In Opinions, same place it always runs.
You demanded accountability in DoD; there is plenty already. Then you laughably characterized Samuelson's column as a "puff piece." If you knew anything at all about Samuelson you would know he doesn't do those. No, you demanded something already present, and then demonstrated complete lack of familiarity with the issue. My use of the term "excuse" was perhaps too kind.
Let me get this correct; your OP is an opinion piece, where are your thoughts and the facts to back up your position?
I have only been here two weeks, when I get my laundry back, but posting an “opinion “ piece as a backup to your position is frowned on here. Have I been misinformed?
Let me get this correct; your OP is an opinion piece, where are your thoughts and the facts to back up your position?
I have only been here two weeks, when I get my laundry back, but posting an “opinion “ piece as a backup to your position is frowned on here. Have I been misinformed?
Yes. You are misinformed. Not all opinion pieces are alike. This one is dense with facts, as befits the work of a much-awarded columnist and Pulitzer nominee for commentary.
A. To anyone even cosmetically, tangentially familiar with the pentagon, there isn't even remotely enough financial accountability. That's simple reality. Something I notice you almost always fail to recognize
B. W/out addressing that reality, his is a puff piece.
C. Your imagination is no replacement for that same reality.
Yet again, you've been trapped in a device of your own making based on your own laughable ignorance.
Please lean words.
Shhhhhh!!!!! Don't spoil the fantasy!
I must have missed your opinions. I cannot debate a WAPO opinion columnist.
My opinion is the opening sentence in Post #1.
DoD has some of the most stringent financial accountability rules and procedures in our government. Your claim is based on ignorance.
Samuelson is a much-awarded columnist and Pulitzer nominee.
You can't insult your way to debate success.
In 2015, the US spent 54% of the budget on the military, not including veterans. As I posted I cannot debate the author of your opinion piece that you agree with.
View attachment 67249090
How much is enough?
And you have one of the most active imaginations on this board.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/01/opinion/sunday/pentagon-spending-audit-failed.html
https://www.thenation.com/article/pentagon-audit-budget-fraud/
His awards and nominations mean nothing other than in your fantasy life.
I haven't insulted you. Why keep lying about that?
Please learn words better.
That's 54% of the discretionary budget, which is well less than half the whole. This is from the OP linked article.
". . . Defense no longer dominates the federal budget, as it once did. That distinction has fallen to health and retirement benefits. During the Cold War — from 1950 to 1990 — military outlays averaged 40 percent of federal spending and 7.4 percent of the economy’s output (gross domestic product). Now those figures are 15 percent and 3.13 percent, respectively, according to a recent CSIS report co- written by Harrison and Seamus P. Daniels. . . ."
Where does the US need to spend more funds?
Where does the US need to spend more funds?
More:
[h=3]Saving America's military edge will take money ... - Defense News[/h]
[url]https://www.defensenews.com/.../saving-americas-military-edge-will-take-money-and-...
[/URL]
Nov 17, 2018 - HALIFAX, Canada — The U.S. military needs Congress to provide sustained defensespending to maintain its eroding military edge against ...
Thanks, Jack. I’m not debating articles. What are your positions? You can back your positions up once we enter the debate......
Yes, the NYT and the Nation continue to attack DoD. Nothing to see here, move along.
LOL! Sorry you can't actually address what's in the reporting but have to whine about where it's hosted.
Can't say as I'm surprised.
More:
[h=3]Saving America's military edge will take money ... - Defense News[/h]
[url]https://www.defensenews.com/.../saving-americas-military-edge-will-take-money-and-...
[/URL]
Nov 17, 2018 - HALIFAX, Canada — The U.S. military needs Congress to provide sustained defensespending to maintain its eroding military edge against ...
Thanks, Jack. I’m not debating articles. What are your positions? You can back your positions up once we enter the debate......
Greetings, Jack. :2wave:
Outstanding article! :thumbs: This was the first time I had ever heard of Joseph Dunsford, US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but after reading his opinion on maintaining our "military edge," if he states we should spend "x" amount of dollars on defense, then we should do it! He obviously knows what he's talking about, and with the world acting crazy these days..... :damn
So you support significant wartime tax rates, I would guess.
NYT article is paywalled. The Nation is a rag.
IOW, you have nothing and certainly no honest interest in the matter at hand.
Noted.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?