Life During Wartime : Spending on Defense

Political cartoon by Joshua Brown / Historians Against the War / The Rag Blog

The Rag Blog

This entry was posted in Rag Bloggers and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Life During Wartime : Spending on Defense

  1. Richard says:

    Are you sure that isn’t spending on OFFENCE? Used to be the WAR DEPARTMENT before the pentagon pr boys got ahold of the name.

  2. If and when you start to spend more on military; finding reasons to involve this country in a war of some kind, you’ve ALREADY SUFFERED that ‘spiritual death’ – you’re definitely NOT ‘approaching it’……

  3. masterspork says:

    I have to say about the comments on military spending let me ask you this. If you where struck by a IED which vehicle would would you rather be in a unarmored HUMMW with only very thin tin doors or a Armored MRAP that has a V shaped hull that is designed to take a blast.

    Because it is easy to what it too much money when you do not have to face the dangers.

    I get that

  4. I like MP's reply, just wishing that we weren't having to deal with the task of bringing troops home at all.

    In the interest of safety, I don't deny the need for expense. I worked in the military and defense industry for 23 years, and know what was developed for the safety; know what often was often almost 'novelty' – just to see if it could be done. Witnessing

  5. Anonymous says:

    If the US military wasn't in Iraq or Afghanistan, which is foreign soil, the issue of IEDs would be moot. It defies logic to name it the Dept. of "Defense" – it may be the most offensive group of people on Earth.

  6. Masterspork says:

    Happy in Nevada,

    I agree that there is a problem with how contracts are done and the results. The uparmored HUMMWV, the M16 and the M4. Not to forget the huge disaster that was known as the B-2 Stealth bomber that costs one Billion each. That is why the MRAPs that are going out are making a major difference. They can go into urban areas where tanks cannot, and can take a blast that

  7. Anonymous says:

    "So to think that the used of IEDs will only remain in Iraq and Afghanistan is wrong."

    Good, old American fear-mongering at its best, spork. If there will be IEDs on American soil, I might wager it would be our 'masters' planting them to ensure we stay fearful and subjugated. Your remarks are ridiculous and must be parroting of the drivel they are teaching

  8. Masterspork says:

    Uh no, look at the history of military conflict. A successful tatic used on one place can and will be used in another.

    We used the tactics used by German U-boats in the Atlantic against Japan in the Pacific. Japan used the shallow water torpedoes against us at Pearl Harbor by watching the British use them against the Italians in 1940.

    Long story short IEDs will be a part

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *