GOP frontrunner Romney: I would not have put defense cuts on the table

[^_^ 5,021]

“As president, my plan would have produced a budget that was cut, capped and balanced – not one that opens the door to higher taxes and puts defense cuts on the table.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60374.html

[dalegg 143]

“As president, my plan would have produced a budget that was cut, capped and balanced – not one that opens the door to higher taxes and puts defense cuts on the table.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60374.html

Liar.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

“As president, my plan would have produced a budget that was cut, capped and balanced – not one that opens the door to higher taxes and puts defense cuts on the table.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60374.html

So, Mitt is uninformed on where federal money is actually spent. Not put defense on the table? ####### is he on?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

I wouldn't put "defense" cuts on the table either.

I sure as hell would put "hey, let's attack this country now" cuts on the table though!

[Ste 6]

I wouldn't put "defense" cuts on the table either.

I sure as hell would put "hey, let's attack this country now" cuts on the table though!

What do you mean? You truly believe that you shouldn't cut defense spending? Give us a few good reasons why not.

The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have most likely made the US more of a target for terrorists, meaning that more has to be spent on countering it, along with the draconian, freedom-stealing laws and rules that go with it.

Do you believe that endless wars in foreign lands count as defending your country from attack? You could probably just pull all your troops back into the US itself and no army would stand a chance if they decided to attack. You could also keep your anti-terror laws.

[scandal 951]

You could probably just pull all your troops back into the US itself and no army would stand a chance if they decided to attack.

We were attacked. On our own soil. BEFORE our troops were in either Afghanistan or Iraq.

Never, ever, ever forget.

[Ste 6]

We were attacked. On our own soil. BEFORE our troops were in either Afghanistan or Iraq.

Never, ever, ever forget.

Just had a sense of Deja vu from that post. (I remember it was from an other forum I used to frequent)

I'm not sure that 9/11 is an excuse not to cut defense spending though. A lot (obviously not all) of the US's spending on defense has no impact on the chances of being attacked like that again.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

What do you mean? You truly believe that you shouldn't cut defense spending? Give us a few good reasons why not.

The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have most likely made the US more of a target for terrorists, meaning that more has to be spent on countering it, along with the draconian, freedom-stealing laws and rules that go with it.

Do you believe that endless wars in foreign lands count as defending your country from attack? You could probably just pull all your troops back into the US itself and no army would stand a chance if they decided to attack. You could also keep your anti-terror laws.

re-read my post you're responding to, and then try again.

[Ste 6]

re-read my post you're responding to, and then try again.

Ah, I see your cryptic point now. No problem.