Speakeasy forum: BO, Senate, and military

Senate passed a bill yesterday 98-0 for the defense budget for 2013 of $613B, and BO has threatened to veto it.

The proposal that House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and other Republican leaders sent to the White House this week calls for cuts of $300 billion in discretionary spending to achieve savings of $2.2 trillion over 10 years. The blueprint offered no specifics on the cuts, although the Pentagon and defense-related departments such as Homeland Security and State make up roughly half of the federal government's discretionary spending.

By any credible calculation, the military, which is still coming to grips with the half-trillion-dollar cut in last year's deficit-cutting law, is looking at an additional $10 billion to $15 billion cut in projected defense spending each year for the next decade. It's a prospect that Republicans recognize is the new reality, with wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ending and deficits demanding deep cuts.

"Not too devastating," said Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee. That's especially true compared with the alternative that McCain dreads - the double hit of tax hikes and automatic spending cuts dubbed the fiscal cliff.

Tea partyers and fiscal conservatives recently elected to Congress have shown a willingness to cut defense, traditionally considered almost untouchable.

First you say you do...then you don't.....

It's a prospect that Republicans recognize is the new reality, with wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ending and deficits demanding deep cuts.

"Not too devastating," said Sen. John McCain of Arizona,

Tea partyers and fiscal conservatives recently elected to Congress have shown a willingness to cut defense, traditionally considered almost untouchable.

Cuts to the military would be devastating (now they're not too devastating)... almost untouchable (now willing to change)...But THEY change their minds....

When THEY make changes...it's not ramming, it's changes....

BUT Obama is ramming stuff through.

Are you in favour of cuts to the military now?

The buck stops here.

still looking for that totalitarian govt fascist, socialist and communist love?

No matter how fundamental, at least it will be better than what Socialism and Communism has wrought in this world.

Dictators, Pol Pot types, Eugenists, and I certainly wouldn't label many if any of those as "religious". Your failure is in not making distinctions between religions or groups, prefering to foster a prejudicial attitude and apply it toward all, even without making exceptions for those who don't fit the mold, which is pretty much what the worst sort of racists do too.

No, I can't accept your view because it is severly skewed. I suspect you feel inadequate in some way to meet the standards demanded of and by religion, by God, and therefore have this rebellious attitude to all that is considered as having something to do with God and those who seek to follow Him.

However, your personal Bigotry toward all things religious is your own to suffer from and small comfort I can see that you might derive from it.

And to Roger; Crusades were initiated by the warlike Muslims and a reaction to them just as the Allies reacted to Hitler and the Nazis, so no points scored there against the religious.

I'll leave any answer on the Inquisition to the Catholic in this forum if he wishes.

IRA = Irish Republican Army. I see no religion in that description, in fact it pretty much sums up the movement which is nationalist, not religious, because if it was, then all Catholics everywhere would be involved in helping them, which is not the case at all. In fact, to point to the IRA as some sort of attack on religion is a very weak position to take.

are against you.

I make a distinction between God and Allah. Same as making a distinction between YHWH and Baal. Neither group are different names for the same entity.

then never mention anything older than the last 100 years.

It's not irrelevant when their God is telling them to kill those who believe in my God. It's not irrelevant to God neither. May the best God win?

But I'm not out killing them because of it, nor because they are unbelievers in who I consider God. I do recognize a right to self defense however, I make distinction between insult and deadly threat in doing so.

Catholic, Catholic, Catholic. All those were Catholic. How many times must I remind you, I'm not Catholic.

"It wasn't YOUR family that did it, but it was a family who did it, which means families are the cause of all those problems....."

then that means all Jews, even those separated from the event by time, are killers of Jesus. It would mean that all Jews are guilty of the genocide in Canaan during the days of Joshua as they entered the land. Is that what you are trying to sell me???

not a difference of the rules of worship, but different Gods?

Interesting.