And countries, around the world, continue to feed the MIC

[MadHound]

"The U.S. Navy is scheduled to induct the Gerald R. Ford, the lead ship of a new class three-ship class of supercarriers, in 2015. Each is expected to cost about $9 billion."
<http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/eu_aircraft_carrier_boom>

Nine billion dollars for a ship that is unneeded and impractical. This is where the wealth of not just the US, but all nations is being spent, on military weapons that serve no real purpose, and that are, in the end, disposable.

Nine billion dollars, what would that do for our fellow citizens here? Low income heating assistance, Head Start, school lunches, all that and more. Yet instead, it is being put into a weapons platform, to float around the world, killing innocents abroad.

This is the madness that has gripped our country, and the world. We need to put an end to it, now, before it is too late.

[napi21]

1. I hate military spending as much as all of you, but it's wrong to say

a new carrier is unneeded. Some of our carriers are etremely old and due to be retired. You don't realize how advantageous a floatng airstrip can be.I would have thought it nuts if someone had mentioned a carrier to fight in Iraq, but my son was aboard the Nimitz during the Desert Storm, and the fighter planes from that carrier played a very big and imporant role in ending that conflict in a very short time.

[MadHound]

2. Then why are there military experts flat out stating that aircraft carriers aren't needed?

And gee, if we hadn't decided to exchange blood for oil, your son wouldn't have had to be on board the Nimitz:shrug:

The fact of the matter is this cycle of wars, destruction of weapons, building weapons, wars. . . only goes to feed the MIC. We aren't investing in our future, but rather in our destruction.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

6. By comparision there are education experts saying NCLB is a good thing

The carriers are power projection. If they were not effective, why are more nations building them?

[CoffeeCat]

3. What bothers me the most about this...

...is that these billion-dollar military decisions are made without discussion, without debate and without
input or consent from the American people. It just HAPPENS.

However, when it comes to providing assistance for poverty-level senior citizens to help them heat their homes
in the winter--well then there's a big, knock-down-drag-out fight from hell that goes on for weeks!

Teachers must justify their salaries (which should be quadrupled in my opinion) but the military NEVER has
to justify the billions they spend--on just one project.

Look at the debate on extending unemployment benefits! That was weeks of hand wringing and, "Oh my Lord, we
can't afford this spending" malarkey. Not a whimper when some billion-dollar plane or ship needs building.

Whenever we want to truly help people in this country--corporatist Republicans and Dems play the
debt card, "We can't afford it! We're destroying our children's future". But not a peep with
this exorbitant military spending. Apparently, the national debt is a crisis when we need $30 million
to help fund preschool for low-income children, but when the Pentagon needs $9 billion--the debt
is no longer an issue.

I hate the free pass that all of this military/Pentagon/DOD spending gets.

[MadHound]

4. Yep, Heaven forbid we ever truly make cuts in the military

Even the slightest cuts are usually nixed, and the growth of our military budget is a bipartisan effort.

But the government is more than willing to continue to cut social programs to the bone and beyond.

But then again, the military is simply another method for transferring wealth up the socioeconomic ladder.

[leftstreet]

5. K&R