Home | About | Donate

'Tying His Own Hands' on Gitmo, Obama Agrees to Sign Bloated Pentagon Budget


#1

'Tying His Own Hands' on Gitmo, Obama Agrees to Sign Bloated Pentagon Budget

Sarah Lazare, staff writer

The White House has announced that President Barck Obama will sign the $607 billion "defense" bill overwhelmingly passed by the Senate on Tuesday, even though critics say he is tying his own hands and betraying repeated promises to close the U.S. military's offshore prison in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba before he leaves office in 2017.

The chamber approved the latest version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which includes a prohibition on relocating those held in the prison to the United States and imposes restrictions on transfers to other countries.


#2

$607 billion to the Pentagon, much of it unallocated!
* I guess the cost of terrorizing and controlling the world is going up.
* I wonder how much of that black money is going to vicious dictators who will kill those the Fourth Reich disagrees with?
* When I was a youngster, we threw a whole generation into the meat grinder to rid the world of fascism and Nazism. The world gave a sigh of relief, and now Walt Kelly is more correct than ever, as he has Pogo say, "We have met the enemy and he is US!"
;-})


#3

Only 2 Senators in the Democrat Party and independent Bernie Sanders voted against this measure that gives over 0.6 Trillion dollars to the Pentagon and ensures that the Guantanamo detention without trial center remains open.

I'm still waiting to hear from Senator Elizabeth Warren regarding why she voted to fund the military to this extent and why she voted to keep Guantanamo open.


#4

At the start of the Republican debate tonight, a color guard and patriotic flag waving and Reagan. People eat that shit up.

607 billion ain't enough! Give them everything! Our kids can work for the war machine.


#5

Although pundits will be congratulating the GOP when they gain additional seats in both Houses of Congress in November 2016, they should be giving credit to Congressional Democrats for chasing away more of their historic base and handing seats over to the GOP. just as they have in most elections from 1994 (when they pandered to Clinton on NAFTA) to present.


#8

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#12

Mr. Sanders is running for president on the Democratic ticket, not as an "independent", let alone as a "socialist".

He has voted consistently to fund the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere (which are separate from the "defense" budget) since 2003.


#13

The 607 billion does NOT include the costs for waging the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere.


#14

My oh my, what will they do, the Green posters, Counterpunch, Hedges et.al., Bernie voted against the Bill which included this, from the Act:

"SEC. 145. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR F–35A AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT.
Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2016 for aircraft procurement, Air Force, not more than $4,285,000,000 may be obligated for the procurement of F–35A aircraft until the Secretary of the Air Force certifies to the congressional defense committees that F–35A aircraft delivered during fiscal year 2018 will have full combat capability, as determined as of the date of the enactment of this Act, with Block 3F hardware, software, and weapons carriage."

This F-35 section Bernie voted against, including the rest of the Bill. Tsk, tsk. He didn't skip out of town to avoid the vote, he voted.


#15

Just ask that George W Bush about the draft. It cost a few good news people their reputations and jobs when they tried to do just that. The rich own this country, get over it or do something about it, as history proves they can put any monkey in a flight suit and land him on an aircraft carrier and declare victory.


#17

Please stop calling it the "democrat party'. It's registered name is The Democratic Party. Use it.


#18

Thank you for providing me with the official name of the party of Democrats. Establishment Democrats use of flowery language can not hide the fact that the Party is anti-democratic and promotes the interests of the plutocratic elite. Since the Party is by no means democratic, I will not use that name to refer to it, regardless of whether or not establishment Democrats have used the US legal apparatus to register their Party with that name.


#19

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.