PDA

View Full Version : GW signs $400 billion defense bill.



Qtec
11-25-2003, 08:36 AM
The funding bill includes:


more than $9bn for ballistic missile defence

funds to develop so-called "bunker-busting" nuclear weapons which would be used against underground bunkers or weapons of mass destruction

$12bn for the purchase of Navy, Marine and Air Force fighters and funds for further developing a Joint Strike Fighter programme

funds for the Air Force to acquire 100 Boeing Co BAN refuelling aircraft <font color="red"> See 'Wow' post. </font color>

a renewal of the $250 monthly "imminent danger" pay for troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.


FIVE BIGGEST DEFENCE BUDGETS
USA: $401bn
Russia: $65bn (2001 figures)
China: $47bn (2001 figures)
Japan: $42.6bn
UK: $38.4bn
Source: US Centre for Defense Information

Q

eg8r
11-25-2003, 10:15 AM
[ QUOTE ]
FIVE BIGGEST DEFENCE BUDGETS
USA: $401bn
Russia: $65bn (2001 figures)
China: $47bn (2001 figures)
Japan: $42.6bn
UK: $38.4bn
Source: US Centre for Defense Information <hr /></blockquote> I am just thinking here, but...Are you comparing apples to apples? Are the figures that you have quoted above yearly figures? The $400 billion bill is not a 2004 budget bill. I could be wrong, but that money will be spent over time and beyond 2004.

I think you might be confusing the numbers above. The numbers for the other countries state they are 2001 figures. To me (I could be reading this wrong) but that sounds like a budget for the year 2001. The $400 billion for the US is not a yearly figure.

eg8r &lt;~~~Have been wrong before, but I also know that Q has an agenda to try and prove

Qtec
11-25-2003, 11:41 AM
Basically, the rest of the world is spending less on defence[ except the UK]and the USA is spending more.

The rest of the world ,including the USA, are for strict controls on nuclear technology and the US is activly developing new nuclear [ WMDs]weapons.

Where is Saddam? Is $400 billion enough to find him? Or Osama? Or the WMDs?

GW is just going to spend,spend ,spend. Cut taxes and give buisness all kinds of tax breaks. When the next guy comes in, he will have to deal with the HUGE debt that is building up.

The money has got to come from somewhere?

Q

eg8r
11-25-2003, 12:12 PM
I guess you just could not answer the question. It is alright. If you would like, in future posts, add in a disclaimer that you have no intention of verifying the data or even at least understanding what data you are looking at. At this point it will be even more clear that you are only looking to show the US in a negative light and we can ignore the rest.

eg8r

Sid_Vicious
11-25-2003, 12:27 PM
eg8r...That's one part of politics I detest, making changes now that run for 5-10 years. All these are for is window dressing, cuz the dems can come in eventually and kill these things, jus' like the reps do following a dem admin. It's all stupid, country deminishing policies. Whether Q is on target or not does not excuse the fact that GW and crew are unreasonable...sid

eg8r
11-25-2003, 01:17 PM
[ QUOTE ]
That's one part of politics I detest, making changes now that run for 5-10 years. All these are for is window dressing, cuz the dems can come in eventually and kill these things, jus' like the reps do following a dem admin. It's all stupid, country deminishing policies. <hr /></blockquote> I don't know about the last sentence but I agree with the rest. I just wanted to point out that the numbers are probably not as extravagantly different as he is trying to show. There is no doubt in my mind that we spend more than the rest, but comparing apples to apples makes more sense. Showing what he did appears to be an attempt to deceive.

[ QUOTE ]
Whether Q is on target or not does not excuse the fact that GW and crew are unreasonable <hr /></blockquote> Definitely a point of view. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r

Kato
11-25-2003, 01:42 PM
I would be willing to bet China is spending more as time goes on. Please realize that we pay to defend alot of countries, not just our own. You'll be thrilled to know that we spend all that money if a country like France tries to come in and steal all your weed. /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif It costs a lot of money to send a 12 man Marine strike team to repel a mighty country like France /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Kato

11-25-2003, 03:53 PM
[ QUOTE ]
The $400 billion for the US is not a yearly figure. <hr /></blockquote>

The U.S. defense budget for 2003 is around $370 billion. Just do a search for 2003 U.S. Defense budget, and you will find countless links to verify this information.

http://www.clw.org/milspend/ushighestbudget.html

http://www.iwar.org.uk/news-archive/2003/11-07-5.htm

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/article.cfm?Id=809

http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Defense

Qtec
11-25-2003, 10:16 PM
I thought this was interesting,

[ QUOTE ]
The bill also provides for $817 million as requested by the Bush administration for counter-drug activities. It extends existing authority of the Pentagon to use this money for anti-terrorist operations in Colombia.

<hr /></blockquote>

...in the light of this...


http://www.bigleftoutside.com/archives/grasso.jpeg

..Richard Grasso with the FARC!

Q

Qtec
11-25-2003, 11:18 PM
If the world is now a safer place because of GW,s crusade in Iraq, why does he have to spend so much money on defense/attack?

If Osama had been captured this year ,would the budget be any less?

Do you think the US really wants to capture Osama?
I have my doubts.
Have you noticed how he is hardly ever mentioned anymore. Its always the 'war on terror' or 'Al Qaeda'.

Even if the US doesnt know where he is, I will bet the Saudis do.After all, family is family.

Q

eg8r
11-26-2003, 08:21 AM
Are you going to even check to see if your numbers are correct (all numbers are annual expenses), or are you going to continue in an argument no one is part of????

eg8r

eg8r
11-26-2003, 08:24 AM
Kato,

Q would not understand that if his own life depended on our military.

I was just wondering, how much money would we save if we pulled our military out of Germany and France??? I know Germany would change their attitude, they have already wet their pants when we started to reduced our role there a little while ago.

eg8r

Qtec
11-26-2003, 10:30 AM
[ QUOTE ]
WASHINGTON - The U.S. House of Representatives last week cleared a final bill for defense programs that includes a multibillion-dollar compromise for the Air Force to acquire 100 Boeing Co. (BA.N: Quote, Profile, Research) refueling aircraft, leasing the first 20 of them.


Winding up a two-year battle over the program, the House and Senate armed services panels agreed the remaining 80 would be bought. The leases will begin in fiscal 2006, which starts Oct. 1, 2005, and purchases will be made through fiscal 2014.
The deal was part of the fiscal 2004 Defense Authorization Act that outlines $401.3 billion for the Defense Department and national security programs of the Energy Department

<hr /></blockquote>

I cant find anything different.

What are your figures?

Q

Qtec
11-26-2003, 10:40 AM
Global Defense Spending Surges

In the wake of September 11, military spending is on the rise across the globe. A German think tank warns that the U.S. is the leader in a 960 billion euro defense spending spree that could lead us back to the 1980s.


In its annual report, "Conversion Survey 2002," the Bonn International Center for Conversion (BICC) warns that after a decade of shrinking, military spending is climbing fast.

"When it comes to the magnitude of military spending and planned increases, the United States is the lone global leader," says Michael Brzoska, one of the report's authors.

With a military budget of $343 billion (369 billion euro) in 2002 (up from $310 billion the previous year), the United States spends almost eight times as much as Japan, which spends $45 billion, the report states. It spends nine times more than France, Great Britain and China, which each spend under $40 billion.

The gap is even greater between the U.S. and Germany, which spends twelve times less at about $30 billion annually.

Fueled by threat of terrorism

Total global spending on defense this year is expected to soar to $900 billion (960 billion euros), the report estimates. The organization believes the U.S.-led war against terror is fueling that trend


Q

eg8r
11-26-2003, 12:27 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I cant find anything different.

What are your figures? <hr /></blockquote> I did not have figures, I was asking you to clarify yours. Comprehension my friend that is your worst enemy.

[ QUOTE ]
The deal was part of the fiscal 2004 Defense Authorization Act that outlines $401.3 billion for the Defense Department and national security programs of the Energy Department <hr /></blockquote>
As far as your quote, it further goes to prove my point...the $400 billion is not just for this year. The $400 is not money budgeted for 2004 only...Your quote shows this.

Here is a quote from your first post in this thread... [ QUOTE ]
$12bn for the purchase of Navy, Marine and Air Force fighters and funds for further developing a Joint Strike Fighter programme
<hr /></blockquote> TUS will not be purchasing any JSF fighters until 2006. There will not even be a single JSF built until end of 05, beginning of 06. To top that all off, LM does all the work for the JSF with it's own money, only to be paid in rewards as milestones are reached. Considering there are 3 variants to be built and completed by 08, and the entire first buy is 19 Billion, I know for a fact that 12 of the 19 will not be spent in 04, as the article is leading you to believe. I am guessing you know nothing about award based programs, so I will leave it at that. In turn, I am guessing you know very little about the Defense budget also.

In having the info on the JSF and being very close to that program, that is why I have questioned you on the numbers. The article you posted did not say the numbers given were for 2004 only, eventhough that is how it listed a couple other countries.

eg8r

11-26-2003, 01:42 PM
[ QUOTE ]
The $400 is not money budgeted for 2004 only...Your quote shows this.
<hr /></blockquote>

Mr. Neanderthal,

Oh wise one, what is the defense budget for 2003 or 2004? I am sure that you won't respond as you're afraid to engage in discourse with those who are clearly more intelligent than yourself. The White House website clearly states the 2003 Defense budget. 2003 Spending: $358.2 billion.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2004/defense.html
http://www.cdi.org/issues/budget/FY03Highlights-pr.cfm
http://www.cdi.org/budget/2004/world-military-spending.cfm

Kato
11-26-2003, 02:06 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> Global Defense Spending Surges

With a military budget of $343 billion (369 billion euro) in 2002 (up from $310 billion the previous year), the United States spends almost eight times as much as Japan, which spends $45 billion, the report states. It spends nine times more than France, Great Britain and China, which each spend under $40 billion.

The gap is even greater between the U.S. and Germany, which spends twelve times less at about $30 billion annually.

Q <hr /></blockquote>

I highly doubt that China's numbers are accurate. I just don't believe that's true.

I'm waiting for the President that says, "You know what boys, we're pulling out our military and you'll have to defend yourselves".

Wonder what kept Russia from taking over Germany and France during the Cold War? Do you think those countries minded our jets, men, and missles then? Do you think the Russians would have backed down in Cuba if we didn't have the weaponry we have? I live in Florida, we probably wouldn't even be here right now, Florida would be a toxic swamp.

Kato~~~~thinks I'll run up to Hamiltucky, pick up Wally and 3 good old boys in a big 'ole pickup and then go take over France for the heck of it.

eg8r
11-28-2003, 11:08 AM
LOL, just another example of Q avoiding my post. You don't have anything to say, so you can just quote some other website about US spending.

Q