Originally posted by RedmikeThats better than wasting it on testing the flow rate of ketchup.
Just what the region needs - 60 billion dollars of new weapons. As Mark Steel points out, thats $250 for every living US citizen.
http://comment.independent.co.uk/columnists_m_z/mark_steel/article2823071.ece
Originally posted by Redmike250 bucks sounds like a bargain... I spent more than that killing a mole and my backyard last weekend.
Are you saying, because there are (arguably) worse things the money could have been spent on, that makes it ok?
Perhaps they could have used the money to buy weapons [b]off people in the Middle East.[/b]
Buy the weapons 🙂 For how much?
Originally posted by lepomisBut its $250 for everyone - a lot of squished moles.
250 bucks sounds like a bargain... I spent more than that killing a mole and my backyard last weekend.
Buy the weapons 🙂 For how much?
I don't know the going rate, but I'd imagine you could get a lot of AK47's off the streets for 60 billion
Originally posted by RedmikeI understand the idea behind buying guns, but I don't think it worked well at all in the US. The money could have been used to buy better guns for all I know.
But its $250 for everyone - a lot of squished moles.
I don't know the going rate, but I'd imagine you could get a lot of AK47's off the streets for 60 billion
About funding the war, or whatever, 250 bucks is not alot of money. 5 per paycheck. Skip the mocha latte or something. Our kids are over there possible dying and we are bulking at $5 a week.
Originally posted by RedmikeRather have them buy them from the US... if we didn't sell them to them,they buy from the Chinese ... or the Russians... or even the French
But its $250 for everyone - a lot of squished moles.
I don't know the going rate, but I'd imagine you could get a lot of AK47's off the streets for 60 billion
Originally posted by RedmikeWe could buy every AK on the planet for that kind of money. Which would give the world plenty of money to buy shiney new ones.
But its $250 for everyone - a lot of squished moles.
I don't know the going rate, but I'd imagine you could get a lot of AK47's off the streets for 60 billion
Better would be for the world to place a weapons embargo on any government that has sht the bed.
Originally posted by RedmikeWhy are American taxpayers buying anyone weapons? It's so damn annoying.
Just what the region needs - 60 billion dollars of new weapons. As Mark Steel points out, thats $250 for every living US citizen.
http://comment.independent.co.uk/columnists_m_z/mark_steel/article2823071.ece
Originally posted by lepomisThis isn't about funding the war. This is one massive arms shipment.
I understand the idea behind buying guns, but I don't think it worked well at all in the US. The money could have been used to buy better guns for all I know.
About funding the war, or whatever, 250 bucks is not alot of money. 5 per paycheck. Skip the mocha latte or something. Our kids are over there possible dying and we are bulking at $5 a week.
Originally posted by MerkI don't disagree, but who'd decide which countries were subject to an embargo, and who'd police it?
We could buy every AK on the planet for that kind of money. Which would give the world plenty of money to buy shiney new ones.
Better would be for the world to place a weapons embargo on any government that has sht the bed.