Skip to main content

View Diary: Do I Really Need to Get Angry Again to Stem this Outpouring of Poutrage? (155 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You do know that I (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Susan from 29, a2nite

    pulled that number out of my ass?

    If asked, I would like to see a thirty year plan to transition away from all military spending short of that needed to resist a direct attack on our borders, and provide sufficient to contribute to actions overseas that were mandated by the UN.

    The transition would not necessarily mean a large cut in government spending, merely a re-purposing into other projects of national interest.

    I hope that the quality of debate will improve,
    but I fear we will remain Democrats.

    by twigg on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 05:18:33 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  It's actually not a bad figure, if the remaining (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      twigg, SanFernandoValleyMom

      25% was spent on supporting the troops who do the defending.

      Of course, with a $20 an hour minimum wage, we couldn't afford to keep a huge standing army. And the current doctrine of force readiness that enables us to fight two wars at the same time would be the first fatality of a 75% cut.

      That would not be a bad thing.

      "I cannot live without books" -- Thomas Jefferson, 1815

      by Susan Grigsby on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 05:24:03 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (146)
  • Community (72)
  • 2016 (57)
  • Elections (47)
  • Environment (46)
  • Media (42)
  • Republicans (39)
  • Hillary Clinton (37)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (34)
  • Law (33)
  • Iraq (32)
  • Civil Rights (32)
  • Barack Obama (32)
  • Culture (32)
  • Climate Change (30)
  • Jeb Bush (30)
  • Economy (25)
  • Labor (25)
  • Bernie Sanders (21)
  • Congress (20)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site