How can you tell the New War is BS? Because if you tried to pass a war tax in Congress,

[grahamhgreen]

Last edited Mon Sep 8, 2014, 01:26 AM - Edit history (1)

the war would become completely unnecessary, at least, that's how I see it.

If it's really an existential threat, the wealthiest & their corporations (sitting on hundreds of billions in cash) should be happy to pay for it.

[JaneyVee]

1. Yup. Tell them any new warring must be financed by

Levying hefty taxes on the rich and watch how fast this war becomes unnecessary.

[Enthusiast]

13. + a brazillion!

[Chan790]

2. There's one flaw of that argument.

The new war could be being fought on US soil with massive American casualties and as long as it was being fought someplace like Detroit or Alabama where they don't live and had no chance of leading to where they do live...those goat-fuckers would still balk at paying for it.

[grahamhgreen]

20. ROFL, "goat f#ckers"!

[ballyhoo]

3. I could long ago. Many of us see it for

what it is: a ruse to get the MIC's gears oiled and bring in more money.

[kairos12]

4. +1000

[pampango]

5. Who said it was an "existential threat" to the US? It is to many people that don't live in the US.

ISIS is not coming for us,
they are coming for Iraqi and Syrian women,
they are coming for Iraqi and Syrian Shiites,
they are coming for Iraqi and Syrian minority religions.
Do we do nothing until they come for us?

...the wealthiest & their corporations (sitting on hundreds of billions in cash) should be happy to pay for it

If we wait for the wealthy and corporations to happily fund government programs, well we will wait a long time and have a very small government.

[Vattel]

10. the answer to your question may well be yes.

Doing nothing may be the best option. Resources spent on killing people including innocent bystanders could be spent on peaceful pursuits that would save lives threatened by disease, for example, and those sorts of pursuits don't inflict the huge amount of collateral damage that war inflicts.

[L0oniX]

11. If they really want to hurt us they could move here and text while driving.

[grahamhgreen]

19. McCain for one.

[grahamhgreen]

21. So the wealthiest should be more than happy to pay for this, right? But no, they won't, because they

intend to profit from the misery they cause by making us so fearful that we pay the. To wipe out the very forces they funded.

If you don't believe that, then would you support a tax on the wealthiest to pay for the new war?

[pampango]

24. "... would you support a tax on the wealthiest to pay for the new war?"

You could have stopped with "would you support a tax on the wealthiest?" The answer is Yes.

High/progressive taxes support strong middle classes wherever they exist. In those countries these taxes did not happen because the benevolence of their 1% but in spite of their resistance (a continuing battle since the 1% does not just admit defeat and retire from politics).

[Brigid]

6. Years ago, on another political site that no longer exists,

Someone suggested that any time our government proposes going to war, legislation should first have to be passed to restore the draft and impose a tax surcharge to pay for it. See how many wars we get into then.

[grahamhgreen]

22. I remember that site:) now, we can't even discuss how to pay for war.

[Brigid]

40. Did you use the same name there?

It sounds vaguely familiar now.

[grahamhgreen]

41. Yes. Yours too. I never would have believed that a Dem would lead us back to Iraq back then.

[Brigid]

42. Me neither.

[OilemFirchen]

7. OK.

The PTB want war because it enriches the MIC, thereby enriching the Oligarchs (the I in the MIC), who don't want war because they (the PTB) don't want to pay for it.

Did I miss anything?

[obxhead]

8. BS, they'll be happy to pay for it with borrowed money

Just like the last two.

Budget issues are not an issue when it comes to war. Both parties agree with this almost wholeheartedly.

[Laelth]

16. Quite true. n/t

-Laelth

[KrazyinKS]

9. Getting back the draft is a valid point-

If everyones son had to go fight they would think twice. But the scary part about ISIS is their financing has become more sophisticated as has the promotion of their cause. I think some people probably rightfully so find that scary. I do have days where I think if you want a strong military then bring back the draft and make the rich and the poor and people of all colors and faiths fight alongside each other. If you don't have the backbone to do that then shut the fuck up. We need to be careful about grouping all people in one group. Such as the 1%, remember F Roosevelt was pretty progressive, and he was born with a silver spoon.

[bl968]

15. the draft

The problem is everyone's sons don't have to fight the rich get deferments that the poor are not even considered for so bringing back the draft is not the answer.

[Live and Learn]

18. +1 If the draft were brought back, it would have to be without deferments,

woman would need to be included and the rich kids can't just be officers.

[LuvNewcastle]

29. I agree. Everyone from 18 to 25 or so would have to be eligible

for the draft, including college students. The only people excused would be those with physical or mental health issues, and only serious ones at that. Make sons, daughters, and grandchildren of Congressmen and Senators and students at Yale and Harvard go fight just like everybody else.

[grahamhgreen]

23. I do like the idea of a draft - makes people get involved.

[Enthusiast]

12. You are absolutely correct.

If there was a real threat. This is just more faked up Bush style BS.

They're loading up DU with paid liars so they can generate the full throated denial. It's coming to a thread near you.

[kentuck]

14. I'll bet you are right.

I bet Mitt Romney would not be for it if there was a 5% surtax on his income bracket?

[grahamhgreen]

25. Nor is there a discussion of COST. At least we talked about these issues before Jr invaded...

I believe it was sold as the war would pay for itself cuz OIL. And that cost was 82 billion.

[whereisjustice]

17. when it comes to war, the rich are always eager to sacrifice the non-rich, honoring the dead with

empty, cynical platitudes about the price of freedom.

[LuvNewcastle]

30. Yep. Makes my blood boil when those bastards say, "freedom isn't free, you know."

[Fred Sanders]

36. And they honor that freedom by trying to suppress the freedom to vote......I agree, goat fuckers.

[stevenleser]

26. How can you tell the new war is NOT BS? Iran is so concerned they want to work with us. nt

[grahamhgreen]

27. They've always been willing to work with us. It is us who will not work with them, ever since we

helped overthrow Mossadeq because he wanted to nationalize their oil (BP), then we propped up their brutal dictator, whom the people overthrew with fundamentalism Islam of the Shia variety.

Don't forget his buddy Kissinger considers Iran a bigger threat than ISIL.

[stevenleser]

28. Not like this. They approve of US military action in Iraq/Syria. That is a first. nt

[LuvNewcastle]

31. Iran and the Saudis know that U.S. military action will save

them money and human lives. What's not to like about it? If Russia decided to tell us not to go in because they wanted to take care of it, I'd be just fine with that, too.

[stevenleser]

34. The point is that Iran considers ISIS a serious threat to the point that they are willing to

sanction US military action in the Middle East for the first time since the Shah was deposed 35+ years ago.

[grahamhgreen]

32. How do we pay for it? How much will it cost?

[stevenleser]

33. An air campaign? Not particularly much. nt

[grahamhgreen]

35. We were forced to trim the food stamp program just a few billion dollars. If we can afford war, we

can afford to pay the war.

Would you support a special tax on the wealthiest to pay for the war? If it's not very much, and is as important as claimed, they should be happy to pay, and it should sail through congress, no?

[rhett o rick]

38. Not sure what you are talking about. We haven't had a "War" since WW II.

[grahamhgreen]

39. That's right! What are they calling this one?

[rhett o rick]

43. Once it was cute to name the conflicts like the "Police Action" in Korea. "Police Action"? what

the hell did that ever mean. Sounds like a drill team.