President Obama signs $633B defense bill

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Truth Seeker Wellsville, UT
    Jan. 6, 2013 2:21 p.m.

    We need to pay countries to help us. Stop the bucks and see what they really think of the good old USA.

  • Itsjstmeagain Merritt Island, Fl
    Jan. 5, 2013 7:46 a.m.

    The Defense budget is too high, but it is the closest to a Jobs Program the Republicans have. Several years ago, Congress placed an order for 10 C-17 in the appropriations bill. Defense and the USAF did not want them but Boeing did. We could repair a lot of declining infrastructure with more bang for the buck than buying weapons with no defined future threat. That's how it works: define a future threat and counter it. Now it's more "lets see if we can do this" like a vehicle that skips across the atmosphere and delivers a bomb somewhere in a few hours. Why do we need this now, with cruise missiles and ICBM? Dismantle ICBM to pay for gee whizz things?

    The systems going to Egypt is a continuation of the Camp David Accord. We provide a budget for Egypt (and Israel) but they can buy only US made products. Egypt has a coproduction plant assembling M-1 tanks, we send the components made in USA.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 4:58 p.m.

    without Guantanamo Obama doesn't get Bin Laden. The guy doesn't live in realville.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 4:36 p.m.

    we have a contact (the people getting the money) with lockheed martin to provide the weapons to Egypt (again not the brotherhood)who we also have an agreement (contract) with to provide the weapons. Your right Obama was president at the time, but it is also true that the man that is currently the president of Egypt was not at the time. As I also pointed out in my last comment we also have an important alliance with Egypt (not the brotherhood) and have been suppling them with weapons since 1978.
    May point? kind of hard to claim Obama has started some new campaign to arm the brotherhood as you are claiming.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Jan. 3, 2013 3:54 p.m.

    Screwdriver! You're smart:

    * Problem solved? No way! Our political leaders would find others ways to spend it.
    * Defense supply jobs to people who pay taxes

    spring street:

    * the brotherhood is now in charge of Egypt, and Obama was president in 2010. There's a difference between selling, and giving.

    * for a man who wants gun control in America, why WMDs to the brotherhood, and Mexican cartels?

    How's cutting the deficit in half going?

  • Screwdriver Casa Grande, AZ
    Jan. 3, 2013 1:57 p.m.

    That's way too much still, 633 billion is completely ridiculous. China only spends 140 billion. Russia 70 billion, Canada and Australia about 25 billion.

    If everyone is "defending" themselves sufficiently why in the world are spending more than the rest of the world combined to contain a few radicals in minor third world countries?

    If we spent as much as Canada or Russia our budget problem is completely solved and we'd have a surplus. But the defense contractors have the bull by the ring in the nose don't they?

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 1:51 p.m.

    We sell arms to almost anyone. Always have, always will. That's capitalism and more dollars in our pockets. Just think of all the peace and profit we could spread throughout our own country if we put one of these in every school.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 1:08 p.m.

    We are honoring our contract we signed in 2010 with Egypt (not the brotherhood) the same Egypt that we have been arming since 1978 because they have been a key ally in keeping peace and provided aid during military operations in the middle east for the past three plus decades.

  • athought Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 3, 2013 12:20 p.m.

    My comment has nothing to do with article, but rather with the picture of Obama getting off Air Force One in Hawaii upon his arrival for vacation. Notice his salute compared to the salute of the officers? Anyway, I have an issue with Air Force 1 being used in this way. When I visited D.C. and was able to go into museums, etc., at no charge was informed when I asked about it that these places were in D.C and basically belonged to the people, including me, and thus there was no charge to enter what I partially owned, being a U.S. citizen. So, in that vein, my family has been planning a vacation the past couple of years, and at this point the biggest expense is the air travel, and with luck and good planning, may have enough put aside this next year to take our super vacation -- but I would like to have Air Force 1 at my disposal for this purpose -- I am helping support it, am I not?

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Jan. 3, 2013 9:26 a.m.

    So why are we giving twenty F-16 jets, and two hundred new tanks to the Muslim Brotherhood?