I am referring in terms of increasing orders, creating jobs, increasing wages, benefits, etc. These are signs of a growing economy. Investing money in stocks, bonds, options, etc has no effect on this.
Whose policies strengthened America and whose policies weakened her? Economics be damned, Reagan rebuilt our military after Carter let it slide only to have Clinton then drop our drawers again. I too am quite positive which pogrom I prefer as well.
Clinton military spending.
First of all Bones is right, Clinton didnt cut DOD nearly as much as his predecessor.
Clinton didnt start the military cutbacks, that started under G.H.W Bush. These cuts were implimented when Clinton was President. So the worst you can say is Clinton failed to prevent the Bush cuts from taking place. Here is the breakdown
The Bush Administration started with $375 Billion DOD Budget in 1989 inherited from Reagan. When they left in 1994 that was down to $267 Billion. The most ardent person in the budget slashing measures was none other than Dick Cheney. Cheney cut military spending in every year of the Bush presidency except 1991 (Gulf War), a 25% reduction.
http://graphics.boston.com/news/pol...e_cuts_underway_as_Clinton_took_office+.shtml
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Cheney
Clinton also did some trimming, to $255 Billion in 1997.
http://www.global-defence.com/1997/ClintonDefence.html
And here is the part Clinton Bashers never want to mention.
In 1997, Clinton passed a $124 Billion increase (about $23 Billion a year for 5 years) in order to fight Terrorism.
http://www.csbaonline.org/4Publicat...ld_War_Defe/H.20000831.Post-Cold_War_Defe.htm
So to Sum up
Bush from $375 to $267 Billion
Clinton from $267 to $255 BUT added $124 Billion making Clintons last DOD budget when he left office $379 Billion.
So When Clinton LEFT office his budget was equal to that of Reagan, and remember this was a PEACE-TIME DOD Budget.
Sorry, but thats not accurate...
GHWB ordered Cheney to reduce the DOD by 25%. He went from Reagans $375 Billion and ended $267 Billion. Thats a reduction of $108 Billion within 4 years. The reason Clinton gets accused for this is that actual cutbacks took place during the Clinton Administration. The worst one could say was that Clinton didnt reverse the Bush policy. Clinton DID provide cuts of his own but it was a paltry $8 Billion and more importantly nobody ever credits him with the $124 Billion he added back into the Budget.
To answer one of the questions posed by one of our members:
I WOULD GO BACK ON ACTIVE DUTY IN A NEW YORK MINUTE IF THEY WOULD TAKE ME.
The problem though, is that I no longer qualify for military service because of medical problems.
I suffer from high blood pressure, Adult Onset Type II Diabetes, high cholesterol, obesity due to a variety of factors beyond my control, my knees and hips are shot from too many years of at sea operations and football injuries when a young man, and I am pushing age 62 ... my Social Security check begins arriving next January (2007).
BUT ... even with all of that, I miss serving with my old shipmates and WOULD answer the call without hesitation even with my decrepitude.
It hurts that so many of my ex-friends, neighbors and old shipmates have died because of GW's decision to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. The count presently stands at seven ... that means that as I was going about my retirement from active duty, the world changed and 7 people that I knew and respected, were killed. Countless others have been injured from a variety of reasons ... not all of the injuries were combat related.
I will NOT argue the right or wrong of GW's decisions ... suffice it to say that I did NOT ... and ... do NOT agree with them ... but ... would still answer the call if it were issued.
http://www.military-quotes.com/forum/your-military-experience-service-t7084.html
Vietnam, Desert Storm, and GWOT.
I lost several friends in Vietnam, I lost a couple of friends in Desert Storm (non battle condidtions) and I lost one friend and one family member in the attack on the Pentagon.
Life is hard, then you die. We do not pick the place or circumstances regardless of if we are in war or not. To avoid war to save lives brings the conditions that we won't defend ourselves and that is one of the biggest problems we face. More doves and fewer hawks and we end up subjectated by someone that has no fear of death.
I have NEVER advocated that we sit on the sidelines when we have been attacked. My problem is attacking a nation that NEVER attacked us, and so far hasn't been shown that it was as big a danger to us as it was accused of being.
Today (9-12-06), the Senate Intelligence Committee released a report that AGAIN proves that AlQaeda had NO ties to Saddam ... as a matter of fact, it now seems that Saddam and his intelligence people were trying to capture the #2 AlQaeda leader and missed him by just hours. Saddam didn't seem to have any more use for AlQaeda than we did.
Before I stand by and see our nation subjugated by a foreign power, even though I am fat and not in great health, I would take up arms and meet them in the streets of our country wherever they are. If they think that terrorism is only a one way street, they better go back to the drawing board.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.