Published: Tuesday, Sept. 2 2014 12:00 a.m. MDT
Excellent letter! Letter of the year! Couldn't agree more!Thank
you so very much!
What an excellent idea.
But Lew...We really want to flex our military muscle to the world.
We spend so much on it, we need to show it off.Along with that, we
want, er MUST have lower taxes. Oh, and lower deficits.It is quite
the dilemma. I really wonder how many of the war hawks would be so
"hawkish" if they had to pay for it TODAY.
This would make many in Washington think especially hard about waging war. A
little more thought and discussion about why and our motivations would be most
Next time someone says "Boots on ground" I want them to say the name of
a Soldier they know. "We need PFC Smith to go to Iraq." Then that
person needs to call PFC Smith, or better yet, look him in the eye and say
"I think we need you to go to Iraq"We have dehumanized the
American military to the point were we can't even say "We need to send
troops" (Troops are people) but rather now we say we need their boots over
there.I would also be in favor of re-instating the draft; just to
re-humanize this War Machine. How many warmongers have their sons in the
military? How many of those who vote on declarations of war have their sons in
The "rich" did away with the draft, so THEIR kids won't go.then, The "rich" did away with the taxes, so THEIR money
didn't have to go.It's time to set things right...Time to buck up or shut-up.
If any President or administration could tell you what a war will cost up-front,
or tell you when it will end (before it starts).... we would do that. But you
can't!Every war is preceded by the minority party asking the
administration WHEN it will end, and how much it will cost. These are mostly
rhetorical questions they KNOW nobody has the ansers too... It happens every
time.You can't predict what a war will cost... or when it will
As a corollary, I propose we should pay for all welfare programs upfront. Fair
Well said. This is very important to the tea party. Cash on the barrelhead,
reduce social security if necessary so we can win quickly.
Bush/Chenney's approach to terrorism and war was a mistake and most
Americans know it. You hear the neo-cons banging the war drums once again
selling fear and hoping to capitlize on any good crisis with a little more
power. They don't want to send their children or their money but will
criticize anyone who is prudent and patient before making a decision. ISIS and
radical muslims are a threat, and will always be a threat. We can contain the
threat through a long term strategy of containment and working with our allies.
To listen to the same fools who pushed us to an illegal and immoral war 10 years
ago would be a mistake. They put us more at risk and borrowed billions of
dollars and suceeded at little.
2 bits: I believe the writer should have said "pay as you go" rather
than up front. That IS a possibility, at least theoretically. It will never
actually happen because citizens will likely rebel at the very thought of it.
I agree, and have said it before. If we want a war, occupation, or whatever
someone wants to call it, then it should be a line item on our annual tax
return. And we should as a nation be provided budget summaries of the exercise
no less frequently than quarterly.
I agree whole-heartedly but it would be a better thing that we stay out. Every
crisis overseas we've had since WWII is a result of our meddling and greed.
We are mistaken that our might can solve anything.
"As a corollary, I propose we should pay for all welfare programs upfront.
Fair enough?"Fair enough. I assume that you equate Medicare and
SS as welfare programs? Because those, along with the military are by far the
biggest budget items.
If we paid for all the conservative wars and foreign aid then Americans would
demand that they stop making wars. Bush and Cheney lied about the
war and purposely kept the price tag off the national budget. Gee, I wonder why
they did that? Could it be that they didn't want Americans to know the true
cost of their war? I demand that the GOP use their own money to
invade countries. They want Iran and Iraq and Russia so bad? Go ahead, fight
with your own kids and money. Stop sending my children and grandchildren while
placing trillions of debt onto their backs.
Uh, Thid Barker, the topic isn't about who pays the most taxes. The problem
is that NO ONE is paying for these military adventures! Well, right now, anyway.
We're piling up debt faster than it can be paid for. The Fed and the
Treasury combine to create money out of thin air which goes to pay for most of
the wars as of late, and it all results in enormous debt! The writer is
suggesting that current taxpayers foot the bill, not our children or
@SEY,RE: Your "pay-as-you-go" fantasy.... That may make
sense in the political-rhetoric obsessed mind... but it shows how little you
actually understand (or care) about reality...1. Not being committed
to finance till the end... would be the BIGGEST MISTAKE you could make. You
name it, WWII, Desert Storm, even the Revolutionary War, or the Civil War)...
Just quitting because you ran out of money... would leave America and EVERYBODY
involved in a bigger mess (and more deaths) than what LEAD to the war! Your
"Solution" would make everything WORSE!Imagine the civilian
deaths world-wide if in the middle of WWII America said, "ran out of
money... we're done"... do you think Hitler would have just
retired???2. Sometimes you have to respond (whether you have the
money or not). Sometimes you are attacked and can't just say "we
don't have money", (Pearl Harbor, 9/11, etc). 3. Some
causes are worth ANY cost (WWII, American Revolution, American Civil War,
etc).==========In these wars... HOW would America (or
the world) be better off... if we got half way in and then quit because you ran
out of money?...
Lew,The freelance journalist they beheaded was not rich; people like him
and other common folk benefit most from national security, the wealthy can hire
their own.You say those who benefit the most should pay up front,
sounds like you want to increase taxes on the middle and lower classes.If BO had not projected an image of indifference and weakness, these guys
never would have developed a foothold and we wouldn’t have this problem,
so by your logic everyone who voted for BO pay for this mess and let the rest of
us off.airnaut,NO ONE’s kid HAS to go, rich or POOR
since the draft was eliminated.The rich pay the bulk of income
taxes, it is THEIR money that already goes – why the lie that their money
does not go?FT,house and senate intelligence committee dems
are neo-cons? They are beating the war drums as much as anyone. BO’s man,
Axelrod, said “never let a good crisis go to waste”To
listen to anyone who says we can contain the threat is “listening to
fools”What we DID succeed at was thrown away by BO’s
To "Lew" but we do put up the money up front. Each year congress is
supposed to set the budget for the US. Are you saying that Congress should
establish a budget well in advance?
Some on this forum seem to think that war is never justified and anything we
spend on the military is complete waste of money. Some wars are definitely more
justified than others, and a few were flat-out wrong. But what happens when evil
aggression goes unchecked and the threat grows until armed confict is not only
inevitable, but far more costly in both blood and treasure. Do we want to wait
until ISIS gets a few million followers, nuclear weapons, and initiates
terrorists attacks here before we respond?I think it would be wise
to pay for wars as they happen (just like I think the government should pay for
everything as it goes). This would make everyone think twice before getting into
a conflict that is not a good one to be involved with. The electorate would
likely hold its elected officials more accountable if everyone got a direct bill
every month for all the waste and mismanagement our government dishes out on a
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments