Look at this graph. Okay? Any questions on WHY we don't have free National Health? Next question. Yes, you in the back?
3 comments:
Anonymous
said...
I submit that the US is subsidizing quite a bit of the world's military spending. If the US suddenly brought their military spending in line with #2, suddenly there would be a highly vulnerable Europe, South Korea, Japan, etc.
I think unversal health care in those European countries would be less sustainable if they were having to defend themselves at full price.
The last time we isolated ourselves to the point where we sacrificed military readiness was when Pearl Harbor was attacked. We did not have the men, equipment, or training necessary to fight a conflict of that size. It took us two years to really be an effective fighting force. If the world really thinks that they are better off without us then all they have to do is open a history book. Either that or they can start learning new languages to conform with their attackers. You're welcome world.
What the fuck are you talking about? Are the Chinese going to invade? Maybe the soviet union is secretly still around and all those damn freedom-hating commies are gonna come get us ooooOOOOOooooOOOoooo.
There are no global wars going on except our farce of a war on terrorism (that makes sense war on a tactic).
When Hitler is ressurected and half the world is fighting each other, I could understand the amount we are spending. As it stands it's abso-fucking-lutely ridiculous that we spend that much so a bunch of rich white war pigs have stronger stock portfolios.
Besides, we didn't say ELIMINATE the military, just cut back on all the money we send to Israel and the like, then cut back on the testosterone-fuelled grunts who we have absolutely no need for right now.
3 comments:
I submit that the US is subsidizing quite a bit of the world's military spending. If the US suddenly brought their military spending in line with #2, suddenly there would be a highly vulnerable Europe, South Korea, Japan, etc.
I think unversal health care in those European countries would be less sustainable if they were having to defend themselves at full price.
The last time we isolated ourselves to the point where we sacrificed military readiness was when Pearl Harbor was attacked. We did not have the men, equipment, or training necessary to fight a conflict of that size. It took us two years to really be an effective fighting force. If the world really thinks that they are better off without us then all they have to do is open a history book. Either that or they can start learning new languages to conform with their attackers. You're welcome world.
@Nevermind
What the fuck are you talking about? Are the Chinese going to invade? Maybe the soviet union is secretly still around and all those damn freedom-hating commies are gonna come get us ooooOOOOOooooOOOoooo.
There are no global wars going on except our farce of a war on terrorism (that makes sense war on a tactic).
When Hitler is ressurected and half the world is fighting each other, I could understand the amount we are spending. As it stands it's abso-fucking-lutely ridiculous that we spend that much so a bunch of rich white war pigs have stronger stock portfolios.
Besides, we didn't say ELIMINATE the military, just cut back on all the money we send to Israel and the like, then cut back on the testosterone-fuelled grunts who we have absolutely no need for right now.
Post a Comment