Should all wars require mandatory funding?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
manimal

manimal

Lifer
Mar 30, 2007
13,560
8
0
If congress brought about legislation that required any police action/war to be funded and payed for would it make a difference?


Would Iraq ever have happened?

The military has enjoyed unparalleled growth for how many generations? Maybe the hawks would think twice before bombing someone if they had to convince their constituents that it would require taxes or cutting of other programs..


Sidenotes:

Should we start charging Japan/Korea/Germany/etc for the troops we keep there? Clearly most of those troops are not necessary anymore since the likelihood of a ground war with China/Russia is about nil...


Are nuclear submarines irrelevant in the current and future landscape?

How many megacarriers are required today?



Finally how strange is it to see Barney Frank and Ron Paul agree about something...
 
shortylickens

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
82,854
17,364
136
In theory Congress is supposed to approve all WARS. Not just the specific details of said wars.
Since that obviously doesnt apply I dont see how making more laws would matter. The president would just ignore those as well.
 
manimal

manimal

Lifer
Mar 30, 2007
13,560
8
0
shortylickens said:
In theory Congress is supposed to approve all WARS. Not just the specific details of said wars.
Since that obviously doesnt apply I dont see how making more laws would matter. The president would just ignore those as well.
Click to expand...

Approving and funding are two different things.
 
H

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
No --- No --- Yes --- No --- 9 or 10

Some debt is good (believe it or not) --- especially when investing in physical infrastructure. Some wars are justified and would probably not be in our best interest to require complete funding of ALL overseas military excursions.

Fighting for 9+ years without any direct funding played into OBL's hands and has played a big part in the current mess we are in.

We need our Subs to spy on all that underwater fiber :D

Carriers are great at projecting force but are anachronistic. We need jon boats with Death Rays --- LOL

Or cigarette racers that can launch multiple drones :thumbsup:


edit: And though it would be really nice to 'make them pay' for our bases in most cases our overall posture is in our benefit - not their benefit.

US Hegemony FTW !



--
 
Last edited:
manimal

manimal

Lifer
Mar 30, 2007
13,560
8
0
heyheybooboo said:
No --- No --- Yes --- No --- 9 or 10

Some debt is good (believe it or not) --- especially when investing in physical infrastructure. Some wars are justified and would probably not be in our best interest to require complete funding of ALL overseas military excursions.

Fighting for 9+ years without any direct funding played into OBL's hands and has played a big part in the current mess we are in.

We need our Subs to spy on all that underwater fiber :D

Carriers are great at projecting force but are anachronistic. We need jon boats with Death Rays --- LOL

Or cigarette racers that can launch multiple drones :thumbsup:


edit: And though it would be really nice to 'make them pay' for our bases in most cases our overall posture is in our benefit - not their benefit.

US Hegemony FTW !



--
Click to expand...

I actually agree with you on the cigarette boats with the drones idea! I do agree that some debt is necessary but the problem I have with current foreign policy is its too easy to attack somebody.Sadly the death of thousands of soldiers is not enough for the blood thirsty masses that want to attack Iran/korea/etc....
 
R

Ronstang

Lifer
Jul 8, 2000
12,490
18
81
Screw the minutia, let's fight wars like WARS. I know that means we have to kill people, and lots of them, but that is what wars are all about. If we don't plan to win and win as soon as possible then let's not play at all. Iraq should have been done within a year. The only thing those people understand is force and death and we are capable of raining both down on anyone. If we did it this way the funding would not be much of an issue since we would be done rather quickly.
 
manimal

manimal

Lifer
Mar 30, 2007
13,560
8
0
waggy said:
nope. sometimes there are wars we need to fight.
Click to expand...

I am not saying that we shouldt fight wars. I just think there should be a tangible price payed by the entire populace...Not just the kids dying in humvees...
 
Kanalua

Kanalua

Diamond Member
Jun 14, 2001
4,860
2
0
Haha...how about requiring funding for all Federal mandates and actions.

I don't think Congress will declare war anytime in the near future for fear of giving up too much Congressional power (than they've already given up, of course)...
 
hal2kilo

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
22,726
9,753
136
manimal said:
If congress brought about legislation that required any police action/war to be funded and payed for would it make a difference?


Would Iraq ever have happened?

The military has enjoyed unparalleled growth for how many generations? Maybe the hawks would think twice before bombing someone if they had to convince their constituents that it would require taxes or cutting of other programs..


Sidenotes:

Should we start charging Japan/Korea/Germany/etc for the troops we keep there? Clearly most of those troops are not necessary anymore since the likelihood of a ground war with China/Russia is about nil...


Are nuclear submarines irrelevant in the current and future landscape?

How many megacarriers are required today?



Finally how strange is it to see Barney Frank and Ron Paul agree about something...
Click to expand...

Absolutely, as well as conscription. Way too many aircraft carriers, but leave those subs alone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom