our "America first" part of our budget is what's drowning us.

---

I am support you in cutting Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security... but those are harder cuts to make bcs Americans will directly suffer for these spending cuts.

Americans will not directly suffer if we refuse to send another $15 billion to Israel next week.

---

You can't say that blanketedly as it depends upon what the 15 Billion is spent on (admittedly I don't know the details). However if it involves shutting down weapons production or shuttering support operations for U.S. military personnel it could be Americans losing jobs. Reality is sometimes it's just shifting around existing resources and putting a price tag on it and we actually don't save anything on a real dollar basis. Unlike direct reduction in transfer payments from entitlements.

---

Weapons manufacture doesn't enrich us in any real sense. Its purpose is, or should be, to protect the productive economy. The more paper you have to spend on bullets, the less you have for bread and butter. Saving jobs has zero weight as an argument for defense spending.

---

Ironic as we communicate via something developed through defense spending.

You'd think you could grasp at this point we spend the paper on both without the discipline to sacrifice either. One we actually attempt to pay for, the other we just add to its cost.

---

I can grasp it, though I don't know where you get the idea that we're attempting to pay for either. It's all supported by borrowing to a great extent. The difference is that welfare at least has tangible benefits. The only benefit of defense is protection from threats that may or may not exist.

---

No, I don't think you actually grasp it. Do you know how the Federal Budget works? We have direct payroll taxes ($1.4 Trillion) for SS, Medicare, and income security that are woefully below costs. It's a $75 Trillion accruing liability. We have income and related taxes ($3+ Trillion) to pay for discretionary spending that more than covers both defense and non defense spending ($1.7 Trillion). The balance of those taxes then go to cover the massive shortfall of mandatory (entitlement) spending ($4.1 Trillion consisting mostly of SS/Med). The shortfall is then borrowed. If we cut 100% of the defense budget ($700 Billion) we would still have to borrow nearly $800 Billion dollars. That's how out of whack it is.

While there is a minimal short term benefit of the type of welfare we have institutionalized, the long term impact has been a subtle destruction of the middle class and a societal dependency that is a frightening cycle hurting Americans from an inflationary perspective which in turn puts pressure on increasing required entitlement spending. In essence, a death circle of dependency and liability.

So keep the global dominance of our military and the dollar, or the music stops and there will be no chairs to sit in for this welfare. Or we can get serious about entitlements.

---

Well, this is a whole new discussion. If we're going to admit that defense spending is really about propping up the dollar, then sure, I'll agree there's a short-term benefit. The problem is, it's having the opposite effect in the long term. People are starting to see that it's a bad idea to have their wealth held hostage to the whims of American policy. As for your numbers, the dollars are fungible, so we're not really saying anything different.

---

Defense spending is only part of the equation, and the cost piece is a minority expense of the budget. The combination of economic interests and strategic stability is what allows it to happen. Defense is only part of that, and it's been and is critical to our global position, but not that we can't argue refined policy positions.

What's for certain is that no one's being held hostage. We've fallen victim to the complacency that relative peace and prosperity provide over long periods, along with the comfort of first world lifestyles. Social economic expectations are elevated well past the struggles (effort) required to attain them. It's our moral hazard and is reflected in areas like savings rates and personal debt. And our government follows that pattern in its own fiscal behavior in the interest of assuaging their electorate.

The false dilemma is looking at foreign lands, people, or expenditures for the blame when it's our own internal reflection and evaluation that is necessary. But that's much harder than pointing a finger away from us.

---

When I say held hostage I'm talking about other countries not wanting to do business in dollars. All these failed wars and sanctions are going to backfire bigly. The blame is here in the US, but don't blame Americans who struggle to do as well as their parents (if that). You ship the jobs overseas, and people still have to live. Entitlements are built into the neoliberal order just as much as defense, like it or not.

---

So you have empathy for other nations to the detriment of the U.S.? Interesting. We lose the dollar as the primary global reserve currency and the fat lady starts singing.

Technology and not outsourcing is the primary culprit of those "lost jobs". And it's those parents who are costing us the most in entitlements.

The US workforce and education system has failed to keep up/adjust with the changing requirements of work. Some of it is on the individuals and some of it is on the institutions. As the quote on historical cycles go, "hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, weak men create hard times". We're somewhere in phases 3-4.

---

I have empathy for all nations involved, particularly my own, but we can't postpone the reckoning forever. The longer we do, the worse it will be. The idea that we can rob and kill our way back to prosperity just continues to feed our illusions. I think we all know this on some level. I'm struck more and more by the undercurrent of despair running through these debates. Other countries have faced fiscal problems and solved them. Everyone has to eventually.

---

Despair? We have self loathing guilt aggregation fomented by an unscrupulous mosh pit of social media echo chambers. Welcome to an era where our strengths are positioned (propagandized) as our weakness or something to be disdained while our weaknesses should be lauded as noble. Rob and kill? Classic example.

We get most of our power through our economic might and our projection of power, not the actual utilization. That's a fact.

---

That's exactly why utilizing it is such a bad idea. We're relying more and more on military actions that can't accomplish our goals and undermine our actual strengths.

The_barBEARian said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

I'm still waiting for one of the pro-Israel/Israel is our greatest ally guys to respond to my previous post:

Israel destroys the USS Liberty and kills 34 American servicemen in 1967 and instead of our leaders vowing to avenge the deaths of our people, they were rewarded with over $1 trillion, when adjusted for inflation, in economic and military aid. Why?

---

The British Army once ransacked Washington DC and the White House. Are you still angry at them, too?

---

Seriously? At least the other pro-Israel guys have enough intelligence and decency to ignore the question and not throw out a trash reply like this!

One was the war of 1812.... the hint is in its name... it was a WAR. Nobody assumed Great Britian was friendly not to mention an ally.

Americans have also been killed by the Mexicans, Spanish, Germans, Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, Vietnamese, Iraqi, Afghanis and countless others I'm sure I am forgetting. They were wars and almost universally we killed more of them than they killed of us.

The USS Liberty was a friendly, non-threatening ship in international waters. Name one of instance where US servicemen were directly attacked and slaughtered by a foreign nation and the US not only did not retaliate, they actually paid tribute to the attacking nation!

As Red alrdy mentioned we never gave Britian hundreds of BILLIONS in blank checks from American tax payer money in sustained economic and military aid?

I'm not saying we should go to war with Israel, but we damn sure shouldn't be helping them. They attacked and MURDERED 34 American servicemen and wounded over a hundred more. They knew they were Americans. Through a coordinated air and sea attack they were trying to kill every man on that ship. It's a miracle from God that any of them survived!

I'm not going to conjecture as to why Israel killed our people but those videos give a pretty good theory and it is chilling.... horrifying even.

Those 34 American Servicemen could have had families and grandchildren today. That is hundreds of Americans who were erased from our timeline by our "greatest ally"

---

You're stretching too far to justify a pre-determined conclusion.

The Liberty incident was in a different time & context. Relationships were different. the US played a mediator role, not a direct support role. That affected analytical conclusions on the Israeli side, about American intentions, which of course reduced the threshold of significance for whether the ship was US or Egyptian. (meaning Israel could not blithely assume that Americans might not use intel collected to Israel's detriment in either military or diplomatic purposes). I.E. the flag over the ship really didn't matter much, given the situation Israel was in (in an existential war on all fronts). Israel later concluded they misjudged (without specifying further), publicly apologized, and paid financial restitution. The event actually spurred the US to take a more direct role in Arab-Israeli affairs.

Israel is one of the best foreign policy investments we've ever made.

---

Former CIA analyst says the only reason anyone on the USS Liberty survived is bcs the Israeli's ran out of ammunition. During the attack the violated international law by blocking SOS signals and the Geneva convention by firing on rescue boats when an SOS signal finally was received. With allies like these, who needs enemies!

---

You have yet to establish that Israel knowingly, purposefully chose to attack the USA, that they had anything to gain from doing so, that such is a pattern of activity, etc..... Blocking SOS signals would serve to inhibit IFF, would it not?......

Climb off the crackpottery train.

The_barBEARian said:

---

So to paraphrase you admit this is the first time in history a foreign state kills American servicemen and instead of retaliating, it was covered up and a pitiful small amount of restitution was paid to the families. An amount that the Israeli's received back 100 million times since from the American Tax Payer....

How exactly was justice served here?

And you people wonder why "antisemitic" conspiracy theories float around the internet.

---

A foreign state killing US servicemen in an accident, in a misjudgment, an IFF error, or even a "we don't know who the hell that is for sure but we cannot risk it being an enemy" (which by context is quite clearly the most likely scenario) is quite a bit different that the premise you apply to every sentence you type on this, which is "Israel is a bloodthirsty killing machine which cannot be trusted not to bite the hand that feeds it."

Every other sentence in the story of US-Israel relationship partly or wholly rebuts such nonsense, and when the assessments are clouded, it is more often the US hand doing the diddling.

You are quite nearly unhinged on this.

The_barBEARian said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Israel is a fantastic return on investment, as far as allies go...

---

More Boomer bull*****

Tell this to any American under 40 and there is a 99% chance they will disagree with you.

---

Americans under 40, due to simple factors of inexperience in life, tend to be quite a bit less well-informed on the sturm & drang of foreign affairs than the graybeards. That has always been so. Your posts are just confirmation that things haven't changed much.

The_barBEARian said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

And I am honestly sickened this post got any likes... I suggest those posters move to Israel if they care more about Israeli lives than American lives.

---

Lighten up, Francis.

---

Listen to this before you tell anyone to lighten up.

---

well, that's blocked. I'm sure it was a harrowing experience for all involved, one they did not deserve. Same can be said about all those people on Iran Air Flight 655. All you can do in such a situation is apologize, fire the captain, start writing checks, and assess what could be done differently to prevent such from re-occuring.

You really don't like Jews very much, do you?

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Weapons manufacture doesn't enrich us in any real sense. Its purpose is, or should be, to protect the productive economy. The more paper you have to spend on bullets, the less you have for bread and butter. Saving jobs has zero weight as an argument for defense spending.

---

Ironic as we communicate via something developed through defense spending.

You'd think you could grasp at this point we spend the paper on both without the discipline to sacrifice either. One we actually attempt to pay for, the other we just add to its cost.

---

I can grasp it, though I don't know where you get the idea that we're attempting to pay for either. It's all supported by borrowing to a great extent. The difference is that welfare at least has tangible benefits. The only benefit of defense is protection from threats that may or may not exist.

---

No, I don't think you actually grasp it. Do you know how the Federal Budget works? We have direct payroll taxes ($1.4 Trillion) for SS, Medicare, and income security that are woefully below costs. It's a $75 Trillion accruing liability. We have income and related taxes ($3+ Trillion) to pay for discretionary spending that more than covers both defense and non defense spending ($1.7 Trillion). The balance of those taxes then go to cover the massive shortfall of mandatory (entitlement) spending ($4.1 Trillion consisting mostly of SS/Med). The shortfall is then borrowed. If we cut 100% of the defense budget ($700 Billion) we would still have to borrow nearly $800 Billion dollars. That's how out of whack it is.

While there is a minimal short term benefit of the type of welfare we have institutionalized, the long term impact has been a subtle destruction of the middle class and a societal dependency that is a frightening cycle hurting Americans from an inflationary perspective which in turn puts pressure on increasing required entitlement spending. In essence, a death circle of dependency and liability.

So keep the global dominance of our military and the dollar, or the music stops and there will be no chairs to sit in for this welfare. Or we can get serious about entitlements.

---

Well, this is a whole new discussion. If we're going to admit that defense spending is really about propping up the dollar, then sure, I'll agree there's a short-term benefit. The problem is, it's having the opposite effect in the long term. People are starting to see that it's a bad idea to have their wealth held hostage to the whims of American policy. As for your numbers, the dollars are fungible, so we're not really saying anything different.

---

Defense spending is only part of the equation, and the cost piece is a minority expense of the budget. The combination of economic interests and strategic stability is what allows it to happen. Defense is only part of that, and it's been and is critical to our global position, but not that we can't argue refined policy positions.

What's for certain is that no one's being held hostage. We've fallen victim to the complacency that relative peace and prosperity provide over long periods, along with the comfort of first world lifestyles. Social economic expectations are elevated well past the struggles (effort) required to attain them. It's our moral hazard and is reflected in areas like savings rates and personal debt. And our government follows that pattern in its own fiscal behavior in the interest of assuaging their electorate.

The false dilemma is looking at foreign lands, people, or expenditures for the blame when it's our own internal reflection and evaluation that is necessary. But that's much harder than pointing a finger away from us.

---

When I say held hostage I'm talking about other countries not wanting to do business in dollars. All these failed wars and sanctions are going to backfire bigly. The blame is here in the US, but don't blame Americans who struggle to do as well as their parents (if that). You ship the jobs overseas, and people still have to live. Entitlements are built into the neoliberal order just as much as defense, like it or not.

---

Wait a minute. On one hand, you say that Russia is no threat to Nato....bad demographics, bad economy, bad military, can't even defeat Ukraine so how could they possibly ever try to take on Nato. Yet here you are in the post above talking about our policy in Ukraine backfiring bigly.

which is it. Is Russia a threat, or not?

We are flicking our fingers at problems and hardly breaking a sweat, to good effect. Watch what happens if we fully mobilize. We will slice across geography like *****t thru a goose.

You cannot demilitarize your way to a balanced budget. No amount of isolationist foreign policy will save enough money to dent the deficit. To tame the spending, you are going to have to man-handle non-discretionary spending. Period.

you are pulling the reins of a trailered horse to try to stop the truck pulling it down the highway.

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Weapons manufacture doesn't enrich us in any real sense. Its purpose is, or should be, to protect the productive economy. The more paper you have to spend on bullets, the less you have for bread and butter. Saving jobs has zero weight as an argument for defense spending.

---

Ironic as we communicate via something developed through defense spending.

You'd think you could grasp at this point we spend the paper on both without the discipline to sacrifice either. One we actually attempt to pay for, the other we just add to its cost.

---

I can grasp it, though I don't know where you get the idea that we're attempting to pay for either. It's all supported by borrowing to a great extent. The difference is that welfare at least has tangible benefits. The only benefit of defense is protection from threats that may or may not exist.

---

No, I don't think you actually grasp it. Do you know how the Federal Budget works? We have direct payroll taxes ($1.4 Trillion) for SS, Medicare, and income security that are woefully below costs. It's a $75 Trillion accruing liability. We have income and related taxes ($3+ Trillion) to pay for discretionary spending that more than covers both defense and non defense spending ($1.7 Trillion). The balance of those taxes then go to cover the massive shortfall of mandatory (entitlement) spending ($4.1 Trillion consisting mostly of SS/Med). The shortfall is then borrowed. If we cut 100% of the defense budget ($700 Billion) we would still have to borrow nearly $800 Billion dollars. That's how out of whack it is.

While there is a minimal short term benefit of the type of welfare we have institutionalized, the long term impact has been a subtle destruction of the middle class and a societal dependency that is a frightening cycle hurting Americans from an inflationary perspective which in turn puts pressure on increasing required entitlement spending. In essence, a death circle of dependency and liability.

So keep the global dominance of our military and the dollar, or the music stops and there will be no chairs to sit in for this welfare. Or we can get serious about entitlements.

---

Well, this is a whole new discussion. If we're going to admit that defense spending is really about propping up the dollar, then sure, I'll agree there's a short-term benefit. The problem is, it's having the opposite effect in the long term. People are starting to see that it's a bad idea to have their wealth held hostage to the whims of American policy. As for your numbers, the dollars are fungible, so we're not really saying anything different.

---

Defense spending is only part of the equation, and the cost piece is a minority expense of the budget. The combination of economic interests and strategic stability is what allows it to happen. Defense is only part of that, and it's been and is critical to our global position, but not that we can't argue refined policy positions.

What's for certain is that no one's being held hostage. We've fallen victim to the complacency that relative peace and prosperity provide over long periods, along with the comfort of first world lifestyles. Social economic expectations are elevated well past the struggles (effort) required to attain them. It's our moral hazard and is reflected in areas like savings rates and personal debt. And our government follows that pattern in its own fiscal behavior in the interest of assuaging their electorate.

The false dilemma is looking at foreign lands, people, or expenditures for the blame when it's our own internal reflection and evaluation that is necessary. But that's much harder than pointing a finger away from us.

---

When I say held hostage I'm talking about other countries not wanting to do business in dollars. All these failed wars and sanctions are going to backfire bigly. The blame is here in the US, but don't blame Americans who struggle to do as well as their parents (if that). You ship the jobs overseas, and people still have to live. Entitlements are built into the neoliberal order just as much as defense, like it or not.

---

Wait a minute. On one hand, you say that Russia is no threat to Nato....bad demographics, bad economy, bad military, can't even defeat Ukraine so how could they possibly ever try to take on Nato. Yet here you are in the post above talking about our policy in Ukraine backfiring bigly.

which is it. Is Russia a threat, or not?

---

Redbrick is the one who says all of that stuff. I think Russia's doing just fine against Ukraine. Taking on Europe directly would be a different matter.

whiterock said:

---

We are flicking our fingers at problems and hardly breaking a sweat, to good effect. Watch what happens if we fully mobilize. We will slice across geography like *****t thru a goose.

You cannot demilitarize your way to a balanced budget. No amount of isolationist foreign policy will save enough money to dent the deficit. To tame the spending, you are going to have to man-handle non-discretionary spending. Period.

you are pulling the reins of a trailered horse to try to stop the truck pulling it down the highway.

---

No one's saying we can fully balance the budget by cutting defense. We certainly can make a dent.

Excellent metaphor

Maybe. Europe is pretty weak militarily. In the 1990s they tried to deal with the genocide in the Balkans and were ineffective until the US got involved. That's their own neighborhood! I see no reason to believe their militaries have improved significantly.

They are still spoiled by having the US defend them for 50 years during the Cold War.

Such a tiny dent that it wouldn't be very noticeable. Not as much as the obsession some have with foreign aid, especially to Israel, but still almost insignificant. I say that because cutting defense would have to be very careful and precise so as to avoid gutting our military strength. In the past, the fascists always want led to gut defense because they wanted us weak. They didn't care if we lost wars (maybe that's why the keep getting us involved in places we have no business going) & they don't care how many people die as a result. It's sad to say but clearly true.

Today they are more interested in taking over the military, judd at y like they have taken over every other part of the government and most areas of our economy & culture resulting in stagflation, rot, perversion, and many other kinds of evil. Look how woke our military has become in which officers are more concerned with pronouns than doing their real jobs & the cadets in the academies are being indoctrinated with all the lies being pushed in public schools & taxpayers are paying for the unnecessary mutilation of their bodies in the name of the trans cult.

Cutting entitlements would have to be done carefully too. We can't just eliminate a system that whole generations have paid into and relied upon.

historian said:

---

Maybe. Europe is pretty weak militarily. In the 1990s they tried to deal with the genocide in the Balkans and were ineffective until the US got involved. That's their own neighborhood! I see no reason to believe their militaries have improved significantly.

They are still spoiled by having the US defend them for 50 years during the Cold War.

---

The reasons for spending tens of billions annually for the defense of western Europe ended decades ago.

Time to end such ridiculous waste and use the billions to benefit our own people.

But lobbyists have control of our politicians.

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

And I am honestly sickened this post got any likes... I suggest those posters move to Israel if they care more about Israeli lives than American lives.

---

Lighten up, Francis.

---

Listen to this before you tell anyone to lighten up.

---

well, that's blocked. I'm sure it was a harrowing experience for all involved, one they did not deserve. Same can be said about all those people on Iran Air Flight 655. All you can do in such a situation is apologize, fire the captain, start writing checks, and assess what could be done differently to prevent such from re-occuring.

You really don't like Jews very much, do you?

---

I really don't like Americans being slaughtered in a false flag operation.

Appearently you are another wise boomer who values Israeli lives over American lives.

You are so wise, but you couldn't be bother to watch any of the videos I posted and hear the first hand testimony of the USS Liberty servicemen who survived?

I've been pretty open about my position on Israel. I think they view Americans as cattle. I think AIPAC has done more election interference than Russia, China, and the rest of the world combined. I would like to cut our alliance with them and return to neutrality.

These people are not the chosen ones, God doesn't exist, and the Bible, while having a tremendous amount of literary merit, is still just a very old book.

Genocide in the Balkans?

The Serbs were fighting for their very survival. The Turks and Islamists have been the ones genociding everyone in the Balkans for centuries.

The Serbs finally gain the initiative back and the US bombs them into extinction. All of Europe, not just Serbia, will eventually become an Islamic Caliphate bcs America chose to help the Islamists take over the native Christians in the 90ties.

You will sacrifice your first born children for the jews and Israel who are doing same things in Gaza and the West Bank today.

Why is Israel fighting for its survival ok? But Serbs can't fight back and need to accept having their land taken and being ethnically replaced?

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Weapons manufacture doesn't enrich us in any real sense. Its purpose is, or should be, to protect the productive economy. The more paper you have to spend on bullets, the less you have for bread and butter. Saving jobs has zero weight as an argument for defense spending.

---

Ironic as we communicate via something developed through defense spending.

You'd think you could grasp at this point we spend the paper on both without the discipline to sacrifice either. One we actually attempt to pay for, the other we just add to its cost.

---

I can grasp it, though I don't know where you get the idea that we're attempting to pay for either. It's all supported by borrowing to a great extent. The difference is that welfare at least has tangible benefits. The only benefit of defense is protection from threats that may or may not exist.

---

No, I don't think you actually grasp it. Do you know how the Federal Budget works? We have direct payroll taxes ($1.4 Trillion) for SS, Medicare, and income security that are woefully below costs. It's a $75 Trillion accruing liability. We have income and related taxes ($3+ Trillion) to pay for discretionary spending that more than covers both defense and non defense spending ($1.7 Trillion). The balance of those taxes then go to cover the massive shortfall of mandatory (entitlement) spending ($4.1 Trillion consisting mostly of SS/Med). The shortfall is then borrowed. If we cut 100% of the defense budget ($700 Billion) we would still have to borrow nearly $800 Billion dollars. That's how out of whack it is.

While there is a minimal short term benefit of the type of welfare we have institutionalized, the long term impact has been a subtle destruction of the middle class and a societal dependency that is a frightening cycle hurting Americans from an inflationary perspective which in turn puts pressure on increasing required entitlement spending. In essence, a death circle of dependency and liability.

So keep the global dominance of our military and the dollar, or the music stops and there will be no chairs to sit in for this welfare. Or we can get serious about entitlements.

---

Well, this is a whole new discussion. If we're going to admit that defense spending is really about propping up the dollar, then sure, I'll agree there's a short-term benefit. The problem is, it's having the opposite effect in the long term. People are starting to see that it's a bad idea to have their wealth held hostage to the whims of American policy. As for your numbers, the dollars are fungible, so we're not really saying anything different.

---

Defense spending is only part of the equation, and the cost piece is a minority expense of the budget. The combination of economic interests and strategic stability is what allows it to happen. Defense is only part of that, and it's been and is critical to our global position, but not that we can't argue refined policy positions.

What's for certain is that no one's being held hostage. We've fallen victim to the complacency that relative peace and prosperity provide over long periods, along with the comfort of first world lifestyles. Social economic expectations are elevated well past the struggles (effort) required to attain them. It's our moral hazard and is reflected in areas like savings rates and personal debt. And our government follows that pattern in its own fiscal behavior in the interest of assuaging their electorate.

The false dilemma is looking at foreign lands, people, or expenditures for the blame when it's our own internal reflection and evaluation that is necessary. But that's much harder than pointing a finger away from us.

---

When I say held hostage I'm talking about other countries not wanting to do business in dollars. All these failed wars and sanctions are going to backfire bigly. The blame is here in the US, but don't blame Americans who struggle to do as well as their parents (if that). You ship the jobs overseas, and people still have to live. Entitlements are built into the neoliberal order just as much as defense, like it or not.

---

Wait a minute. On one hand, you say that Russia is no threat to Nato....bad demographics, bad economy, bad military, can't even defeat Ukraine so how could they possibly ever try to take on Nato. Yet here you are in the post above talking about our policy in Ukraine backfiring bigly.

which is it. Is Russia a threat, or not?

---

That's my position...not his

And its backed up by facts....the russian air force can not even get air superiority over a country right on their borders. That would be like the USA failing to do that over Canada.

Just take their airforce....

[One of the greatest surprises from the initial phase of the Russian invasion of Ukraine has been the inability of the Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS) fighter and fighter-bomber fleets to establish air superiority, or to deploy significant combat power in support of the under-performing Russian ground forces...

...failure to establish air superiority could be explained by lack of early warning, coordination capacity and sufficient planning time, the continued pattern of activity suggests a more significant conclusion: that the VKS lacks the institutional capacity to plan, brief and fly complex air operations at scale. There is significant circumstantial evidence to support this, admittedly tentative, explanation]

https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/rusi-defence-systems/russian-air-force-actually-incapable-complex-air-operations

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russian-air-force-dying-slow-and-painful-death-ukraine-208045

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2022/09/12/russias-air-force-goes-missing-at-the-worst-possible-time-during-ukraines-counteroffensive/

I agree with this. But here is the question that I have never heard answered by anyone defending Russia's Ukraine invasion:

If Putin knows he has zero chance against NATO, why do you buy into the argument that Putin invaded Ukraine over NATO? Said another way, how would invading and taking over Ukraine somehow make Putin the favorite over NATO (or even appreciably shorten the odds)?

The only logical answer to those questions is that the invasion (like others preceding it) had nothing to do with NATO and everything to do with some combination of (1) money, (2) Putin's longstanding and very public dream of reconstituting what he could of the old empire, and (3) his longstanding and very public belief that Ukrainians aren't a real people.

The_barBEARian said:

---

Genocide in the Balkans?

The Serbs were fighting for their very survival. The Turks and Islamists have been the ones genociding everyone in the Balkans for centuries.

---

It is pretty wild that DC decided to intervene on the side of the Muslim Bosnaks in that war against Orthodox Christian Serbs.

At the very least the Gulf Arabs like Saudi Arabia used their influence to played us for fools…funneling money to some really bad guys.

America saved the Bosnian Muslims from being crushed and never was given any thanks for it by the Islamic world. If anything anti-American feeling increased after the 1990s....

Redbrickbear said:

---

It is pretty wild that DC decided to intervene on the side of the Muslim Bosnaks in that war against Orthodox Christian Serbs.

---

The same ancient and wise boomers in this thread telling us we have to sacrifice ourselves for Israel supported the bombing Christians who were attempting to secure a Christian Europe in the 90ties.

Now the most common boys name for children being born in European countries is Muhammad.

sombear said:

---

I agree with this. But here is the question that I have never heard answered by anyone defending Russia's Ukraine invasion:

If Putin knows he has zero chance against NATO, why do you buy into the argument that Putin invaded Ukraine over NATO? Said another way, how would invading and taking over Ukraine somehow make Putin the favorite over NATO (or even appreciably shorten the odds)?

The only logical answer to those questions is that the invasion (like others preceding it) had nothing to do with NATO and everything to do with some combination of (1) money, (2) Putin's longstanding and very public dream of reconstituting what he could of the old empire, and (3) his longstanding and very public belief that Ukrainians aren't a real people.

---

I wouldn't say zero chance, but he can't reconstitute the empire without confronting NATO. He can defend against further encroachment via Ukraine.

sombear said:

---

The only logical answer to those questions is that the invasion (like others preceding it) had nothing to do with NATO and everything to do with some combination of (1) money, (2) Putin's longstanding and very public dream of reconstituting what he could of the old empire, and (3) his longstanding and very public belief that Ukrainians aren't a real people.

---

All of the above.

sombear said:

---

If Putin knows he has zero chance against NATO, why do you buy into the argument that Putin invaded Ukraine over NATO? Said another way, how would invading and taking over Ukraine somehow make Putin the favorite over NATO (or even appreciably shorten the odds)?

---

That itself is a strange question.

Why would any country oppose a hostile foreign military alliance being on its borders?

China knows they have no chance against the Western alliance...yet obviously they would oppose USA troops being placed in Mongolia or Burma.

The geo-strategic imperative of Moscow is to keep Belarus, Ukraine, Georgia, and Kazakhstan on its side (by sweet talk or by military action)

DC seems committed to pulling those countries out of the orbit of Moscow...by coups and proxy wars if necessary.

Why Moscow wants to prevent that is obvious....why DC cares that much is the real question.

Latin America, Central & Western Europe, East Asia, the oil rich Middle east....these are all far more important areas to American prosperity and security than Belarus or Ukraine.