[herring_RN]

Is it possible to cut taxes, build up the military, rebuild the infrastructure, balance the budget, and pay down the debt while continuing the war in Iraq?

[mshultz]

Possible, but highly improbable. Remember Senator Proxmire of Wisconsin? He was an opponent of government waste, and would present a Golden Fleece Award to wasteful programs. However, I heard that he always supported dairy subsidies. Balancing the budget is so difficult because even those who want to cut spending only want to cut other people's spending.

As far as the war in Iraq, the people who are opposing it due to cost seem to have little interest in cutting other costly programs. I suspect that the cost of the war is not the real issue.

I am not thrilled about the cost of the war, either. However, I do not see getting used to having our jets flown into our skyscrapers as a viable alternative. Remember all the talking heads proclaiming that further acts of mass terrorism in the US was inevitable after 9/11? I can think of 2 acts of terrorism since then: the Los Angeles airport shootings and the Virginia Tech shootings. We have been able to prevent many other terrorist acts, however.

[mshultz]

Originally Posted by mshultz

...Balancing the budget is so difficult because even those who want to cut spending only want to cut other people's spending...

I saw a similar issue back when I was on the County Planning Commission. We only have zoning in 2 townships, and in the cities and villages. When a proposed allotment was before the Planning Commission, there would always be neighbors opposed to it. Their argument, but not in these words:

"I moved out here to get away from other people. Now that I am here, it is time to put up the No Vacancy sign".

If an allotment met our regulations, we had to approve it. I always wondered what these people would have thought if the No Vacancy sign had been put up before they moved here. Zoning has been voted down a number of times. What people seem to want is zoning that only applies to their neighbors.

When I was on the Planning Commission, an allotment across the street from me came before us. While I preferred the Black Angus cattle to additional neighbors, the allotment met our regulations, and I voted for it without complaint. I am proud of that vote.

The allotment across the street has worked out rather well. The houses directly across from me are a couple of hundred feet from the road (they each bought 2 lots). The new neighbors are like the old neighbors, in that they never complain about me (nor do I complain about them). There is a lot more traffic, but because I own 1000 feet of frontage, and the back of my 15 acres is a swamp, I will always have my privacy.

[perseus29]

Originally Posted by mshultz

Remember all the talking heads proclaiming that further acts of mass terrorism in the US was inevitable after 9/11? I can think of 2 acts of terrorism since then: the Los Angeles airport shootings and the Virginia Tech shootings. We have been able to prevent many other terrorist acts, however.

So are you saying that because of the iraq war other terrorist acts have been prevented?

[llg]

No president can keep all of the promises they make ... but no one can get elected president without making similarly incompatable promises.

It's sad.

[♪♫ in my ♥]

Originally Posted by herring_RN

Is it possible to cut taxes, build up the military, rebuild the infrastructure, balance the budget, and pay down the debt while continuing the war in Iraq?

Uh, no.

NO.

NOOOOO.

H-*-*-L NO!!!

[♪♫ in my ♥]

Originally Posted by mshultz

I am not thrilled about the cost of the war, either. However, I do not see getting used to having our jets flown into our skyscrapers as a viable alternative.

Though, of course, Iraq and 9/11 had no connection whatsoever. And bin Laden and Al Quaeda are still out there...

And, the Iraqis themselves are tiring of the US presence as evidenced by the struggle to agree to terms of a status-of-forces agreement and THEIR call for a drawdown time line.

And, you don't hunt terrorists with tanks and bombers and infantry platoons. You hunt terrorists with covert operations and the special ops boys from Force Recon, Rangers, and SEALs.

[CHATSDALE]

to say that iraq is solely responsible for 9/11 is not true
neither is the statement that terrorists get no help from iraq exp saddam when he was in control...he gave money openly to sucide bombers in israel

[♪♫ in my ♥]

Originally Posted by CHATSDALE

to say that iraq is solely responsible for 9/11 is not true

To say that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11 is not supported by the publicly released evidence.

Originally Posted by CHATSDALE

neither is the statement that terrorists get no help from iraq exp saddam when he was in control...

Hmm, I didn't notice such a comment in the preceding posts.

Originally Posted by CHATSDALE

he (Saddam) gave money openly to sucide bombers in israel

I don't think anybody thinks the dude was anything but a murdering scoundrel just like many other heads of state.

I'm just saying that there's not been any evidence that he had anything to do with 9/11... or had WMD, for that matter.

Many hundreds of billions, or over a trillion depending on what charges you care to assign to the books, on a war whose most significant result has been the empowering of the Republic of Iran. Not money well spent in my book.

To tie back into the fiscal part of the OP: There are much more cost-effective ways of securing the nation and going after terrorists than invading, occupying, and trying to rebuild other countries.

[mshultz]

Originally Posted by perseus29

So are you saying that because of the iraq war other terrorist acts have been prevented?

Yes.

"The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 5 characters."

That should do it