Afghan war debate: How to pay for it? | WHAT REALLY HAPPENED


Afghan war debate: How to pay for it?

Several powerful House committee chairmen are proposing a surtax on Americans to pay future war costs. The idea is unlikely to pass, but it illustrates the fiscal anxieties Obama will face if he asks Congress to write another big-ticket item into the budget -- especially for an increasingly unpopular war.

Webmaster's Commentary: 

If any of the knuckleheads in Congress are actually listening to their constituents (not just the ones with the money which gets them re-elected year after year), they will understand fully that the response of their constituents will be a united "Hell, no!" to more new taxes.

If they continue to ignore their constituents, there will be no more congressional incumbents re-elected, period, end of discussion.

But I do have an alternative suggestion.

Thinking people understand that the war in Afghanistan was to have two outcomes. The first was to install the pipelines with which to control Eurasian oil. The second was to control the drug trade, from which so many profit so handsomely.

Neither outcome had a damned thing to do with keeping We the People "safe from terrorists", and everything to do with profit.

So I suggest that those oil companies which will benefit from the pipeline installations in Afghanistan should pay for the costs of this war; it's just that simple. It's really their war, and not ours.

Comments

SHARE THIS ARTICLE WITH YOUR SOCIAL MEDIA