Obama in a turban...?

[AZhitman]

That's what a bigoted society does - they categorize and condemn [Christians] based on the actions of a fringe few.

Fixed that for ya, since it works both ways.

There's a huge segment of the Middle East that has hated Western culture for years. It didn't *just* start with Desert Storm. C'mon now.

In fact, I have an old collection of magazines from the 70's with pictures showing middle easterners expressing their hate for the west.

You think THEY'RE taking the time to learn about our faith and what it's REALLY all about?

WE'RE the nation that needs to be more "sensitive"????

When we're considering military intervention JUST to get food and medical supplies to the residents of countries whose governments don't want citizens to get aid?

When we collectively donated $300 BILLION to charity in 2007?

When we're the LARGEST provider of foreign aid, exceeding the contributions of ALL other countries COMBINED????

WE need to be more "sensitive"?

Sensitive people need to move to France. Screw sensitive.

And why the hell do we keep bringing Fred Phelps into this? Am I the only person who doesn't even know who he is? If he's some sort of Christian spokesperson du jour, I must have missed that sermon - But he sure as hell don't represent me, or my friends, or my church, or my faith...

BTW, I concur that the spouses and kids are OFF LIMITS.

[AZhitman]

p.s. The New Yorker is a pathetic excuse for journalism anyway, and that cover is incredibly not cool.

However, if it were the other way around (GWB in a diaper with his finger up his nose and the other on the "deploy" button), it's be "witty" and "insightful".

Whatever.

[rn79870]

WE'RE the nation that needs to be more "sensitive"????

When we're considering military intervention JUST to get food and medical supplies to the residents of countries whose governments don't want citizens to get aid?

When we collectively donated $300 BILLION to charity in 2007?

When we're the LARGEST provider of foreign aid, exceeding the contributions of ALL other countries COMBINED????

WE need to be more "sensitive"?

Sensitive people need to move to France. Screw sensitive.

And why the hell do we keep bringing Fred Phelps into this? Am I the only person who doesn't even know who he is? If he's some sort of Christian spokesperson du jour, I must have missed that sermon - But he sure as hell don't represent me, or my friends, or my church, or my faith...

BTW, I concur that the spouses and kids are OFF LIMITS.

Greg, my point, in this regard, is that America and American money isn't the "gift" we think it is. Look at the problems we've had getting in to countries and offering aid, merely because the aid is delivered by military sources. America has a misbelief that throwing money at a situation is the answer for any problem, foreign and domestic. To many in this world that is seen as vulgar.

Now, before this goes sideways, I, in no way, mean to take anything from those who serve in uniform. Bless them and bring them home safely.

Yes Greg, part of solving the problems we now face will require a little "sensitivity" on the part of the US. A little ask before shooting.

My comment about Fred Phelps (the dude from Foxbouro Baptist Church - the protestor at many military funerals, etc.) was a study in wide brush painting. Saying Muslims are terrorists is not unlike saying Fred Phelps speaks for Christianity. In fact, terrorists and Phelpsites are small fringe lunatic groups of each religion. It's unfair to group either religion in the cause.

[rn79870]

Bob...are you so friggin blind that you forgot that the terrorists attacked us first? Are we to do nothing? Don't even go into the mismanagement of the war...

I'm asking you directly...right now. After 911, do you believe we should have done nothing?

Brian, terrorists may be Muslim, but not all Muslims are terrorlst. In fact, as I understand it, most Muslims are against terrorism. Helio can better explain this than I can, he should be back today from a few weeks in Syria.Painting all Muslims as terrorlst is a giant leap from reality.

Perhaps post 9/11 we should have concentrated on getting bin Laden, and expended the 1/2 trillion dollars to that end instead of searching for unicorns and WMDs, and deranged dictators. We could have sponsored a FOD march across his stomping grounds and found him and all his henchmen. That would have gone much further in removing the terrorlst threat faced by this country than the disaster in Iraq has.

What country was it that stopped the Russian army from destroying ALL of the middle east and making it the USSR? It was a LIBERAL that lead that effort I might add...

Starting with Eisenhauer (R), Kennedy (D), Johnson (D), Nixon (R), Ford (R), Carter (D), Regan (R) ? Which liberal are you referring to? They have all fought against Ivan. Perhaps you're thinking about Regan and his dealings with the USSR.

You people have lost your minds in defense of what? For the sake of playing party politics that's what. You're so against anything that could even be conveyed as Conservative that you'll willing throw yourself and our country under the bus. My God Bob...do you even realize what you're saying at this point. Are you arguing just to argue? Election aside...brother, you have to know that we aren't souly responsible for the Arabs not liking us. Ask those selfish fvckers where they would be if we hadn't intervened when the Russians were slaughtering them by the 100,000 thousand...or has EVERYONE convienently forgot about that?

Brian, it's your "kill them all and let God sort them out" attitude that I find alarming. What the Russians did to those countries I can't control, however, if you read the history correctly, they (the Afgans) did a pretty good job of kicking Ivans a$$.

And yes, we need to address the issues with Arab/American relations. It's far better to talk than to shoot. Who knows, maybe there is a resolution under the surface that might last. It's worth the effort on the part of both sides. We might get lucky and remove some of the underlying causes of terrorism. You never know.

Jesus...you people amaze me. As a person who has risked his life in order to protect you while you sleep, you make me ashamed to call you American. You dishonor everyone that has died to preserve your rights...

Brian, like ot or not, there are quite a few Americans that see the military as the last option, not the first. We place a value on the lives of those who serve and want them put in jeopardy only when it is necessary to protect America or Americans.

[rn79870]

I don't see where all arabs hate us?

I misspoke. No one hates you Matt.

But care to take a guess what fuels terrorism or what motivates people to fly airliners into buildings?

[skylndrftr]

p.s. The New Yorker is a pathetic excuse for journalism anyway, and that cover is incredibly not cool.

However, if it were the other way around (GWB in a diaper with his finger up his nose and the other on the "deploy" button), it's be "witty" and "insightful".

Whatever.

But yoru the one saying its uncool. Honestly I thought the cover (and having now read it, the article as well) were incredibly insightful. I think the same thing with Bush would have been pointless and an easy target.

WD I think that last statement is a cheap shot. We have our opinions and they are just as valid as yours. Thats the whole idea of what you protected. The whole 'they attacked us first' is kinda irrelevant when you consider us going into Iraq had nothign to do with 9/11 (saving the why discussio non that for another time) Hussein had nothing to do with Al Qaeda. So couldn't the Iraqi's then use your logic and say we attacked them first?

[WDRacing]

Bob...just stop. I already said MYSELF that not all Muslims are terrorists...

Charlie Wilson Bob...Charlie Wilson...

The Afgans did well because WE armed them and trained them Bob...YOU read the history.

I don't have a kill them all attitude at all Bob. YOU are simply to blind to realize that I'm simply saying America isn't souly responsible for any "bad reputation" and or "bad feelings"...

Do I need to explain to you Bob why the military is the one that sends the most assistance when it comes to disater relief etc? It's because they are the best fit to do so Bob. Would you mind telling what is so threatening about a C5 full of rice and water Bob?

Let me ask you this...since you have ALL the answers. What should we do instead of financial assistance and food and medical assistance? That pretty much limits us to playing no roll in helping anyone.

You didn't even answer my question. You are two busy sidestepping and rewording my posts with your anti conservative propaganda.

I asked, do you think we should have done nothing after 911. I'm not referring to the WAR...I'm referring to our invasion of Afganistan...also Muslim.

Not all Muslims are terrorists...far from it. But are you going to sit there and tell me that we can do nothing and we'll never be attacked again? Perhaps you have an answer for that as well.

Maybe your wife should be captured and slowly have her throat cut until her head pops off. Because until then I don't think you'll truly understand the depth that these people will go. What if it's a school that gets bombed next?

I'm not anti Muslim Bob, I'm asking you to realize things aren't cut and dry like you and your cohorts would like to believe. If you refuse to see things for how they are, then you're simply not looking.

I'm all for pulling out of Iraq remember.

Just answer my questions honestly without spinning things or mentioning the Iraq war or the budget etc. It has no bearing on the question I asked you.

[WDRacing]

WD I think that last statement is a cheap shot. We have our opinions and they are just as valid as yours. Thats the whole idea of what you protected. The whole 'they attacked us first' is kinda irrelevant when you consider us going into Iraq had nothign to do with 9/11 (saving the why discussio non that for another time) Hussein had nothing to do with Al Qaeda. So couldn't the Iraqi's then use your logic and say we attacked them first?

Not referring to Iraq...I'm referring to Afganistan.

I to do not want anymore war mongering guys. But I am not ever going to say we deserve what we get, or that we brought it on ourselves.

[rn79870]

Bob...just stop. I already said MYSELF that not all Muslims are terrorists...

Charlie Wilson Bob...Charlie Wilson...

The Afgans did well because WE armed them and trained them Bob...YOU read the history.

I don't have a kill them all attitude at all Bob. YOU are simply to blind to realize that I'm simply saying America isn't souly responsible for any "bad reputation" and or "bad feelings"...

How is it that America isn't responsible for the way the world views America? People judge us by what we say and what we do. Or, let me say it this way...If we handled international issues differently, perhaps Americas would be better received in the world community. It's not like it's only one country telling us we're wrong. Maybe we should listen...

Do I need to explain to you Bob why the military is the one that sends the most assistance when it comes to disater relief etc? It's because they are the best fit to do so Bob. Would you mind telling what is so threatening about a C5 full of rice and water Bob?

It isn't the rice and water causing the countries to refuse our aid, it's the US Air Force on the side of the planes and the uniformed soldiers that they don't want in their country least they never leave...

Let me ask you this...since you have ALL the answers. What should we do instead of financial assistance and food and medical assistance? That pretty much limits us to playing no roll in helping anyone.

You've missed the point again. They DON'T want our aid becasue it always seems to come with strings attached. Not only that, aid is available from most to them from most the other countries in the world - and they would rather have their freebies....doesn't that cause you to stop and think?

You didn't even answer my question. You are two busy sidestepping and rewording my posts with your anti conservative propaganda.

I asked, do you think we should have done nothing after 911. I'm not referring to the WAR...I'm referring to our invasion of Afganistan...also Muslim.

I guess you missed it the first time, so I'll repost it...

Perhaps post 9/11 we should have concentrated on getting bin Laden, and expended the 1/2 trillion dollars to that end instead of searching for unicorns and WMDs, and deranged dictators. We could have sponsored a FOD march across his stomping grounds and found him and all his henchmen. That would have gone much further in removing the terrorlst threat faced by this country than the disaster in Iraq has. Not all Muslims are terrorists...far from it. But are you going to sit there and tell me that we can do nothing and we'll never be attacked again? Perhaps you have an answer for that as well.

I bolded the specific answer to your question, specifically the failed attempts to get the one responsible for 9/11. We were too busy chasing WMDs to concentrate on the real goal.

Maybe your wife should be captured and slowly have her throat cut until her head pops off. Because until then I don't think you'll truly understand the depth that these people will go. What if it's a school that gets bombed next?

Maybe we should foster an environment where that type of response to our policies isn't seen as the only option. However wrong they (the terrorlst) may be in their actions, addressing the underlying cause of these responses may be more productive as a means "curing" them than excallating the hostilities. At least it's worth a try, because the fight fire with fire method doesn't seem to be working all that well.

I'm not anti Muslim Bob, I'm asking you to realize things aren't cut and dry like you and your cohorts would like to believe. If you refuse to see things for how they are, then you're simply not looking.

Brian, you've been called by several people here for anti-muslim comments. I don't know whather they were gramatic slips or intentional, but I'll give you the benefit. I remember one specific comment you made about your God kicking Allah's a$$. That's anti-muslim buddy.

I'm all for pulling out of Iraq remember.

I thought you changed your mind and went with the guy who wants to be there for the next 100 to 1000 years. How do you reconsile your "pull out" beliefs with his "we'll be there forever" philosophy?

Just answer my questions honestly without spinning things or mentioning the Iraq war or the budget etc. It has no bearing on the question I asked you.

I think I've answered them Brian. Now, if you'd like to, maybe you could explain why bin Laden is still living in some desert leading a band of extreemist against our country while we fight ...nevermind, you know where that is going.

[WDRacing]

Nah...done talking about it.

[HashiriyaS14]

I remember one specific comment you made about your God kicking Allah's a$$. That's anti-muslim buddy.

Ok, now I never saw WD make this particular statement, but I'll admit that it's pretty funny.

For anyone who doesn't know (probably few), the God of the Christian religion and "Allah" are the same being, as is the God of the Jews. This is why all three religions are referred to as "peoples of the book", because ultimately we all pray to the same central deity. "Allah" is just what God is called in Islam, but they recognize that they are ultimately worshiping the same figure that we are.

The differences arise over things like the Jews not viewing Christ as the messiah, or the Muslims believing that Christ was not divine and putting more into Mohammad's significance, or stuff like the holy trinity upsetting Muslims as they see it as polytheism, et cetera.

But yeah, it's ultimately all the same "God".

Anyway, this thread has spun wildly off subject, or at least it appears that way. I don't really have a problem with the cartoon per se, as it's quite obviously a satire designed to take potshots at Obama's more ignorant detractors. It's the f**king New Yorker, not Fox News, we know what side they're on, lol. It's definitely a traditionally left-leaning publication.

I can see how the cartoon might create a negative impression of Obama for those who don't understand it, but somehow I doubt that crowd was going to vote for him in the first place as they're likely the ones being made fun of.

I actually thought that "terrorlst Michelle" was the FUNNIEST part of the cartoon, and I bet Michelle herself did too, but ultimately she and Barack can't appear to find the cartoon funny publicly, they need to seem to disapprove with it for political reasons even though it obviously is poking fun at their enemies' ignorance.

[AZhitman]

It isn't the rice and water causing the countries to refuse our aid, it's the US Air Force on the side of the planes and the uniformed soldiers that they don't want in their country least they never leave...

Maybe because FedEx and UPS pilots aren't trained to blast the piss out of some skinny shoeless assclown with a grenade-launcher on his shoulder...

Witholding aid from their citizens is a tactic used by non-democratic societies for ages... it's sick, it's wrong, and I'd rather have some warlord wannabe "hate" the US than to see people under despotic rule starving and dying because he wants to be the "Big Boss".

It's real easy to say we should "keep it at home", but with great power comes great responsibility. Yeah, sometimes we go at it wrong. But if not us, WHO? If not now, WHEN?

[AZhitman]

Hashie, that's some good insight - I hadn't thought of it that way. Always refreshing to have your viewpoint.

And you're spot-on with the "God" thing.

[rn79870]

That's not the issue Greg. I was referring to the countries that refuse US aid because they don't want the US military (who delivers the aid) on their soil. Even when that military is on a humanitarian mission. It all stems from the decline of American status as a good guy in the international eye.

[Badfish]

A politics forum now? Back in my day, we just posted hot topics in general chat and flamed everyone if they didn't agree with us.

Some people at another board I post at wanted to see what an appropiately themed counter cover for McCain would be. How about McCain curbstomping homosexuals in the oval office? One plucky artist there was up to the task.

Yeah....

Tasteless I know, but admittedly I find a lot of tasteless things funny for the wrong reasons. I also don't have the responsibility of a huge national readership who is already flooded with an enormous amount of subversive propaganda about the candidates.

[audtatious]

I misspoke. No one hates you Matt.

Another blanket statement.

My 1st X-wife hates me

But care to take a guess what fuels terrorism or what motivates people to fly airliners into buildings?

Obama did not want us in Saudi Arabia although we were there at their request? That we don't follow the teaching of the Quran thus we are infidels that must die? There's two of the reasons.

He seemed pretty happy with our support against Russia tho so we must not be all that bad.

[audtatious]

That's not the issue Greg. I was referring to the countries that refuse US aid because they don't want the US military (who delivers the aid) on their soil. Even when that military is on a humanitarian mission. It all stems from the decline of American status as a good guy in the international eye.

Which countries? I know that relief was denied in Africa a couple months back but it was not simply from the US that it was denied.

How about we simply pull our of all humanitarian efforts and deal with our own problems for a while. Let the world handle things themselves instead of sitting around accepting our generous handouts while going home and burning our flag? So what if N. Korea or Iran gets a nuke that can reach the US, they can only get so far as California and to a good portion of the US that's not a bad thing

[rn79870]

Here are but a few examples...I've taken a few from the last 5 or 6 years to show that this not a new idea.

June 4, 2008

BANGKOK -- U.S. warships will soon leave waters near Myanmar after the ruling military junta refused permission for the delivery of aid supplies to the cyclone-stricken Irrawaddy delta, a top U.S. commander said on Wednesday.

Adm. Timothy Keating said the USS Essex group will sail away from the former Burma on Thursday but leave several heavy-lift helicopters in neighboring Thailand to help in the relief effort.

"Should the Burmese rulers have a change of heart and request our full assistance for their suffering we are prepared to help," Keating, commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific, said in a statement.

Note: US warships delivering aid. Ironic isn't it.

April 25, 2002:

A truck carrying humanitarian aid from the United States to Jenin refugee camp has been turned back by the residents of the camp. The aid, including baby clothes and toys, was being unloaded and the boxes were marked as ‘a gift from the United States’. Some of the goods were clearly manufactured and produced in Israel. One man pointed to the remains of two missiles fired from an Apache helicopter and stated that “this is the biggest gift we got from America.” A delivery of tents was also refused.

[audtatious]

The first one you listed is where the rulers wanted the "supplies" so they could deliver them to their "people" in order to get votes. IIRC, they refused to let other countries in and only after major negotiations were even the Red Cross allowed (which is far from a military organization).

The second; they turned down the aid because it was US built weapons that Israel was using. The aid was being delivered not by the US military, but from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). The mention of Apache helicopters makes one read that the US was the ones who bombed them when it was in fact Israel. Now, if they wish to refuse aid from the US because Israel used US-perchased weapons then that is fine. BUT, I wonder how much aid they refused from Iran and others who's weapons are used against Israel and their own people all the time. I doubt they refused any of it.

[AZhitman]

Note: US warships delivering aid. Ironic isn't it.

Well, maybe you could talk megalibby Richard Branson into delivering aid in one of his luxury liners.

Really Bob - How the hell else would you propose this be done?

What's next? Starving Ethiopians burning donated Army rations JUST because they're labeled "Army"? I don't think so.

One man pointed to the remains of two missiles fired from an Apache helicopter and stated that “this is the biggest gift we got from America.” A delivery of tents was also refused.

Sounds like a case of "Pride goeth before a fall."

If one of my kids were starving or needed medical attention, I'd take it. Charity is charity - Part of being gracious is accepting it in the spirit it was given - NOT looking a gift horse in the mouth.

[OriginalWheelman]

How about we simply pull our of all humanitarian efforts and deal with our own problems for a while. Let the world handle things themselves instead of sitting around accepting our generous handouts while going home and burning our flag?

Because OUR citizens ***** if we don't. The same people that sit there and say "why do we spend so much money?" go "why are we not doing anything to help?". I hear the same people who ***** about military spending complain after watching Hotel Rwanda "Why did we just let that happen?" Umm....

[WDRacing]

Because OUR citizens ***** if we don't. The same people that sit there and say "why do we spend so much money?" go "why are we not doing anything to help?". I hear the same people who ***** about military spending complain after watching Hotel Rwanda "Why did we just let that happen?" Umm....

Um...duh...

We can't help the Africans because it will be "Invading"...we can't give them aide because then we're wating resources and going crazy on spending. But if we don't we're uncaring arrogant Americans...

It's a lose lose situation.

[rn79870]

Well, maybe you could talk megalibby Richard Branson into delivering aid in one of his luxury liners.

Really Bob - How the hell else would you propose this be done?

What's next? Starving Ethiopians burning donated Army rations JUST because they're labeled "Army"? I don't think so.

Sounds like a case of "Pride goeth before a fall."

If one of my kids were starving or needed medical attention, I'd take it. Charity is charity - Part of being gracious is accepting it in the spirit it was given - NOT looking a gift horse in the mouth.

I think you've all missed my point. I'm not commenting on the need or the delivery of aid, my point was designed to reflect on the nations who want so little to do with the US that they are willing to refuse needed aid. I think there is a story present whenever a entity in need of assistance refuses to accept it. Allowing citizens to suffer instead of accepting US aid is quite a statement any way you look at it.

[WDRacing]

I think you've all missed my point. I'm not commenting on the need or the delivery of aid, my point was designed to reflect on the nations who want so little to do with the US that they are willing to refuse needed aid. I think there is a story present whenever a entity in need of assistance refuses to accept it. Allowing citizens to suffer instead of accepting US aid is quite a statement any way you look at it.

Yes, that story is about how the leaders of that country are making a stupid decision because of idiotic reasons. We don't invade countries we give aide to...they are simply making an anti American statement when they choose to refuse aide.

I'm NOT saying we look good in the eyes of the world Bob, I'm saying it's stupid to refuse aide when given. I support not being a War Mongering country, always have. But I'll not leave us defenseless either, simply for the sake of appearances.

We definitly need to leave countries that don't want is there. But when we do that we need to CLOSE our borders to insure security for OUR nation. No Visa...get out. Illegal Immigrant, get out. That would have to be done to insure security.

Disagree?

[AZhitman]

I think you've all missed my point. I'm not commenting on the need or the delivery of aid, my point was designed to reflect on the nations who want so little to do with the US that they are willing to refuse needed aid. I think there is a story present whenever a entity in need of assistance refuses to accept it. Allowing citizens to suffer instead of accepting US aid is quite a statement any way you look at it.

Bob, no one missed your "point".

MY point is that the regimes systematically eradicating their own people because of their flawed ideological impressions need to be held accountable and bitchslapped into submission.

You ever rescue a baby bird, Bob? I know it's hard for you to fathom a conservative as being genuinely compassionate, but I am...

The parents want you NOWHERE near the baby. The baby wants nothing to do with you. Hell, the baby would do anything in its power to get away, and if it could, it'd peck your eyes out and go back to dying.

So you imopse your will on it, provide it some water and maybe a bit of food, create a crude protective shelter that serves its purpose, and once the bird regains its strength, you release it back into its environment.

It doesn't say "thanks, Bobby!" nor does it go proselytizing to other birds about how freakin cool us humans are.

But hopefully, it survives and has a nice existence and makes babies and life goes on.

[rn79870]

I knew you were a good person.

Now, what you posted makes so much more sense than shooting the birds or forcing them to eat pretzels and drink beer. Kind of a live and let live philosophy.

[rn79870]

Brian, I don't disagree. I wouldn't be upset if we entered a period of isolationism and reflected on where that took us.

All I've been trying to say is our current path is not in the best interest of our country. Changes are needed. I think you're seeing that now.

[Encryptshun]

MY point is that the regimes systematically eradicating their own people because of their flawed ideological impressions need to be held accountable and bitchslapped into submission.

You ever rescue a baby bird, Bob? I know it's hard for you to fathom a conservative as being genuinely compassionate, but I am...

The parents want you NOWHERE near the baby. The baby wants nothing to do with you. Hell, the baby would do anything in its power to get away, and if it could, it'd peck your eyes out and go back to dying.

So you imopse your will on it, provide it some water and maybe a bit of food, create a crude protective shelter that serves its purpose, and once the bird regains its strength, you release it back into its environment.

It doesn't say "thanks, Bobby!" nor does it go proselytizing to other birds about how freakin cool us humans are.

But hopefully, it survives and has a nice existence and makes babies and life goes on.

Hmmm. This is the place where my approach is more conservative than Gregs?

See rescuing those who don't want to be rescued is what gets us into bad situations in the first place. Liberation is a bad thing. Revolution is a good thing. But we can't seem to just sit back and let that happen -- we have to do what's best for the world, which the rest of the world just sees as doing what's best for US. Again back to lose/lose.

[WDRacing]

Brian, I don't disagree. I wouldn't be upset if we entered a period of isolationism and reflected on where that took us.

All I've been trying to say is our current path is not in the best interest of our country. Changes are needed. I think you're seeing that now.

I'm not JUST seeing it...I've always known change was/is required. But I personally care far less what others think about America. If they leave me alone I'm fine with never bothering them or interfering with any crazy leadership issues that arise. However, mess with the bull and you get the horns.

We could never go back to the Desert again and it would be to soon for me. Just keep the oil coming and keep all the terrorists over there. Cause honestly I don't want anymore war. If we were to be attacked again, any target and any amount of people killed, I'd be all for simply using nuclear weapons. Cheap, no casualties on our side and we don't have to invade anybody. Yeah that's wicked harsh and millions of innocent people will die, but if we're minding our own bussiness what can they expect? Perhaps then other countries would stop harboring them.

WD

[skylndrftr]

Because OUR citizens ***** if we don't. The same people that sit there and say "why do we spend so much money?" go "why are we not doing anything to help?". I hear the same people who ***** about military spending complain after watching Hotel Rwanda "Why did we just let that happen?" Umm....

Apples and Oranges dude...process on this for a while:

a B-2 b0mber costs about $2b/US...how many families in Africa could that feed?Hell...we're ramping up to build 2 nuclear submarines ($1.8-$2b/US) a year. How many children in America could have health insurance if we only built 1?

We spend more on our military than the rest of the world combined...and spend far less than most developed nations on charitable aid.

thats what those 'people bitching' are on about.