$648.7 billion for 2008 and an extra $93.4 billion for 2007<\/em>\u00bb, ce qui fait le compte et les bons comptes font les bons amis.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tNous voil\u00e0 rassur\u00e9s. Les s\u00e9nateurs ont peu parl\u00e9 du budget parce qu’ils ont beaucoup parl\u00e9 de l’Irak. L’un d’eux s’y est pourtant int\u00e9ress\u00e9, Joe Lieberman, le d\u00e9mocrate devenu ind\u00e9pendant pour \u00eatre plus proche des r\u00e9publicains et du Bon Dieu, pour juger que ce budget-l\u00e0 \u00e9tait insuffisant. Lieberman est favorable \u00e0 l’instauration d’un imp\u00f4t-terrorisme, ce qui pourrait ouvrir la voie \u00e0 un imp\u00f4t-Pentagone direct, qui n’aurait peut-\u00eatre plus besoin de passer par les chicaneries du Congr\u00e8s pour aller directement dans les caisses qui conviennent.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\t\u00abSen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., came closest to discussing the proposed defense budget when he said the 11.3 percent increase the Pentagon is asking for in 2008 isn’t enough.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bb I honestly think that we are underfunding some needs we have, Lieberman said. I think the Army needs more, the National Guard needs more. I think we’re heading rapidly to a 274-ship Navy, and we’re flat-funding research and development.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbThe solution? I think we’ve got to start thinking about a war on terrorism tax, Lieberman said.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bb People keep saying that we’re not asking sacrifices of anybody but our military in this war, Lieberman said. People would be willing to sacrifice in the form of more taxes if they were assured the extra money collected would go toward national security, he said.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbLieberman conceded that critics might complain that the Pentagon is wasting money on some outmoded Cold War major arms systems that we really don’t need anymore.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbBut he stopped himself. I know that’s a large question. We’ll come back and ask more specifically during later hearings, he said.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tTout de m\u00eame, la d\u00e9l\u00e9gation du Pentagone craignait les r\u00e9actions des s\u00e9nateurs. Pour la premi\u00e8re fois pour une audition de pr\u00e9sentation g\u00e9n\u00e9rale, elle comptait dans ses rangs le Contr\u00f4leur G\u00e9n\u00e9ral du DoD, Tina Jonas. Et les premiers mots de Gates devant les s\u00e9nateurs ont \u00e9t\u00e9 comme pour s’excuser : \u00abThere has been, understandably, sticker shock at the sheer size of the $742 billion worth of defense spending bills the Pentagon sent to Congress yesterday.<\/em>\u00bb Les s\u00e9nateurs avaient l’esprit ailleurs. Vous savez, $742 milliards<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\tMis en ligne le 7 f\u00e9vrier 2007 \u00e0 17H39<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Nous l’avons rat\u00e9 et Robert Gates, secr\u00e9taire \u00e0 la d\u00e9fense, d\u00e9posant devant les s\u00e9nateurs de la commission des forces arm\u00e9es, a rectifi\u00e9 pour nous, \u00e0 notre grande confusion. Le budget gargantuesque du DoD, FY2008, pr\u00e9vu \u00e0 $648 milliards et des poussi\u00e8res, doit \u00eatre lu $742 milliards parce qu’il englobe une demande suppl\u00e9mentaire pour 2007. Soit,… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[3127,568,6411,3984,4883,3531],"class_list":["post-68499","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-budget","tag-dod","tag-gargantuesque","tag-gates","tag-lieberman","tag-senat"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68499","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=68499"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68499\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68499"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68499"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68499"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}