Should military spending be reduced?




 
--
 
May 18th, 2006  
WarMachine
 
 

Topic: Should military spending be reduced?


I'm currently researching this topic and i'm really concerned about the levels of spending on defense that the bush administration has developed over the years. Because we're rebuilding Iraq the cost will be over 430 billion total this year. That's half of the budget of the USA.

I for one would like to see a reduction in military spending down to roughly 200 billion which is more sustainable. All that's necessary is to stop spending money on new useless weapon systems and reduce the number of troops. Those two categories are inflating the cost and i'm tired of having to worry about civilian services always being cut to satisfy the Pentagon's appetite.

We'll still be a superpower and we'll still have the best military, so what's wrong with cutting defense spending a little bit?
May 18th, 2006  
phoenix80
 
 
It may happen if another Clintoonite takes the office of president and he may cut the spending and cripple the military just like he did back in 90s
May 18th, 2006  
LeEnfield
 
 
WarMachine.....What would you cut and why
--
May 18th, 2006  
PJ24
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarMachine
I'm currently researching this topic and i'm really concerned about the levels of spending on defense that the bush administration has developed over the years. Because we're rebuilding Iraq the cost will be over 430 billion total this year. That's half of the budget of the USA.
The Current defense budget is about 4% of the GDP. To date we've spent about $250Mil on Iraq if I remember correctly and we're expected to spend another $120 for both Iraq and Afghanistan this year.

Quote:
I for one would like to see a reduction in military spending down to roughly 200 billion which is more sustainable. All that's necessary is to stop spending money on new useless weapon systems and reduce the number of troops. Those two categories are inflating the cost and i'm tired of having to worry about civilian services always being cut to satisfy the Pentagon's appetite.

We'll still be a superpower and we'll still have the best military, so what's wrong with cutting defense spending a little bit?
Who is going to decide what is useless? Maybe we should just scrap R&D altogether! We'll keep what we have and carry it into the next century.

Cut troops, huh? Good idea, especially in the middle of a war with deployment rotations already reaching three and four.

Ignorant comments like this chap my butt sometimes.

The Defense budget is hurting civilian services, which ones?
May 19th, 2006  
WarMachine
 
 
4% is a lot with over 10 trillion dollars worth of GNP. That figure doesn't include the money left over that we run our country on which is something less than a triilion dollars. If nearly half of that is going to defense then i think there's a problem. You're cutting money to schools, health, and virtually every other field of the budget. And if you're not cutting the budget then you're borrowing heavily and inflating the national debt which has interest payments in the 100's of billions annually.

I hate to say it but the f 22 isn't necessary. They're expensive and have features designed to counter soviet planes that were in mind in development, but no longer pose a threat. So there is no one you can justify using these expensive jets against. Same with the B2 bomber, they cost over a billion each and we just keep producing more of them to attack nomads in the desert, not soviet targets like it was intended to.

When i said to reduce the troop deployment i meant in the future after Iraq has become more stabilized. It would be dangerous to do that now, but paying soldiers is a huge part of the defense spending so you have to lower their numbers.

The civilans are hurting because there isn't an extra 100 billion anymore to spend on the civil programs or pay off the debt, you know, improving our lives.

Just in case you don't know, we're spending as much on military now as we did during the cold war, that makes no sense. There's no competing super power and there's no one to use high tech weapons against. Though the robotics seems like a good field to invest in, the R&D itself isn't the prob.
May 19th, 2006  
PJ24
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarMachine
4% is a lot with over 10 trillion dollars worth of GNP. That figure doesn't include the money left over that we run our country on which is something less than a triilion dollars. If nearly half of that is going to defense then i think there's a problem. You're cutting money to schools, health, and virtually every other field of the budget. And if you're not cutting the budget then you're borrowing heavily and inflating the national debt which has interest payments in the 100's of billions annually.
Half of the US budget is NOT going to defense. 4% of 100% is not half. I don't care where you went to school.

Quote:
When i said to reduce the troop deployment i meant in the future after Iraq has become more stabilized. It would be dangerous to do that now, but paying soldiers is a huge part of the defense spending so you have to lower their numbers.
And when the next war breaks out and we find ourselves with our d*cks in our hands and no trained military, what then? Yeah, great idea! All of those doctrines about being prepared are just silly and should be completely ignored.

It's obvious you want an ill prepared and ineffective military.

Quote:
The civilans are hurting because there isn't an extra 100 billion anymore to spend on the civil programs or pay off the debt, you know, improving our lives.
Again, what programs are suffering. Specifics, please. What civilians, specifically are suffering?

Quote:
Just in case you don't know, we're spending as much on military now as we did during the cold war, that makes no sense. There's no competing super power and there's no one to use high tech weapons against. Though the robotics seems like a good field to invest in, the R&D itself isn't the prob.
I know, but you obviously don't. We're not spending half as much as we did during the cold war. Our defense budget was on average 7.5% of the GDP during the Cold War.

You seem to have researched this topic very poorly. Not only are your facts wrong, but you show no understand of how the military actually functions, what its needs are, etc.



May 19th, 2006  
bulldogg
 
 
*shakes head side to side*
Warmachine, warmachine, warmachine... what are we going to do with you? Huh??

This is the problem with using the media and the water cooler as your source of truth and light.

George Washington, Sun Tzu, Clausewitz, Rommel, Patton just to start off would all back the argument that the only path to peace is through preparing for war. Without having possession of a stick your enemy fears you cannot eat the carrot in peace. I'd daresay those five blokes are more intelligent and well-versed on the subject at hand despite the passage of time as truths such as these are universal regardless of when or where.

You also fail to grasp the impact the military and all its ancillary support on the economy at large. IT drives the core of the USA's industrial base that has not been outsourced and downsized and retrofitted and fubar'd. Get rid of it and we are in the same boat as England post Thatcher. Not good.

I'll go so far as to say its not possible you researched this in the slightest before firing your opening salvo, much like your ideas would do to my brothers-in-arms.
May 19th, 2006  
WarMachine
 
 
Riddle me this confucius, just who is our enemy that we're spending all this money on suddenly?

Iraq? Don't b******t me.

Iran? See above

N. Korea? ditto

None of those countries pose a realistic threat to us. Their defense spending is negligible compared to ours and they're a threat(Iraq before invasion)? To spend this much on military without an actual enemy is ridiculous.

I realize that asking this question on a military forum would give me these sort of cynical responses, but hey, it's the only forum i got.

In case you don't believe me about some of the facts, see here: http://www.sensiblepriorities.org/budget_analysis.htm
or
http://borgenproject.org/Defense_Spending.html
or
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militar..._United_States

Btw, the gdp is not our budget like i tried to explain before. The budget is the money leftover that we can actually use. The gdp is all our money before subtracting what we owe. Plus, i did research this, that's why i posted the question here in the first place.
May 19th, 2006  
bulldogg
 
 
Wikipedia, ok, does that mean I can quote my drunk uncle too?

Your first source is misrepresenting the "Federal Discretionary Spending" as the entire federal budget. The budget includes discretionary spending as well as mandated spending. When you analyse the facts correctly 19% is on military and domestic security, 18% discretionary non-military, 9% debt interest, Medicaid 7%, Medicaire 14%, Social Security 21% and other mandated spending totals another 12%.

Don't listen to what someone else thinks it means mate, read it yourself and engage your grey matter. Don't believe me even, here it is...
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2007/

We must prepare for all enemies, foreign and domestic, known and unknown. Failure to pursue these ends is criminal. Iraq, Iran, China, Russia, Cuba, Venezuela, Quebec... you must plan and prepare for all possible threats, then and only then can your society rest easy and unfortunately it is a race without end.
May 19th, 2006  
WarMachine
 
 
Wow, and you thought wikipedia was an unreliable source? At least i had others listed. The white house website makes whatever the white house does sound good, it's their friggin' site. Why not give me George Bush's blog while you're at it?

I think it's unhealthy to constantly prepare for threats from countries we should be working with to resolve issues, not intimidate them and make them distrust us. Thanks to the propaganda the Bush administration has launched at the american public, we have to believe we're going to be attacked sometime somewhere from enemies thousands of miles away.

People here seem to think i'm of the opinion that i want to do away with the american military. That's nonsense, i just want to see spending being more responsible on programs we can actually use. I like the idea that we're a superpower, but we were a superpower when we were spending 250 billion or, it's what you do with it that counts. 430 billion spent on military costs does add up and unless free money magicly appears, somebody is paying this bill sooner or later. Guess What? It's the american public scared to death of developing countries.