In response to:

Winning the Defense Spending Debate

zmazurak Wrote: Nov 16, 2012 10:13 AM
$68 bn over 10 years is just $6.8 bn per year. That only proves that there isn't enough waste in the defense budget. Not even close. Fact is, America cannot afford to cut its defense budget deeply.
cchuba Wrote: Nov 16, 2012 10:47 AM
You sir are 100% correct.

I simply do not understand the Republican devotion to innappropriately high defense spending. Reduce our mission from invading countries to change their gov't so that we can focus on simply having the best navy and air force in the world. We should not plan overseas land egagements that drain us white.
Jay Wye Wrote: Nov 16, 2012 10:01 PM
I'd MUCH rather fight overseas than have an attack occur on US soil.
It's called "forward defense."

it's Weapons Grade STUPID to wait until there's a direct attack on US soil.
Jack2894 Wrote: Nov 16, 2012 10:44 AM
America could cut its defense budget by HALF and be in no more danger than it is now.
layopinions Wrote: Nov 16, 2012 11:15 AM
If we cut our defense budget in half, we couldn't afford to maintain the equipment we have now, let alone develop the technology required to defend us from future threats. You can't just make rediculous assertions and pretend like they're in any way based in fact.
Jay Wye Wrote: Nov 16, 2012 9:59 PM
that statement -proves- you don't know what you're talking about.

Comrade Hussein already has made the US weaker and closer to war.

With no time to recover from a thorough election day whooping, Republicans in a lame duck Congress are facing an even worse budgetary nightmare than last year. And they only have two months to negotiate a solution with President Obama.

Last time, as the Chair the Balanced Budget Amendment campaign, fellow conservatives and I were urging Republicans to tie the unavoidable increase in the debt ceiling to a balanced budget amendment. Because it also prohibited tax increases, the amendment would have required balance to be achieved through necessary cuts throughout the federal government.

But in...