If it means sourcing critical parts in the US so the money is recycled, I have less of an issue with it. But Id prefer to see things stay static or reduced from waste/fraud. Somalis arent the only fraud game to go after.
What critical parts to United States defense equipment is sourced from outside the United States?
Lots. Chips from taiwan, tungsten from russia/china, rare earth minerals. I also shouldnt have said "parts" as that implies a limit to equipment, when fertilizers from Ukraine would also be critical, as well as medicine produced in china/india
But we source those things internally partially because there is no other alternative. The rare earth minerals can't be easily accessed through domestic means. The microchips can't be produced in the same ways at the same rates as foreign chips.
At the same time, we would need the domestic infrastructure to process or manufacture these materials and components. We just don't have that at the level where it would be realistic to shift to domestic production.
From my perspective, this administration has put the cart before the horse completely. The use of tariffs and the increase in prices across all industries, including defense contracting, has caused a lot of economic pain for everyone except the federal government receiving our import tax money. At the same time, I'm not seeing a concerted push to increase manufacturing capabilities or increase natural resource processing efforts. At any rate, these projects would take a lot of time and effort and certainly wouldn't be anywhere close to done by 2027.
How could a push for US-based manufacturing and processing possibly be a factor in 2027's budget when we literally cannot make or acquire most of our key resources domestically?
But we source those things internally partially because there is no other alternative. The rare earth minerals can't be easily accessed through domestic means. The microchips can't be produced in the same ways at the same rates as foreign chips.
Thats why I said "if" the increase supports moving supply chains here.
From my perspective, this administration has put the cart before the horse completely. The use of tariffs and the increase in prices across all industries, including defense contracting, has caused a lot of economic pain for everyone except the federal government receiving our import tax money. At the same time, I'm not seeing a concerted push to increase manufacturing capabilities or increase natural resource processing efforts. At any rate, these projects would take a lot of time and effort and certainly wouldn't be anywhere close to done by 2027.
We have deals for multiple TSMC chip fabs to open, and Trump has been making deals to lower our needs from china.
No one believes this stuff will happen overnight, I applaud longer term thinking from either side.
How could a push for US-based manufacturing and processing possibly be a factor in 2027's budget when we literally cannot make or acquire most of our key resources domestically?
Simple you can cut contracts now that include terms to build manufacturing here.
I think my point is that even if we started signing contracts last January when Trump entered office, those plants won't be ready to actually begin manufacturing anything for years. Companies have to build plants, develop infrastructure, work out the business side of things, etc. It takes three to four years to build most of these plants for more complex parts, once the building begins.
Trump and MAGA are speaking like we've already got everything set up, ready to go, and it's all thanks to Trump. None of that is true. And even if it was, where would these US companies be getting their raw materials? They come from all over the world -- therefore still being greatly impacted by his tariffs and economic policies. Unless Donald Trump undoes his tariffs then all companies will still feel the effects and pain of them and will continue to be forced to increase prices to offset those extra costs.
Trump's policies are causing the higher prices but instead of saying "these tariffs are hurting Americans, we'll stop them" he just increased the budget of the military, which will increase our debt, which will cause more economic struggle.
The way I see it, these parts and resources will take longer, cost more, and be less readily available. In what way does making production and manufacturing more expensive and more difficult with tariffs help our military and ultimately the country as a whole?
Trump and MAGA are speaking like we've already got everything set up, ready to go, and it's all thanks to Trump.
Many of the deals are thanks to him. No one expects it to be overnight.
where would these US companies be getting their raw materials? They come from all over the world -- therefore still being greatly impacted by his tariffs and economic policies.
They already had higher tariffs on us than we had on them, Trump just asked for reciprocal tariffs, so we havnt seen much of a price increase in most goods. Server/GPU RAM being a separate issue since OpenAI cornered the market by being sneaky.
It doesnt matter if raw goods are from overseas, as long as we have multiple suppliers, which is part of whats happening. For example we re-negotiated with Ukraine so our loans are now backed by something.
he just increased the budget of the military, which will increase our debt, which will cause more economic struggle.
Yes, but not at the same rate of when money is given to consumers ala covid and post covid.
In what way does making production and manufacturing more expensive and more difficult with tariffs help our military and ultimately the country as a whole?
Tariffs lower the cost difference between following the environmental regulations and labor laws here vs offshoring to another country who doesnt follow the same regulations. That makes it easier to produce locally, and circulating money internally improves our economy and everyones pockets.
Is this the same for other spending programs? Healthcare is a huge for profit industry in the US and people get healthcare almost exclusively locally. Would you be fine with increased allocations for healthcare spending?
No, as i said above, it only makes it marginally better than sending the money overseas. Id like to gut most programs as we can see that the waste and fraud is at absurd levels.
They all are only better than spending the money overseas, including the military. Note I said I would have less of an issue if the increase was used to move production here, not that I have no issue with bloated military spending.
I prefer to see the money from tariffs be spent exclusively on paying down our debt
Are you at odds, than, with Trump's repeated claims that he is promising some or all of the tariff money to a multitude of different groups or funds, besides paying down the debt? Wasn't he going to be issuing "Tariff Checks" to citizens, or "Patriot Checks" to veterans, or Farmer bailouts?
I am not a cultist. I'm barely a Republican. There are several things that Trump has done that I don't agree with. But I will continue to support him while the Democrats continue to act the way they do. Democrats made me a Republican, not Trump.
while the Democrats continue to act the way they do
What, in particular, have the Democrats done that was egregious or pervasive enough that it pushed you into continuing to side with Trump, despite some of his actions that we'd typically see, as you call them, "the cultists" really go to bat for? What are the issues that make Trump the better side than any other alternative?
Democrats lost me because of: Medicare for All, unreasonable minimum wage, student debt cancelation, overzealous criminal justice reform, climate change fear mongering, moving away from abortion being save-legal-rare, and decriminalization of hard drugs. These policy choices, while implemented in various ways and degrees are the most impactful reasons for pushing me to be a Republican.
You know, I agree with many of your points and am disenfranchised and would consider voting for a sane, coherent republican but I don’t think DJT is either. You seem like a reasonable person, what do you think of his mental state and constant lying. I don’t even disagree either many of his ideas or polices at a high level but the execution is a joke and the administration seems to be making things up as they go along. Do you agree? What happened to DOGE?
The military budget is big enough, I like the tariffs and think the money from them should be spent on other things.
There’s a lot of things that could be funded with 500 billion dollars: debt reduction, increased funding for ICE, education, r&d, even the tariff dividend Trump was talking about.
Could you point me to a statistic or visual on exactly how much money has come in from tariffs, and specifically where it’s being spent and/or applied in the United States?
Id prefer the money go straight to debt reduction. The whole point of making more income to get out of debt is not to also spend more. It's counterintuitive. I also understand that we are probably behind the power curve of where we need to be with our military and usually defense investment trickles into the economy, so there's worse things to spend are money in, which we have been
we are probably behind the power curve of where we need to be with our military
What makes you say this? Isn't the US typically touted as the strongest and widest reaching military capability on the planet?
Would it not be better to get a bit ahead of the "power curve" in areas like infrastructure, technology, energy, and education, which the US is falling behind on, when compared to other major world powers?
Wouldn't shoring up THOSE areas lend itself to a stronger America that doesn't need to rely on the "big stick" of militaristic force? It is putting a lot of eggs in one basket, for what we can hold up as our Ace up our sleeve, isn't it?
You do recognize that Tariff revenue isn’t going to result in a budget surplus? In fact, when coupled with the BBB tax cuts we are still going to be at a deficit. This additional 0.5 Trillion bill is just more debt. There’s no “either or” of defence spending or debt reduction.
Do you believe Trump’s claim that we have collected 18 trillion dollars in tariff revenue?
I'm probably in the top ten percent of US people who support a big defense budget, because I think the peace our military has brought over the decades is largely responsible for the exceptional growth and (on average) prosperity we've seen.
Assuming we could afford it, why do you think it's a nice idea to further enlarge our military? I presume China (reasonably) has a lot to do with it? Thanks in advance!
I don't know what is the right size for the military budget. I'm just not knowledgeable enough about military technology and preparedness. But it should be big. 5% of GDP, which is what Trump is pushing for with our allies, would be around 1.5 trillion.
Just to be clear, the total tax revenue collected in 2024 was less than $5 trillion and the budget's spending was almost $7 trillion. You're suggesting the military budget by itself should be increased to somewhere between more than 50% to nearly 100% of the government's entire revenue?
Did you know the “war” between DRC and Rwanda hasn’t stopped? Although a peace agreement was signed there hasn’t been any peace on the ground at all. Does this make you skeptical that perhaps the Trump administration’s claim about ending all these wars might not be true?
Do you still believe the claim that Trump has ended the war in DRC and Rwanda after being presented with the overwhelming evidence and citations you requested?
I am glad you were able to provide a link by somebody who cannot back their claims. I am also glad you decided to end your argument by bringing up a random twitter account.
It makes President Trump stronger.
Enjoy the world with 8 wars ended (and counting), and lower gas prices.
You didn't answer my question, how is bombing 7 countries, bombing fishing vessels, invading a country to steal their oil by killing civilians, threatening Cuba, Columbia, Mexico and Greenland, siding with Russia, changing the Department of Defense to the Department of War while undermining NATO peaceful? He's also deployed the military to American cities causing unrest in our own country. How is any of this peaceful?
You're still ignoring my question about Trump's aggressive actions and continued threats. He's literally causing more violence and unrest in the world and in our country, how is any of that peaceful?
How do you reconcile the fact most of the conflicts listed in that tweet are still ongoing in various capacities? Cambodia and Thailand, Rwanda and DRC, Israel and Iran, Israel and Hamas are all still ongoing. This is propaganda at best and a bold faced lie at worst.
I believe we should police people who try to run over identified law enforcement in Minnesota , securing our borders so we do not allow illegal aliens to invade, and to protect Americans.
Video clearly shows the ICE agent putting themselves in unnecessary harm's way, initially getting in front of the vehicle, as she was reversing, and attempting to leave. It also shows the agent firing the shot while alongside the vehicle, not in imminent danger of being ran over. Why do you think this is being so heavily skewed, when there is the evidence presently available?
Shouldn't basic Federal law enforcement training have taught the agent to not create what is typically referred to as an Officer-Created Jeopardy situation? Shouldn't proper training have taught them that is is use of deadly force isn't permissible on subjects fleeing, that aren't posing active & imminent risk to others?
Do you believe "Ignoring a lawful command" is an action punishable by execution? And, not to sound glib, but what video did YOU watch, that made it look like the agent was in danger of purposeful and/or malicious harm by the victim? From the video of the agents on the side of the vehicle, to the angle of the bullet hole, it all would indicate that there were clear from being "run down". Why do you think DHS is so insistent on digging their heels in, on pushing this lie?
Do you believe "Ignoring a lawful command" is an action punishable by execution?
Ignoring lawful instructions from law enforcement, along with attempting to run over a law enforcement officer, like that woman did which we have video of, deserves the officer to defend themself.
we should police people who try to run over identified law enforcement in Minnesota
What does this have to do with increasing the military budget? The women murdered by the ICE agent, in Minneapolis was a US-Born citizen, and had nothing directly to do with undocumented migrants; Should our military budget skyrocket, really in response to domestic issues?
The military’s intention is outside of the country
Factually it can be used within the country, for things like disaster relief and other emergencies. We just saw a recent case of the military being used to again, protect Americans.
It may be possible you do not understand exactly what the military can do which leads to potential confusion for you.
Are you comfortable with the necessary increase in revenue intake that would be required for even just the proposed increase, not even touching upon your ideal of doubling or quadrupling? 500 Million in increased spending will HAVE to necessitate some form of consequential increase in taxes or some form of government revenue; So isn't it a bit contrary to the typical GOP platform of "Lower Taxes", to ask for a sudden 50% budget increase, all while you claim we are at the safest we have ever been?
How do you know that? I never said the US would go to war with Greenland. I said NATO. When youre asked a hypothetical question its not really an option to say "that hypothetical will never happen". Thats the whole point of a hypothetical question. You assume the scenario does occur and give your opinion about the scenario. None of us have any way of knowing what will happen in the future. Before the world wars happened no one thought something like that could happen. They would probably say something like that was for people who dont understand how life works or global politics.
Trump is just pumping defense stocks to offset his statement about defense buybacks and dividends. Do you think he actually intends to increase defense spending 50%??
Do you think he actually intends to increase defense spending 50%??
He cannot control spending, as congress controls spending. Further proof he is not a dictator because he literally cannot control the amount of spending on defense.
It is too much money.... I think the money is better spent on things like patriotic public work projects, put American citizens who are having troubles finding employment, back to work at a job, if they want one. The military got tons of money already. We have a very strong military.
AskTrumpSupporters is a Q&A subreddit dedicated to better understanding the views of Trump Supporters, and why they hold those views.
For all participants:
Flair is required to participate
Be excellent to each other
For Nonsupporters/Undecided:
No top level comments
All comments must seek to clarify the Trump supporter's position
For Trump Supporters:
Helpful links for more info:
Rules | Rule Exceptions | Posting Guidelines | Commenting Guidelines
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
If it means sourcing critical parts in the US so the money is recycled, I have less of an issue with it. But Id prefer to see things stay static or reduced from waste/fraud. Somalis arent the only fraud game to go after.
What critical parts to United States defense equipment is sourced from outside the United States?
Lots. Chips from taiwan, tungsten from russia/china, rare earth minerals. I also shouldnt have said "parts" as that implies a limit to equipment, when fertilizers from Ukraine would also be critical, as well as medicine produced in china/india
But we source those things internally partially because there is no other alternative. The rare earth minerals can't be easily accessed through domestic means. The microchips can't be produced in the same ways at the same rates as foreign chips.
At the same time, we would need the domestic infrastructure to process or manufacture these materials and components. We just don't have that at the level where it would be realistic to shift to domestic production.
From my perspective, this administration has put the cart before the horse completely. The use of tariffs and the increase in prices across all industries, including defense contracting, has caused a lot of economic pain for everyone except the federal government receiving our import tax money. At the same time, I'm not seeing a concerted push to increase manufacturing capabilities or increase natural resource processing efforts. At any rate, these projects would take a lot of time and effort and certainly wouldn't be anywhere close to done by 2027.
How could a push for US-based manufacturing and processing possibly be a factor in 2027's budget when we literally cannot make or acquire most of our key resources domestically?
Thats why I said "if" the increase supports moving supply chains here.
We have deals for multiple TSMC chip fabs to open, and Trump has been making deals to lower our needs from china.
No one believes this stuff will happen overnight, I applaud longer term thinking from either side.
Simple you can cut contracts now that include terms to build manufacturing here.
I think my point is that even if we started signing contracts last January when Trump entered office, those plants won't be ready to actually begin manufacturing anything for years. Companies have to build plants, develop infrastructure, work out the business side of things, etc. It takes three to four years to build most of these plants for more complex parts, once the building begins.
Trump and MAGA are speaking like we've already got everything set up, ready to go, and it's all thanks to Trump. None of that is true. And even if it was, where would these US companies be getting their raw materials? They come from all over the world -- therefore still being greatly impacted by his tariffs and economic policies. Unless Donald Trump undoes his tariffs then all companies will still feel the effects and pain of them and will continue to be forced to increase prices to offset those extra costs.
Trump's policies are causing the higher prices but instead of saying "these tariffs are hurting Americans, we'll stop them" he just increased the budget of the military, which will increase our debt, which will cause more economic struggle.
The way I see it, these parts and resources will take longer, cost more, and be less readily available. In what way does making production and manufacturing more expensive and more difficult with tariffs help our military and ultimately the country as a whole?
Many of the deals are thanks to him. No one expects it to be overnight.
They already had higher tariffs on us than we had on them, Trump just asked for reciprocal tariffs, so we havnt seen much of a price increase in most goods. Server/GPU RAM being a separate issue since OpenAI cornered the market by being sneaky.
It doesnt matter if raw goods are from overseas, as long as we have multiple suppliers, which is part of whats happening. For example we re-negotiated with Ukraine so our loans are now backed by something.
Yes, but not at the same rate of when money is given to consumers ala covid and post covid.
Tariffs lower the cost difference between following the environmental regulations and labor laws here vs offshoring to another country who doesnt follow the same regulations. That makes it easier to produce locally, and circulating money internally improves our economy and everyones pockets.
Is this the same for other spending programs? Healthcare is a huge for profit industry in the US and people get healthcare almost exclusively locally. Would you be fine with increased allocations for healthcare spending?
Obama already “allocated” that onto American Taxpayers via Obamacare…
No, as i said above, it only makes it marginally better than sending the money overseas. Id like to gut most programs as we can see that the waste and fraud is at absurd levels.
Does this “recycling” of money justify other forms of spending increases?
For instance, let’s say we decide to recycle money by spending it on building solar farms made from US manufactured solar panels.
Or we recycle it by spending it on SNAP so people eat healthier?
Are examples like those any more or less justified the recycling spending into the military industrial complex?
They all are only better than spending the money overseas, including the military. Note I said I would have less of an issue if the increase was used to move production here, not that I have no issue with bloated military spending.
I prefer to see the money from tariffs be spent exclusively on paying down our debt. But if the money comes from our NATO budget I'm cool with it.
What is the US’s NATO budget? How much does the US pay to the NATO organization?
How much annual revenue do tariffs generate? How large is the US debt? What percentage of the debt would using tariff revenue knock off the US debt?
Are you at odds, than, with Trump's repeated claims that he is promising some or all of the tariff money to a multitude of different groups or funds, besides paying down the debt? Wasn't he going to be issuing "Tariff Checks" to citizens, or "Patriot Checks" to veterans, or Farmer bailouts?
I am not a cultist. I'm barely a Republican. There are several things that Trump has done that I don't agree with. But I will continue to support him while the Democrats continue to act the way they do. Democrats made me a Republican, not Trump.
What, in particular, have the Democrats done that was egregious or pervasive enough that it pushed you into continuing to side with Trump, despite some of his actions that we'd typically see, as you call them, "the cultists" really go to bat for? What are the issues that make Trump the better side than any other alternative?
Democrats lost me because of: Medicare for All, unreasonable minimum wage, student debt cancelation, overzealous criminal justice reform, climate change fear mongering, moving away from abortion being save-legal-rare, and decriminalization of hard drugs. These policy choices, while implemented in various ways and degrees are the most impactful reasons for pushing me to be a Republican.
How close a call is it? What would it take for you to vote against the republicans?
I would have picked first term Obama over Trump, but against Second Term Obama I would choose Trump.
You know, I agree with many of your points and am disenfranchised and would consider voting for a sane, coherent republican but I don’t think DJT is either. You seem like a reasonable person, what do you think of his mental state and constant lying. I don’t even disagree either many of his ideas or polices at a high level but the execution is a joke and the administration seems to be making things up as they go along. Do you agree? What happened to DOGE?
Where should the other $499.25bn come from?
The military budget is big enough, I like the tariffs and think the money from them should be spent on other things.
There’s a lot of things that could be funded with 500 billion dollars: debt reduction, increased funding for ICE, education, r&d, even the tariff dividend Trump was talking about.
Could you point me to a statistic or visual on exactly how much money has come in from tariffs, and specifically where it’s being spent and/or applied in the United States?
Isn't the money from tariffs already US money?
Id prefer the money go straight to debt reduction. The whole point of making more income to get out of debt is not to also spend more. It's counterintuitive. I also understand that we are probably behind the power curve of where we need to be with our military and usually defense investment trickles into the economy, so there's worse things to spend are money in, which we have been
What makes you say this? Isn't the US typically touted as the strongest and widest reaching military capability on the planet?
Would it not be better to get a bit ahead of the "power curve" in areas like infrastructure, technology, energy, and education, which the US is falling behind on, when compared to other major world powers?
Wouldn't shoring up THOSE areas lend itself to a stronger America that doesn't need to rely on the "big stick" of militaristic force? It is putting a lot of eggs in one basket, for what we can hold up as our Ace up our sleeve, isn't it?
You do recognize that Tariff revenue isn’t going to result in a budget surplus? In fact, when coupled with the BBB tax cuts we are still going to be at a deficit. This additional 0.5 Trillion bill is just more debt. There’s no “either or” of defence spending or debt reduction.
Do you believe Trump’s claim that we have collected 18 trillion dollars in tariff revenue?
My question is what the extra $500B is buying us.
Nice idea, but the country is broke. We can't afford it.
Absolutely.
I'm probably in the top ten percent of US people who support a big defense budget, because I think the peace our military has brought over the decades is largely responsible for the exceptional growth and (on average) prosperity we've seen.
Assuming we could afford it, why do you think it's a nice idea to further enlarge our military? I presume China (reasonably) has a lot to do with it? Thanks in advance!
I don't know what is the right size for the military budget. I'm just not knowledgeable enough about military technology and preparedness. But it should be big. 5% of GDP, which is what Trump is pushing for with our allies, would be around 1.5 trillion.
Amazing.
It should be 2-4 trillion.
Our world is safer because of our president.
Just to be clear, the total tax revenue collected in 2024 was less than $5 trillion and the budget's spending was almost $7 trillion. You're suggesting the military budget by itself should be increased to somewhere between more than 50% to nearly 100% of the government's entire revenue?
Did you support Donald Trump’s calls to dramatically scale back American military involvement back in 2016?
Of course! Trump has ended 8 wars. The world is now safer because of President Trump.
Can you list the 8 wars and how President Trump was responsible for ending them?
https://x.com/StateDept/status/1978183959553970220?lang=en
Did you know the “war” between DRC and Rwanda hasn’t stopped? Although a peace agreement was signed there hasn’t been any peace on the ground at all. Does this make you skeptical that perhaps the Trump administration’s claim about ending all these wars might not be true?
Citation needed.
Do you have access to Google, grok, or any other online search engine? Are these citations enough?
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/04/us/politics/trump-congo-rwanda-leaders-peace-talks.html
https://www.npr.org/2025/12/10/nx-s1-5638922/fighting-between-rwanda-and-congo-continues-despite-trump-brokered-peace-deal
https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2025/12/11/donald-trump-has-not-ended-conflict-between-congo-and-rwanda
https://www.axios.com/2025/12/04/trump-rwanda-drc-peace-deal
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/12/5/fighting-flares-in-dr-congo-within-hours-of-trumps-peace-deal-ceremony
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gk34k9k23o
I do.
Do you still believe the claim that Trump has ended the war in DRC and Rwanda after being presented with the overwhelming evidence and citations you requested?
Can you name the 8 wars?
I can
https://x.com/StateDept/status/1978183959553970220?lang=en
[removed]
I am glad you were able to provide a link by somebody who cannot back their claims. I am also glad you decided to end your argument by bringing up a random twitter account.
It makes President Trump stronger.
Enjoy the world with 8 wars ended (and counting), and lower gas prices.
You didn't answer my question, how is bombing 7 countries, bombing fishing vessels, invading a country to steal their oil by killing civilians, threatening Cuba, Columbia, Mexico and Greenland, siding with Russia, changing the Department of Defense to the Department of War while undermining NATO peaceful? He's also deployed the military to American cities causing unrest in our own country. How is any of this peaceful?
I answered your question directly.
Enjoy your lower gas prices, lower crime in the USA, and less war in the world due to President Trump.
You're still ignoring my question about Trump's aggressive actions and continued threats. He's literally causing more violence and unrest in the world and in our country, how is any of that peaceful?
How do you reconcile the fact most of the conflicts listed in that tweet are still ongoing in various capacities? Cambodia and Thailand, Rwanda and DRC, Israel and Iran, Israel and Hamas are all still ongoing. This is propaganda at best and a bold faced lie at worst.
Do you think we should be the worlds police?
I believe we should police people who try to run over identified law enforcement in Minnesota , securing our borders so we do not allow illegal aliens to invade, and to protect Americans.
He has done that in every aspect.
Have you watched the video from Minneapolis?
I watched the video of a woman who disobeyed orders from federal law enforcement, attempted to run over an officer, and FAFO’d.
Video clearly shows the ICE agent putting themselves in unnecessary harm's way, initially getting in front of the vehicle, as she was reversing, and attempting to leave. It also shows the agent firing the shot while alongside the vehicle, not in imminent danger of being ran over. Why do you think this is being so heavily skewed, when there is the evidence presently available?
Shouldn't basic Federal law enforcement training have taught the agent to not create what is typically referred to as an Officer-Created Jeopardy situation? Shouldn't proper training have taught them that is is use of deadly force isn't permissible on subjects fleeing, that aren't posing active & imminent risk to others?
She ignored lawful commands by law enforcement. She also attempted to run over a law enforcement officer.
And she FAFO’d.
Do you believe "Ignoring a lawful command" is an action punishable by execution? And, not to sound glib, but what video did YOU watch, that made it look like the agent was in danger of purposeful and/or malicious harm by the victim? From the video of the agents on the side of the vehicle, to the angle of the bullet hole, it all would indicate that there were clear from being "run down". Why do you think DHS is so insistent on digging their heels in, on pushing this lie?
Ignoring lawful instructions from law enforcement, along with attempting to run over a law enforcement officer, like that woman did which we have video of, deserves the officer to defend themself.
Did you watch it before or after reading the President’s response?
What does this have to do with increasing the military budget? The women murdered by the ICE agent, in Minneapolis was a US-Born citizen, and had nothing directly to do with undocumented migrants; Should our military budget skyrocket, really in response to domestic issues?
I never disagreed with those things. You said “our world is safer”. Do you think it’s the USAs job to make the world safer?
The USA’s job is to make the country safer.
Ending 8 wars makes us here safer.
Please explain how much you enjoy how low gas prices are since Trump has created lower gas prices for us.
The military’s intention is outside of the country (unless he’s trying to send in the guard again)…
Do you think using a Red Herring Fallacy is in good faith?
Factually it can be used within the country, for things like disaster relief and other emergencies. We just saw a recent case of the military being used to again, protect Americans.
It may be possible you do not understand exactly what the military can do which leads to potential confusion for you.
Are you comfortable with the necessary increase in revenue intake that would be required for even just the proposed increase, not even touching upon your ideal of doubling or quadrupling? 500 Million in increased spending will HAVE to necessitate some form of consequential increase in taxes or some form of government revenue; So isn't it a bit contrary to the typical GOP platform of "Lower Taxes", to ask for a sudden 50% budget increase, all while you claim we are at the safest we have ever been?
Are you concerned about the impact it will have on our national debt?
Would you still feel that way if the US got into a war against NATO over Greenland?
The USA will not go to war against Greenland. That is fodder for people who do not understand how life works and do not understand global politics.
What makes you so sure?
How do you know that? I never said the US would go to war with Greenland. I said NATO. When youre asked a hypothetical question its not really an option to say "that hypothetical will never happen". Thats the whole point of a hypothetical question. You assume the scenario does occur and give your opinion about the scenario. None of us have any way of knowing what will happen in the future. Before the world wars happened no one thought something like that could happen. They would probably say something like that was for people who dont understand how life works or global politics.
Trump is just pumping defense stocks to offset his statement about defense buybacks and dividends. Do you think he actually intends to increase defense spending 50%??
He cannot control spending, as congress controls spending. Further proof he is not a dictator because he literally cannot control the amount of spending on defense.
Exactly, he’s just pumping stocks as usual.
I don’t think he’s a dictator (not capable enough), he’s just super corrupt.
Why do we need massive increases in defense spending if we aren’t doing foreign wars anymore?
Because we have stopped 8 wars
The world is objectively safer because of President Trump.
Unless it's to rebuild our shipbuilding industry... I don't know why we need to spend another 500B for defense (war).
It is too much money.... I think the money is better spent on things like patriotic public work projects, put American citizens who are having troubles finding employment, back to work at a job, if they want one. The military got tons of money already. We have a very strong military.
I don’t like it. That increase is as much as the spending of the next 3 top spenders combined. Ridiculous.