Hi
@TonyR
I think I understood the basics well enough ..
My point :
All great nations can multitask and "multifund".
USA has done this numerous times, and should still be able to do with with good "leadership" and "stewards"
Also, remember the USA gets money from numerous There's , and part of playing the most powerful nation in the world, the leader of the free world - it must spent money over there's as well as the domestic here's
You're certainly entitled to your opinion but I heartily disagree.
By stating what you just did you are directly affirming your belief that you are perfectly OK with the U.S. spending money they don't have, printing up more money to cover the shortfall, taking money from budgets allocated for other purposes, all so that it can sent to fund foreign wars....in the name of "democracy."
You are indirectly affirming your belief that you are perfectly OK with the U.S. prioritizing its spending in such a way that it puts the welfare, safety and health of its own citizens AFTER that of countries outside of the U.S.
I believe the U.S. should provide humanitarian relief efforts when it can to other nations which suffer natural disasters but sending them billions of tax-payer dollars and in many cases troops to fight their war while we cannot help our homeless, our elderly and help victims of natural disasters within our own borders in a timely fashion and properly protect THOSE borders. And it would be a lot less expensive to secure our borders than it would be to house and feed the illegal migrants.
Supporting the Ukraine in its war with Russia is about as wrong as it can get. Both are corrupt and cruel nations politically. Funding either would be akin to funding MS-13 in a war with the Sinaloa Cartel. The U.S. is openly aiding and abetting criminals, in my opinion.
You said ".....USA has done this numerous times, and should still be able to do with good "leadership" and "stewards"...."
The fact that the U.S. has done this numerous times makes it okay? I have a stronger description of such a statement but will restrain myself and say that it is just outright "ridiculous."
And the part of that same statement ".....and should still be able to do with good "leadership" and "stewards"...."?
So just when do you think the U.S. can meet that standard? Now with our current "leadership"? Do you think the U.S. is a "good steward" of funds now?
Again, I feel you are entitled to your opinions but I am curious about something. I hold that all of our beliefs and opinions about any and all issues and actions come from what we've witnessed and/or experienced personally in our individual lives, it shapes us and drives us. Being directly involved also qualifies and authenticates those opinions and gives weight to their value. If I need help understanding a procedure that I am not familiar with I value the instructions from a person that has performed that procedure on several occasions successfully and not instructions from someone who has only read about how to do it. So that leads me to several questions which you also have the right not to answer.....
- Have you served honorably in the U.S. military?
- If so, did you serve in a war anywhere in the world?
- Are you employed now or were formerly employed in the U.S. by a federal or municipal government?
- Have you travelled outside the continental U.S. on several occasions to more than just a couple of resort-type vacation spots?