Team Infidel
Forum Spin Doctor
Wall Street Journal
November 13, 2008
Pg. 18
Bret Stephens questions Sen. Barack Obama's commitment to a strong military in "Will Obama Gut Defense?" (Global View, Oct. 28). Unfortunately, Mr. Stephens misses the point.
Since George W. Bush came into office the baseline defense budget, exclusive of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, has grown in real terms from $375 billion to $505 billion -- a 35% increase. And yet no one would argue that we are 35% safer than we were eight years ago. Money poorly spent does not lead to a strong military and enhanced security. Against the backdrop of a $10.2 trillion national debt, the $700 billion bailout of the banking industry, and falling revenues, we cannot afford to let wasteful military spending continue unchecked.
Analysis of where the money is being spent in the current defense budget makes it clear that $60 billion could be eliminated from the current defense budget without affecting our national security. This $60 billion is being spent for weapons systems designed to counter threats from a bygone era, not today's terrorism, for the upkeep of staggering quantities of nuclear warheads, and for money squandered because of mismanaged procurement processes and weak contractor oversight. Between 2000 and 2007, major military acquisitions alone ran over budget by $400 billion. This money can be better spent on programs that actually enhance our national security -- needed programs that invest in our human capital, or not spent at all.
Lawrence Korb, Washington
R. Warren Langley, San Francisco
Mr. Korb was an assistant secretary of defense under Ronald Reagan. Mr. Langley is a past president of the Pacific Stock Exchange.
November 13, 2008
Pg. 18
Bret Stephens questions Sen. Barack Obama's commitment to a strong military in "Will Obama Gut Defense?" (Global View, Oct. 28). Unfortunately, Mr. Stephens misses the point.
Since George W. Bush came into office the baseline defense budget, exclusive of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, has grown in real terms from $375 billion to $505 billion -- a 35% increase. And yet no one would argue that we are 35% safer than we were eight years ago. Money poorly spent does not lead to a strong military and enhanced security. Against the backdrop of a $10.2 trillion national debt, the $700 billion bailout of the banking industry, and falling revenues, we cannot afford to let wasteful military spending continue unchecked.
Analysis of where the money is being spent in the current defense budget makes it clear that $60 billion could be eliminated from the current defense budget without affecting our national security. This $60 billion is being spent for weapons systems designed to counter threats from a bygone era, not today's terrorism, for the upkeep of staggering quantities of nuclear warheads, and for money squandered because of mismanaged procurement processes and weak contractor oversight. Between 2000 and 2007, major military acquisitions alone ran over budget by $400 billion. This money can be better spent on programs that actually enhance our national security -- needed programs that invest in our human capital, or not spent at all.
Lawrence Korb, Washington
R. Warren Langley, San Francisco
Mr. Korb was an assistant secretary of defense under Ronald Reagan. Mr. Langley is a past president of the Pacific Stock Exchange.