You said Obama scaled the war effort back. I showed you that he spent more on the war than Bush. Pretty simple.
Your retort is that he decreased DOD spending? That's great. We were talking about war in the middle East.
It's understandable that you've lost the plot after dragging us down this rabbit hole of nonsensical objections to anything I say. So let's review quickly.
I said the Dems have done everything possible to extricate themselves from the [Middle East] situation .
You said (you didn't show) that Obama spent more than Bush.
I said total spending is an invalid metric, and showed that [total military] spending actually decreased under Obama.
You said it's weird Liberal logic.
I showed that it makes mathematical sense.
You said I'm using the wrong figures.
Before you have me chase my tail some more, let's work backwards to resolve these last objections of yours.
Do you agree the simple graph showing that Obama reduced spending yet spent more than Bush makes sense?
If so, do you agree the change in military spending is a better metric to judge a President's militarism than outright dollar figures?
If so, do you agree that Obama has tried to disengage militarily (overall) versus Bush?
If you can answer those questions, then we can move on and look at the US involvement in the Middle East specifically. I've used the best figures I have available but if you can show (not just say) better ones I'm willing to retract my first statement based on whatever valid information you may provide.
), but now that we've gone bi-partisan bashing there's a problem? He's a troll? He has a vastly different opinion then you. So what... Get over it.
