Check out the story Here.
It's all over the news sites and blogs.
I must admit this really is a novel and fascinating idea. For contextual purposes, it should be noted that we had similiar taxes in Vietnam and WWII (and other conflicts in our nation's history).
Fascinating idea. I'm still undecided how I feel about it. One thing, off the cuff, that I do find appealing about it is that it raises the bar on the jus ad bellum constraints for our nation. It essentially says, "if you want to go to war (and you believe it is important enough, morally neccessary, etc.), then you have to step up and pay for it." hmmm...
What do you think? We had a rousing debate about it in the department just the other day.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I agree with the higher standard for ad bellum, but with that I think this a largely political move, and is only done with the appearance of trying to "put our money where our mouth is" so to speak. It seems like the Dems are trying to sway public opinion farther away from the war by making it expensive for everyone, not just the soldiers and their families. In a different context, I could see myself supporting this legislation, but I think at a time like this there's too much politics going into what may seem like a morally justified move at the onset..
Post a Comment