In this country we have people who worked all their lives to build a better America and take care of their families.They get old and need medicines they cant afford .Yet we send billions of dollars over seas to people we dont know.These people later on depending on how they feel bite us in the butt.I was always taught to take care of home first.The money we are sending over seas came from our paychecks when we worked.Is there no one in Washington who has parents that are getting old?Are they all rich? If everybody was rich no one would have to work and this country would come to a stand still. Sending money to outer space and the man around the corner has to split his pills or skip a day because he has run out of money.We should be ashamed.People over seas are laughing at us.What goes up will come down.

I worked with a family that had a single mother who worked two jobs and even cared for 3 children. She sent them to private schools so they could get an education that she never had also she kept them in a safe neighborhood where crime was low. But when her children got sick she could not pay for the child to have proper care. The state nearly took her child away.

I say we higher taxes on cigarettes and alcohol much like Canada and provide everyone with free health care.

Please, stop talking about "overseas" ! The world is not divided between America an Overseas.
Get a world atlas. Read statistics about life expectancy, average income and education in other countries. And start thinking.
There is no such thing as "people from overseas".
There are Afghani, Romanian, Erythrean, Laotian, Syrian, Tunisian, Senegalese, Peruvian people… Most of them have never got one cent from american help in their life. Most of them are to busy trying to survive to imagine vast plots against America. Most of them won't even earn in their whole life enough to buy a computer like those we're using to communicate, and won't have the possiblity of answering your message.

Stop complaining about your precious tax money being spent to help other countries. American help to poor countries represents only a few percents of what you spend every year on ice cream !
If you really want to improve your health and social system, start cutting military expenses.
And if you really want to live in a safer world, start really helping third world countries, not just giving them subsidies to buy american goods and support american policy !

(Sadly, all these good ideas are also true for my own country, France)

(1) We do need to help some countries get out of economic crisis, starving people etc. But not feed the same people who are attacking us!!

(2) We obviously do not need to cut out defense budget, especially at a time like this. Not only does the money for defense help protect our country, it often leads to new inventions, research, etc that would have never been invested in otherwise. Also, it stimulates our economy quite well in times like these.

Furthermore, there must not be any patriots here because people always name the threads "whats wrong with america" and silly things like that. Yes there is room for improvment but try not to have a negative look on everything.

Amen to that. If America is a terrible place, then God help the rest of the world.

[quote:6df91981ec]do not feed the same people who are attacking you[/quote:6df91981ec]

Ok, I agree with you if you mean that CIA should not have financed, armed and trained taliban and Ben Laden. The same for Saddam during Irak/Iran war. Maybe the USA should rethink its support to Pakistan, which have nuclear weapons and supports terrorists !

About military expenses : of course they are good for the economy and for science. But what kind of economy ? What kind of science ? Giving the same amount of money to improve your health system would be good for economy and science too, and I think that a cure for cancer would be much better than stealth technology !

In the federal budget for 2002, military expenses represent 347 billion $ and international develompant only 7 billion $. So if you want to save money, there is no hesitation.

You say that it's not the right time to cut military expenses. Why ? Do you fear invasion by Canada or by the mighty Iraqi navy ? Do you seriously believe that cruise missile will prevent further terrorist attacks ?

It's very sad that Mr Bush and his staff have been using the world trade center tragedy to gain support for their militaristic policy.

[b:fcd4629b04]"I say we higher taxes on cigarettes and alcohol much like Canada and provide everyone with free health care."

Cigarettes have been taxed so much that it has created a black market.
If you want to raise taxes how about on guns and bullets for a change!




[/b:fcd4629b04]

[quote:c39b3f4f73="astrapol"]Please, stop talking about "overseas" ! The world is not divided between America an Overseas.
Get a world atlas. Read statistics about life expectancy, average income and education in other countries. And start thinking.
There is no such thing as "people from overseas".
There are Afghani, Romanian, Erythrean, Laotian, Syrian, Tunisian, Senegalese, Peruvian people… Most of them have never got one cent from american help in their life. Most of them are to busy trying to survive to imagine vast plots against America. Most of them won't even earn in their whole life enough to buy a computer like those we're using to communicate, and won't have the possiblity of answering your message.

Stop complaining about your precious tax money being spent to help other countries. American help to poor countries represents only a few percents of what you spend every year on ice cream !
If you really want to improve your health and social system, start cutting military expenses.
And if you really want to live in a safer world, start really helping third world countries, not just giving them subsidies to buy american goods and support american policy !

(Sadly, all these good ideas are also true for my own country, France)[/quote:c39b3f4f73]Too bad !!! the word over seas was used when I was going to school and its still good for me.I been in this country a long time and I love it But its headed for a big down fall .If I cant voice my thoughts Than there is something wrong with America. :idea:

[quote:c88d81e530]Ok, I agree with you if you mean that CIA should not have financed, armed and trained taliban and Ben Laden. The same for Saddam during Irak/Iran war. Maybe the USA should rethink its support to Pakistan, which have nuclear weapons and supports terrorists ! [/quote:c88d81e530]

I wasn't aware we trained and funded Ben Laden. The Taliban gained its weapons from left over weapons from the war against the soviets. The actual group called the Taliban didnt exist, itleast not in the way it does today.

[quote:c88d81e530]About military expenses : of course they are good for the economy and for science. But what kind of economy ? What kind of science ? Giving the same amount of money to improve your health system would be good for economy and science too, and I think that a cure for cancer would be much better than stealth technology ! [/quote:c88d81e530]

Often investment in military brings out new products not related to it. Such as computer technology such as the internet. Space technology such as satelites, etc. Cancer funding would not be impacted at all by a cut in defense spending.

[quote:c88d81e530]In the federal budget for 2002, military expenses represent 347 billion $ and international develompant only 7 billion $. So if you want to save money, there is no hesitation. [/quote:c88d81e530]

These expenses include the wages of the employees who work for the military. Whose jobs are not just to fight wars, although that is a main objective. The primary expenses are research in new weaponry, which save lives during wartime.

[quote:c88d81e530]You say that it's not the right time to cut military expenses. Why ? Do you fear invasion by Canada or by the mighty Iraqi navy ? Do you seriously believe that cruise missile will prevent further terrorist attacks ? [/quote:c88d81e530]

First, if you become involved in a unforseen war - somthing that might not even occur to us now if we have a very small budget army then we will lose. Once you are being bombed it is to late to develop new weapons, produce them, etc. Furthermore we are having a war against terrorism, rather you agree with it or not it does require funding.

[quote:c88d81e530]It's very sad that Mr Bush and his staff have been using the world trade center tragedy to gain support for their militaristic policy.[/quote:c88d81e530]

I guess you wished they would have just told the thousands of families who lost loved ones that just would not prevail.

Ben Laden has been helped by the CIA during the war against soviets to train mujahidin in Pakistan. That's where everything started. He even got trained to guerila by american specialists. This is not red herring or paranoid conspiracy theories, but a fact admitted even by the CIA.
The US diplomacy always considered taleban were a stability factor in the area and let Pakistan support them. Only last year tragedy opened their eyes.


This" war against terrorism" slogan is a great manipulation. Since you say something is a war, you justify military expenses.
But to fight terrorism efficiently, you don't need the army. It never worked ! You need efficient intelligence services, financial staff, and more than anything else a very accurate view of intarnational issues. Good diplomacy, good understanding of how people in the world perceive your country. The USA have not been closing any fiscla paradise in their area, they have not supported peace in Middle east, they have done everything to upset their allies (International treaties not signed, economic war…) So don't be surprised if the USA are not supported by many countries !


There is no link between Iraq and the WTC tragedy. Bush is unable to fight real terrorism so he relies on the only thing he knows : a good old classical war against old foe Saddam. It's just a diversion for public opinion !

[quote:4d02da8815="astrapol2"]Ben Laden has been helped by the CIA during the war against soviets to train mujahidin in Pakistan. That's where everything started. He even got trained to guerila by american specialists. This is not red herring or paranoid conspiracy theories, but a fact admitted even by the CIA.
The US diplomacy always considered taleban were a stability factor in the area and let Pakistan support them. Only last year tragedy opened their eyes.


This" war against terrorism" slogan is a great manipulation. Since you say something is a war, you justify military expenses.
But to fight terrorism efficiently, you don't need the army. It never worked ! You need efficient intelligence services, financial staff, and more than anything else a very accurate view of intarnational issues. Good diplomacy, good understanding of how people in the world perceive your country. The USA have not been closing any fiscla paradise in their area, they have not supported peace in Middle east, they have done everything to upset their allies (International treaties not signed, economic war…) So don't be surprised if the USA are not supported by many countries !


There is no link between Iraq and the WTC tragedy. Bush is unable to fight real terrorism so he relies on the only thing he knows : a good old classical war against old foe Saddam. It's just a diversion for public opinion ![/quote:4d02da8815]

No offense, but that is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard.

Milt Bearden, the CIA's station chief in Pakistan from 1986 to 1989, admitted to the January 24, 2000, New Yorker that while he never personally met bin Laden, “Did I know that he was out there? Yes, I did ... [Guys like] bin Laden were bringing $20-$25 million a month from other Saudis and Gulf Arabs to underwrite the war. And that is a lot of money. It's an extra $200-$300 million a year. And this is what bin Laden did.”

In 1986, bin Laden brought heavy construction equipment from Saudi Arabia to Afghanistan. Using his extensive knowledge of construction techniques (he has a degree in civil engineering), he built “training camps”, some dug deep into the sides of mountains, and built roads to reach them.

These camps, now dubbed “terrorist universities” by Washington, were built in collaboration with the ISI and the CIA. The Afghan contra fighters, including the tens of thousands of mercenaries recruited and paid for by bin Laden, were armed by the CIA. Pakistan, the US and Britain provided military trainers.

Tom Carew, a former British SAS soldier who secretly fought for the mujaheddin told the August 13, 2000, British Observer, “The Americans were keen to teach the Afghans the techniques of urban terrorism — car bombing and so on — so that they could strike at the Russians in major towns ... Many of them are now using their knowledge and expertise to wage war on everything they hate.”

Bin Laden only became a “terrorist” in US eyes when he fell out with the Saudi royal family over its decision to allow more than 540,000 US troops to be stationed on Saudi soil following Iraq's invasion of Kuwait.

Inquiring into the attacks of August 1998 against the American embassies of Nairobi (Kenya) and Dares-Salaam (Tanzania), the investigators of the FBI discovered that the traces left by the loads come from a military explosive of the American army and that this explosive was delivered three years before to Arab Afghans, the famous international brigades of volunteers, engaged at the side of Oussama Ben Laden lasting the war of Afghanistan against the Soviet army.

[quote:0f1cfb2922]Bin Laden only became a “terrorist” in US eyes when he fell out with the Saudi royal family over its decision to allow more than 540,000 US troops to be stationed on Saudi soil following Iraq's invasion of Kuwait.
[/quote:0f1cfb2922]

So now you are saying Bin Laden is not a terrorist? Brilliant.

I never said Ben Laden is not a terrorist. Of course he is, of course he has to be stopped !

I just want to show the links between him and the CIA, and to remind that the USA once supported jihad and guys like him in Afghanistan. Maybe it seemed clever then - let's manipulate these guys to fight USSR and then let them do whatever they want, Afghanistan is very far away and we'll always find a way of keeping them under control." Clever it was not.

So instead of using manipulation of violent groups and non-democratic governments to serve short-term policies, we westerners should learn from the past. Support democratic movements, help peace, favour long-term development and help populations.

Can we agree on that point ?