Why do Republicans support their tax dollars going to the Iraq war and not to

[Retrograde]

Americans? 92 billion in federal tax money went to corporate welfare in 2007, and a trillion dollars is going to support the people in Iraq, but Republicans don't want a dollar spent on their fellow Americans. Can you explain thinking like this?
Republicans seem to be saying it's responsible to give away trillions of dollars to foreigners but not Americans.
Less than 1% of taxes go to all welfare programs.
40% of tax revenues goes for military spending.
daddio - Are you saying government programs will work in Iraq and not in the US?

[truth seeker]

good question. I am not a Republican and have often wondered the same thing. If he rest of the Republicans answer the same way your first two did, you are not going to get an answer to this.

[The Question]

The same reason that many Americans supported tax dollars to help our brave soldiers fight the Germans and the Japanese during WWII.

The U.S gov't must vigilantly protect American interests around the world, less we wake up one day with a lot of power in the hands of evil people with a capacity to inflict great harm and misery upon us all and with little we can do to stop it.

Of all the roles of our federal gov't, none is as important as that, and perhaps the best justification of the use of federal tax dollars that one can imagine.

[Cinner]

It IS in our best interest to support the nation of Iraq right now. Honestly, what would you libs say if we went after the government and radicals like we did and then just left the citizens twisting in the wind with no support? It is the right thing to do.
Our fellow Americans should be gently pushed into helping themselves. Charity is for private citizens, churches and charitable organizations to distribute, not our government. Redistribution of wealth is wrong no matter how you sugar coat it.

[Beau D. Satva]

It's the typical Republican investment--one upon which there is zero return.

Go Dems!

[freepress04]

Better to support the war!!! than usles social programs to help real Americans....that just suckle down PROFITS!!!& Increase the loss!!!

[geonomad2000]

That is the rift between the left and the right. The right supports personal responsibility, the left supports more government programs.

The right supports the war, the left does not.

[Mr. Lava, Democrat]

Because Republicans dont want to see this money spent on Americans, namely poor children. Its about withholding money to feel tough. What else is it?

I know I know, Dems are "commie". Republicans are just heartless. If America takes care of its own there goes the GOP

[Michael H]

Well if you would stop and think about how those tax dollars are spent on the war, you would retract your question. It simply proves that you really know nothing about economics. The US military needs things, things such as guns, ammo, armor, tanks, missiles, food, and all kinds of other things.

Who supplies all that stuff? And don't give me the pansy answer that we get it from other countries. That is purely ignorance. We use American workers to produce a majority of those products. So technically the government is putting civilians to work providing products to the military. I would say that is spending the money on their fellow Americans.

And for the other side of this issue. If we do not protect ourselves and our interests throughout the world, then we become vulnerable to invasion and further terrorist activity. Those types of activities prevent the growth of our economy and no matter how much money the federal government spends here in the United States, it will not be enough because many of the businesses that would be required to provide services to the government would be unavailable. If you know anything about war and how to defeat an enemy you will know what I am talking about.

So the best way to help America and the taxpaying citizens is for the government to protect this country and do so with American made products and services. That seems to me to be exactly what we are doing.

[daddio]

how much money do you throw at a problem, to find that money is not what will fix the problem?

raw dollars are the smallest part of what goes to Iraq. operation expenses are the bulk. and yes, it's stupidly expensive.

however, there is not much left to do, but wait out a fledging democracy, that can take care of itself. can't just leave.

as for welfare issues, the government does very, very little well. i'm pretty sure we can all agree on that. which begs the first question i mentioned. what is the problem with admitting, that money will not fix certain problems?