Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (480698)	10/24/2003 11:41:21 AM
From: Original Mad Dog	Respond to of 769670

Are you trying to say all defense contracts are good things? I didn't say that defense contracts are all good or all bad. I did observe that if we are going to send troops into combat we ought to give them the tools to do what they are sent to do and minimize the risk that, due to inadequate tools, they will suffer greater casualties. Voting to take away or reduce numerous weapons systems which have been an essential part of the military effort in the first Gulf War, Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere is, in my opinion, a sign of weakness on defense. The only Kerry pro-defense vote you have identified so far was in the wake of 9-11 when every single member of the Senate was in favor as well. I am sure there are probably other situations where Kerry voted in favor of defense programs, but it sure looks like he is one of the last ones to favor a stronger military, not one of the first ones. In the current situation, I have concerns about him as a candidate due to that, and I suspect that I am not alone. The military we have now was built and trained during the Clinton years. The military is constantly built and trained, so yes, it was in part built and trained during the Clinton years. What is not constant is the funding of systems and tools to help them get the job done more safely and effectively. On that score you mislead people when you claim that it was due to the building and training of the Clinton years that the weapons systems I cited in my post were available. Actually, as I showed to you system by system, virtually all of those systems were initiated before the Clinton years, and in most cases delivery of the weapons themselves occurred before the Clinton years. In all cases, Kerry at some point in his career has favored either scrapping or reducing every one of those systems. I haven't seen anything in your posts which shows me (or shows anyone reading this) that those facts aren't true. If Kerry did not favor scrapping or reducing those systems, show us the votes he made. Otherwise, I think it is a reasonable conclusion that he is weak on defense.