Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: MikefromOhio
Military spending is one of things specifically spelled out within the constitution. Hiding behind the cost for something that is clearly in our interest to be involved it (should it come to that) won't go over very well and is very much like what the Libtards have done since 2003

Of course! Military spending for self-defense is a perfectly legitimate function of goverment. Military spending to become a world nanny state, however, is not what the founders envisioned.

Clearly in our interest? I don't think that the president has a crystal ball to determine any more than he ha as crystal ball to determine whether more welfare or housing subsidies are in our national interest. After all, back in 1953 the president thought it was "clearly" in our national interest to overthrow a democratically elected government in Iraq. Most recently, the president thought it was "clearly" in our national interest to support dictatorships in the Muslim states in the former Soviet Union.

321 posted on 06/21/2009 7:43:46 AM PDT by Captain Kirk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 316 | View Replies ]


To: MikefromOhio

I meant to say to “overthrow a democraticaly elected government in Iran.”


324 posted on 06/21/2009 8:33:56 AM PDT by Captain Kirk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies ]

To: Captain Kirk
Of course! Military spending for self-defense is a perfectly legitimate function of goverment. Military spending to become a world nanny state, however, is not what the founders envisioned.

Clearly in our interest? I don't think that the president has a crystal ball to determine any more than he ha as crystal ball to determine whether more welfare or housing subsidies are in our national interest. After all, back in 1953 the president thought it was "clearly" in our national interest to overthrow a democratically elected government in Iraq. Most recently, the president thought it was "clearly" in our national interest to support dictatorships in the Muslim states in the former Soviet Union.


I love how easily you feel the need to speak for the founders. Especially since the founders, in their time, had no idea things like jets and international air travel and all that stuff were even possible.

It doesn't take 6 months to cross an ocean like it did back then. We have interests in the region even if it's just so that if we don't get involved, someone ELSE will.

Go hide in your shell if you want, but you'll only be missing out on something that will be vitally important to the United States, her allies and our very core interests. I've said in other comments it's not there yet, but it will be very obvious when the time has come.
328 posted on 06/21/2009 10:59:28 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (Fides et Audax)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson