HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Barack Obama signs sweepi...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 02:30 AM

Barack Obama signs sweeping US defense spending bill

Source: Agence France Presse

Barack Obama signs sweeping US defense spending bill
Agence France Presse | Updated: January 03, 2013 12:22 IST

New York: President Barack Obama has signed into law a $633 billion US defense spending bill that funds the war in Afghanistan and boosts security at US missions worldwide.

"I have approved this annual defense authorization legislation, as I have in previous years, because it authorizes essential support for service members and their families, renews vital national security programs, and helps ensure that the United States will continue to have the strongest military in the world," Obama said in a statement early Thursday after signing the measure.

Obama said that he signed the measure despite reservations.

"In a time when all public servants recognize the need to eliminate wasteful or duplicative spending, various sections in the Act limit the Defense Department's ability to direct scarce resources towards the highest priorities for our national security," the president said.

Read more: http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/312717

50 replies, 5549 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 50 replies Author Time Post
Reply Barack Obama signs sweeping US defense spending bill (Original post)
Judi Lynn Jan 2013 OP
newfie11 Jan 2013 #1
Webster Green Jan 2013 #2
AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #3
gtar100 Jan 2013 #4
Flatpicker Jan 2013 #5
bowens43 Jan 2013 #13
Myrina Jan 2013 #21
MessiahRp Jan 2013 #41
dmosh42 Jan 2013 #6
ReRe Jan 2013 #7
rucky Jan 2013 #8
unhappycamper Jan 2013 #10
Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #12
awoke_in_2003 Jan 2013 #25
valerief Jan 2013 #9
maddogesq Jan 2013 #44
valerief Jan 2013 #46
bowens43 Jan 2013 #11
Myrina Jan 2013 #22
tammywammy Jan 2013 #48
OnyxCollie Jan 2013 #34
Owl Jan 2013 #14
madrchsod Jan 2013 #15
dixiegrrrrl Jan 2013 #20
jzodda Jan 2013 #16
lancer78 Jan 2013 #47
AllyCat Jan 2013 #17
plethoro Jan 2013 #18
RC Jan 2013 #19
MKITEM Jan 2013 #30
RC Jan 2013 #31
MKITEM Jan 2013 #32
bunnies Jan 2013 #23
olddad56 Jan 2013 #24
L0oniX Jan 2013 #26
think Jan 2013 #27
MKITEM Jan 2013 #28
Gregorian Jan 2013 #29
Kaleva Jan 2013 #33
humbled_opinion Jan 2013 #35
Comrade Grumpy Jan 2013 #36
humbled_opinion Jan 2013 #39
Nihil Jan 2013 #42
cstanleytech Jan 2013 #43
Solly Mack Jan 2013 #37
triplepoint Jan 2013 #38
ronnie624 Jan 2013 #40
olddad56 Jan 2013 #45
lib2DaBone Jan 2013 #49
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #50

Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 02:38 AM

1. Gotta feed the war machine nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 02:48 AM

2. Imperialist adventures.

Not defense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 03:23 AM

3. Too bad the "highest priorities" don't include rebuilding our cities, our schools, & our industrial

 

base (or our former industrial base).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 03:29 AM

4. Well we should all feel safer now that the military is well funded to defend our freedom.

Besides, there really wasn't anything else to spend that money on that would enhance our lives the way the military does. Who really needs health, education, and a vibrant economy when we can have the greatest military in the world. I'd feel even more fortunate but they took half of that away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 04:18 AM

5. well

While I don't agree with military expansion, I'd be at a loss to see how we could defund those items during a down economy.

A lot of people would be out of work from a production side and we don't have the other jobs readily available for them to transition into.
An aircraft aluminum welder or a sonar systems programming specialist would not be able to just pick up a new infrastructure support role without massive retraining. Just as an example.

So, how do we get from here to there without gutting our economy?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flatpicker (Reply #5)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 07:21 AM

13. not a valid excuse

sorry but 'we might lose jobs' is not a valid reason for continuing this ridiculous amount of spending on killing machines.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flatpicker (Reply #5)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 09:45 AM

21. Don't 'gut' the economy, point the economy in a different direction.

Instead of contracting to build more planes and bombs, contract R&D for innovation/rebuilding of infrastructure, LEED buildings/materials, farm equipment/technology ... tons of things they can do if they take their scientific/technical knowledge and just reapply it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Myrina (Reply #21)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:26 AM

41. +1000

And that could likely be done at a fraction of the cost of continual war and military hardware development.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 05:21 AM

6. Now we can be sure he meant to 'screw' the social programs!(SS, Medicare)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 05:39 AM

7. Well, there go the revenues we just gained...

.... by signing the cliff document and raising taxes on the rich night before last. That big old elephant in the room eats more and more it seems like. It's all great and dandy to have "the strongest military in the world" and provide jobs for all the MIC related industries, but we can't afford it anymore. What about the rest of us? What about the homeless soldiers when they come home? I just don't think the ends justifies the means anymore. At what cost do we have "the strongest military in the world?" Heck, we are our own worst enemies right here stateside with all these damn assault weapons. Go figure. Thanks Judi Lynn for bringing this news from Agence France Presse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 05:47 AM

8. As long as Northrup can keep sponsoring bowl games

that's all that matters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rucky (Reply #8)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 06:44 AM

10. Which one did they sponsor?

TIA

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to unhappycamper (Reply #10)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 07:20 AM

12. The Military Bowl of course....

The Military Bowl presented by Northrop Grumman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #12)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 12:08 PM

25. That is why I can't stomach...

college football. Too many bowl games and almost everyone gets to go to one.

Ok, I exaggerate, but not by much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 06:42 AM

9. WAR PIGS. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to valerief (Reply #9)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 11:11 AM

44. Just for you!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maddogesq (Reply #44)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:05 PM

46. Ha! Can't listen to it in the office here now, but thanks. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 07:19 AM

11. 'signed the measure despite reservations'

this the story of Obama's presidency......


Well , I don't necessarily agree with it but I'll sign it anyway....

right...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bowens43 (Reply #11)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 09:46 AM

22. I think his reservations were that it wasn't a big enough check ...

... didn't he authorize even more than Congress requested?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Myrina (Reply #22)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 04:31 PM

48. His reservations were mostly with Gitmo and MEADS.

Congress's bill was for more than Obama requested, including spending on items the Pentagon didn't want. You can find Panetta's letter to Congress with their objections.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bowens43 (Reply #11)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 01:53 PM

34. He's just following orders. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 07:25 AM

14. Ugh. So much wasteful spending. The MIC welfare syndrome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 07:43 AM

15. "...the next stop is afganistan...."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madrchsod (Reply #15)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 09:38 AM

20. Damn...that video makes me all weepy.

Actually, I have been in deep mourning for a few years now, I realize.
I miss the energy and optimism had had during the anti-war period, during that massive wave of change.

Yet..the irony of our last gasps of imperialism does not escape me, as we gobble resources in a bid to take over the globe so we can grab more resources which we will gobble up in an effort to hang onto the resources we just grabbed.
rinse
Repeat
and ignore the dying planet.
sigh.










Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 07:53 AM

16. misguided

How about spending money on job training for those troops to prepare them for the real world and gut the defense budget-You Republicans want spending cuts? Well here is where they should be coming from. Not from Medicare or Social Security.

$633 billion is an amazing number. So while Europe and our allies continue to cut defense so they can move spending to other areas, we are the only idiots who continue to defense(spend) our way to oblivion.

We could probably live with a defense budget 1/5 of that number yearly. That, plus the tax increases for the wealthy, could go a long long way towards moving us out of deficits.

And our President doesn't have the necessary courage to tackle this issue. Depressing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jzodda (Reply #16)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:34 PM

47. We are.....

the defense "wet nurse" for europe. Why do you think they feel they can reduce their defense spending? Wet nurse Amerika will provide them with all the defense they will ever need.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 08:44 AM

17. More money for killing, less for living every day.

Jeez...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 09:05 AM

18. And the bill comes due in March...Gee, really?.......nft

 

ddddd

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 09:26 AM

19. Oh, really?

 


"I have approved this annual defense authorization legislation, as I have in previous years, because it authorizes essential support for service members and their families, renews vital national security programs, and helps ensure that the United States will continue to have the strongest military in the world," Obama said in a statement early Thursday after signing the measure.


Having the biggest Defense Budget in the world does not equate to having the strongest military in the world. How many times have we lost against 3rd world countries, in our imperial aggression? Why are we still in Afghanistan?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RC (Reply #19)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 12:34 PM

30. Not even countries

 

Factions within countries are driving us to stalemates in Afghanistan and Iraq. When a few combatants with AK-47 and IEDs are forcing us to spend millions on defense, we have lost. But face it, those "terrorists" are really just a raison-du-jour to siphon money into the pockets of the war pigs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MKITEM (Reply #30)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 01:08 PM

31. It is not out of the realm of possibilities they are being supported by us in the first place.

 

Gotta keep those almighty profits commin'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RC (Reply #31)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 01:37 PM

32. I think you are correct

 

History has shown many instances where that is the case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 11:05 AM

23. This makes me sick.

I have no words. Just

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 11:33 AM

24. I guess we know how serious Obama and congress are about cutting spending.

Got to subsidize those corporations of mass destruction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 12:10 PM

26. ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #26)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 12:15 PM

27. Amen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 12:17 PM

28. That's the problem with this country

 

The "We have to be the bestest" mentality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 12:29 PM

29. Don't rock the boat.

Just think of what we could do with that money. Something that isn't counterproductive. Like battery research.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 01:41 PM

33. kicked

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 01:56 PM

35. WOW !!

How absolutely Progressive of the President, tell me again what move on that 3 dimensional chess board is this one? This just proves what I have been saying for awhile now it is not the rhetoric it is the action.... On the Cliff he got half of what he wanted so that means that the Republicans got half of what they wanted there is no lunch eating, beat down that some here would like to create the illusion of.... this is just a sample of more of the same... I would ask my moderate to slightly right friends on this forum why the President hasn't even voiced support for any truly progressive revenue streams i.e....

- VAT
- Wealth/luxury TAX
- Wall street transaction tax
- Bank transaction tax
- Firearms ownership yearly tax
- Raising the cap on SS
- means testing for SS and Medicare
- Support for lowering the age of access to SS and Medicare


Nope he would rather bring up ideas like chained CPI. and sign laws that are at the very least moderate right leaning i.e., the ACA and it's boon to insurance industries... Now how progressive is that?

Of course he may have chosen not to even worry about the debt or deficit but that could hurt his legacy, I mean you don't want to go through 8 years with more than a trillion dollar deficit for each of those years and at the end some how claim that your policies worked for the economy.... or that those last 8 years and the future deficits are some how not your fault....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 01:58 PM

36. Another glorious victory for the Single Unified Capitalist War Party.

It's stuff like this that make people talk about no differences between the two big parties.

That and stuff like the Democratically-controlled Senate adding all that corporate pork to the tax bill.

I could go on.

Same old same old.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade Grumpy (Reply #36)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 05:28 PM

39. and you should go on and on...

because if you don't speak out than the beltway left wins the argument and we will be told like 4 year olds to "shut up and color"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade Grumpy (Reply #36)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 10:52 AM

42. It's hard to avoid it at times ...

> Another glorious victory for the Single Unified Capitalist War Party.
> It's stuff like this that make people talk about no differences between the two big parties.
> That and stuff like the Democratically-controlled Senate adding all that corporate pork to the tax bill.

More hope & change ... is definitely needed ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nihil (Reply #42)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 11:00 AM

43. Just to point out but Obama never ever promised that any change he made or proposed would include

major cuts to defense spending nor do I recall offhand anyone in office doing so.
And no I do not agree with the amount our country spends on defense at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 02:03 PM

37. ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 02:33 PM

38. No Soup For Us!

 


.
.
.

.
.
You may prefer this version instead:
.
.

.
.
.
Too Bad Nobody Took His Advice Seriously in This Instance:
.
.

.
.
.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 12:45 AM

40. The Defense Department has "scarce resources"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 11:28 AM

45. hey, there are human live in the balance

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 11:35 PM

49. Obama authorized U.S. Troops to 35 more African Countries....

 

$633 Billion.. no questions asked....?

Obama is going to have to cut a lot of school lunches for kids and slash heating allowances for Seniors to pay for this.

But never fear.. Obama will stick it to those who are able to protest the least....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 01:35 AM

50. WITH the provision allowing indefinite detention for US citizens without trial or representation.

 

AGAIN. He signed the first two new year's eves ago. Where is my democracy!

Don't know what I'm discussing? Search: NDAA Section 1021 or simply Indefinite Detention NDAA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread