When my now-deceased WWII veteran father was still alive , he did his patriotic
duty when we were hit at Pearl Harbor. Immediately upon enlisting, he was
quickly sent to Hawaii. He said that during those first several weeks, he had to
train with wooden guns. Thank goodness he was given enough time, by the grace of
God, to eventually get a real gun in his hand and fight towards victory with his
brothers in arms.May that never happen again.
Our nation would be much better protected (by God) if we repented of our sins
and turned to him.Much of what we spend, militarily, especially in
R&D, sooner or later is given to our adversaries, by spies and leakers
either in the military establishment (some may be civilians), sometimes by
foreigners (Chinese nationals, both working in defense and attending our
colleges and universities, are among them, among other nationalities), and some
by being hacked through the internet.I'm not against wise
military spending at all. But, that said, still—Except the Lord build the house, they labour in vain that build it: except the
Lord keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain. —Psalm 127:1Not only is this true, "In God We Trust", but, only in and by
God are we protected, or not, ultimately. And he will only do so inasmuch as we
incline our ears, hearts and doings to him. If we disregard his commandments, he
will not forever keep a hedge up between us and our enemies. Regardless of how
much or little we spend on our military.
1. Take a couple of decades off in upgrading military hardware, & initial
costs will be heavy. Since Clinton was POTUS, militarily, we've saved money
by not fixing the roof.2. The trade-off for lower military expenditures is
body-count. More advanced weapons & tactics result in lopsided victories.
Which weapon systems fielded will determine which side of the equation the US is
on.3. The US is equipped for asymmetrical & not conventional
combat--we need both.3. Peace thru strength. Only martyrs & fools
attack a prepared, better armed, & better trained force.4. Much waste
in federal spending is due to baseline budgeting; inefficient by its nature.
Funds not spent this year are deducted from the budget base next year--promoting
inept spending decisions.5. Most weapon-system procurement $s are spent by
contractors on fed required social-economic program compliance.6. The fed
gladly spends $1 to affirm it isn't cheated 5¢.7. Technology
evolves quickly--government design changes are almost as fast. Regularly
redesigning (by committee) easily doubles the cost/schedule of a weapon
system.8. If the US can't project overwhelming force, it will have to
concede to nation/s that do.
@a bit of realityRE: "I can't help but think that when the
military-industrial complex wins, the American people lose"...---Nice. But how do you figure that if the US Military wins... Americans lose?
That's nonsense.The term "military industrial complex"
is an old Vietnam era buzz-word. Today we know there is nothing evil about
Military, or Industry. They are both needed for our nation to be successful,
safe, and prosperous.Hippies used to blather about the Military
Industrial Complex during the Vietnam War, but this is a new age. We know we
need a strong military, and strong industry, for America to be strong.There's nothing wrong with a nation having a strong military (even the
USA).There's nothing wrong with a nation having a strong industrial
foundation (even the USA).If your kid is a soldier.. he's part
of the "Military Industrial Complex". I want my kids in the military to
be paid as much as those who aren't. Don't you? How do you do that
if Democrats keep pushing to drastically cut the military budget?Rhetoric is one thing. Lets talk common sense. How does our military
winning mean the people lose?They protect the people!
The Pentagon is not some independent entity that has to be fed for its own
contentment. The US armed forces are the guarantors of peace in the world, and
are needed just as much as ever in light of the imperialist actions of Putin and
the expanding military power of the totalitarian Chinese government.
International trade is vital to America, and the safety of the seas is protected
by the Navy backed up by the other services. Freedom of air travel is vital to
modern civilization, and is protected by the Air Force. Our electronic
information society depends on the security of satellites. The protection of
the US homeland against nuclear missiles has relied for decades on the ability
of the US to retaliate on a commensurate scale. The military budget
is a very small part of the US economy. It is a significant part (16%) of the
Federal budget because national defense was made a federal duty by the US
Constitution, "to provide for the common defense". It is a global job,
one that is best performed by a nation that controls its military through
elected officials and is dedicated to protecting democracy and human rights.
Withdrawing from the field would be costly.
Sorry cmsense. My previous comment was about Silo 1:41 p.m. comment, not
yours.Note: The DOD budget will be +9%, not +13% (WIkipedia)I don't usually question a sub-10% increase in Defense. Heck, if
it makes me safer, and it means we can pay our soldiers better, protect them
better, give them better weapons, and fix their injuries better... why not?I know there is some waste in the DOD. There is some waste in every
department. If you knew the amount of your money that is spent on fraudulent
claims to SS, Medicaid, and Medicare... it would make your head spin. Forbes
estimates it at $21 Trillion in fraudulent payments.Google
"Fraud and billing mistakes cost Medicare — and taxpayers — tens
of billions last year"...Google "Federal government
continues to lose billions to waste, fraud and abuse" (Washington
Post)...Google "Fraud, waste, and abuse in entitlement programs)
Deloitte...Medicare Advantage billing errors cost taxpayers billions
- CNBC.com...Look at the graphs... it goes up whether an R or D is
President. It's higher than you can imagine. DOD waste/fraud is small in
cmsense,I don't know if his number is correct. I've never seen
that number. But if you Google "2018 United States federal budget"
(Wikipedia)... you will read the following..."The budget cuts
mandatory spending by a net $2,033 billion (B) over the 2018–2027 period.
This includes reduced spending of $1,891B for healthcare, mainly due to the
proposed repeal and replacement of the Affordable Care Act"..."The proposed budget includes $200B in additional infrastructure
investment"... (that's upgrading roads, bridges, etc)."The budget cuts discretionary spending by a net $1,851 billion over the
2018–2027 period. This includes reduced spending of $752 billion for
overseas contingency operations (defense spending in Afghanistan and other
foreign countries), which is partially offset by other increases in defense
spending of $448B, for a net defense cut of $304B"...Remember...
the whole 2018 Defense budget is just $574B. That's small compared the
healthcare budget, which will grow if Democrats force everybody in the country
to get their healthcare through the ACA (or what Hillary and Bernie were
proposing the ACA morph into in it's next incarnation).(Source
"Where was this opinion when the Obama administration was spending 10
trillion dollars?They doubled the national debt. His administration
spent more than any prior administration, put together.Where was your
angst when that occurred?"======Even though that is
completely FALSE, there are many people gullible enough to actually believe
it.That is downright frightening. It's those people who fail
to be able to recognize the lies of trump and friends. Those who refuse to see
the truth are even more scary.
National defense is a specific, enumerated, delegated power and responsibility
of the federal government. In sharp contrast, charity programs are
not within Congress' proper purview to spend money. And no, the
"general welfare" clause was never intended to empower congress to set
up charity programs. Even the 16th amendment that empowers unlimited taxing,
does not authorize unlimited spending.If desired, individual States
might well operate socialized medical plans, retirement or disability programs,
business subsidies, free food programs, or spend tax money on education. Of
these, however, congress is authorized only to help train the militia: defense
spending.Obviously, we now have generations dependent on federal
charity spending. Ending the programs all at once would be catastrophic. But we
must contain such spending and then work toward reinstilling personal
independence. We need to follow the constitution or amend it to
allow additional federal powers.And congress is bringing in record
high revenue this year. Tax cuts dont necessarily mean reductions in tax
Under normal circumstances I would agree with this editorial. Looking at human
history and the state of the world and potential adversaries, blank check no,
but I can swallow a 13% increase. I do think it it better to be
prepared and have a strong detterent to any potential adversaries. Russia and
China relations are not the best right now. Sometimes the best offense is a
good defense. Russia and China have been increasing their spending.
So Mr Genius... how much SHOULD the budget for our military be?What
should the number on the check be? Not knowing how many conflicts or threats
will come up in the coming year...We don't even know how many
soldiers we will need to hire next year (and write monthly pay checks to their
families), or how many weapons systems we will need, or how many threats we will
be faced with. How are you going to write the check for that today?What if you write the check and then Iran attacks Israel, or North Korea
attacks Japan or the USA? Or Al Qaeda and ISIS attacks America again? Or
Syria gasses civilians again. Or Russia invades Crimea or Ukrainian again...
Just say, "Sorry... we don't have any money"?You
can't put the military on a tight budget. They are responsible for the
most important thing (according to the Constitution)... Protecting our Citizens
from military threats. Are you going to put a lowball price on that Dems?The DOD budget is $547 Billion of the $4.407 trillion budget.
That's a pretty small price for our security IMO. 16% of the budget.Do you want to target that 16% Dems?Obama funded military
too you know.
Tax cut and spend - the Republican way.
@mike richards"Obama added $10,000,000,000,000 to the national
debt with his ill-conceived ObamaCare, which nearly bankrupted America"100% false, and you know it.Yes the federal debt increased
during Obama's presidency, but his 'ill-conceived ObamaCare' was
not even a major contributor to that debt, let alone the entire cause as you
claim.If Obama's policies were so detrimental as you claim, why
the need to falsify your claims about those policies?
@mdThe annual deficit was decreasing each year after Obama's first
year (which had a huge increase thanks to decreased revenue and increased
spending to deal with the recession) then things got handed over to Trump and
the deficit has now started growing during good economic times which is
precisely the time when you should be looking to balance the budget. It's
projected to be a trillion dollars soon.
Why is that so-called "conservatives" find that welfare and health
expenditures for people are "free stuff"?Then all the
goodies, perks and grift that ends up in the Dept of Defense budget is not? I
don't speak about wages for the average soldier, or decent equipment. That
is a given. But a huuuggge amount of the Defense budget is dedicated to
spending on "toys" we don't need, bases that ought not be still
opened, perks for generals and admirals, and a bloated bureaucracy. And
don't get me started on our offensive capacities to destroy the Earth many
times over.Corporate America is the biggest beneficiary of the blank
checks issued to the Dept of Defense. Why are we so insistent on continuing
this "free stuff" to Corporate America? Where is your outrage
A good day to join the military?
Defense spending is out of control.We don't get to have tax
cuts AND an increase of spending. Where are the Republicans who care about the
deficit! They are strangely quiet since Obama left office.
Figures don't lie, but...Defense was 49% of total federal
spending in 1962, and today it is only 15%Social security is now 24% of
federal spending.Medicare is 15%“Health” is another 13%
“Income Security” is another 13%Interest is 6% (and
rising rapidly)The problem is not that we are spending too much on
defense, it is that politicians have bought votes by passing entitlement
programs for “Free Stuff” and these now account for an untouchable
60% of federal spending.Defense is not cheap, cannot be made cheap,
and currently is not nearly enough to ensure our ability to defend against
emerging threats like China and Putin’s resurrected Russia.As
President Kennedy said “Ask not what your country can do for you, but ask
what you can do for your country.” That means less free stuff, to ensure
we have our freedom.The real issue is not defense spending, but the
insatiable demands of interest on the current debt made worse every year as
Congress refuses to cut spending overall and especially to eliminate annual
deficits.Some defense programs should be eliminated, but overall
defense needs are far from met.
If it ends up that they do have a blank check...I have some $5,000 hammers they
might be interested in buying!
Defense spending must be properly contained. To do so without threatening the
national security of the United States or our allies will require that those
allies step up their defense spending first to meet the needs of their own
national defense, and then to shoulder their share of the defense of the free
world.The United States has been subsidizing the national defense of
the UK, Western Europe, and major parts of Asia since about 1940.In
other threads, some are wont to ask why other nations can afford socialized
medicine while the US can't. To the extent that any other nation actually
affords socialized medicine it is often because US taxpayers are funding--either
directly or implicitly--the national defense of that country.At the
same time, let us remember some of the benefits of our defense spending, above
and beyond simple national defense. The Freeway Interstate System was originally
funded as a defense item. Like the Space Race of the '60s (really part of
national defense despite claims to the contrary), today's defense spending
spurs technological development in many areas. DARPANET is most well known.
Couldn't agree more. Though defense spending is one of the few areas the
Federal Government spends that is actually Constitutionally-based, that
doesn't mean we shouldn't look carefully at it. But, how much money is
really needed there? I don't have that answer, but I don't think
anybody seriously asks the question. The reality is nothing will be worse for
our nation's defense than a fiscal crisis - as the story points out. And
without significant changes, we're heading for one. It's only a matter
of time and severity.
Congress has been charged with the duty to protect the United States and to levy
taxes to do that. The President is the Commander in Chief of the military.
Part of his job is to see that the United States is protected.Obama
added $10,000,000,000,000 to the national debt with his ill-conceived ObamaCare,
which nearly bankrupted America. On February 9, 2017, the Military Times polled
members of the military for their opinion of Obama's handling of his duty
as Commander in Chief. "More than half of troops surveyed in the latest
Military Times/Institute for Veterans and Military Families poll said they have
an unfavorable opinion of Obama and his two-terms leading the military. "Lost ground must be recovered if America is to be protected from enemies
foreign and domestic. That takes money. Congress has no authority levy taxes
for social programs, but it has full authority to levy taxes for the
military.Those Americans who stand with the Constitution will stand
for a strong military. Those who don't stand with the Constitution will
demand that unauthorized programs be funded at the peril of the military.
I totally agree with this, the War Machine needs to be turned into a protection
and don't mess with us machine.Congress loves wars and is in
the business of funding war. Not what the founding fathers had envisioned and
not what the American people want. We need to lead by example and War is not a
good example. It is time for term limits and new faces in
Washington, what we have now is a Congress fueled by greed and what better way
to get money than by starting a War! Vote them out. If we don't have term
limits we will just get the same thing we have now. Dem or Rep doens't
matter they are all in on "The War Machine." Lead by example.
We spend as much as the rest of the world combined and yet so many of todays
'conservatives' are still scared. Meanwhile they will most likely die
from heart desease. The GOP has been buying votes with fear for years. Eisenhower saw this coming and warned us about the military industrial
complex. Also defense is something you do here. When its overseas
that is called offense.
If they want to spend more on the military then they should raise a special tax,
called "Military Tax" and make people write a check every month. And
while they're at it they should raise another tax called "Entitlement
overspending tax" and make everyone write a check for that every month. None
of these sneaky payroll deduction, tax hiding tactics. Let's have full
disclosure of where the money is going and why, and then we'll see how much
the American people really value additional defense spending and bloated
When excessive debt is your greatest threat, you know it's time to change
your ways.The big spending categories are defense, Social Security,
and health care. This is where reductions must be made.
Here’s an idea Congress, don’t vote for a 13% increase in a year the
budget deficit may reach $1 TRILLION😳
Maybe not a blank check but the military should be the closest thing to having a
blank check over all things in the governmen since many NATO countries
don't care about increasing there military. China and Russia are becoming
serious players (in particular China) in the arms race. China's economy is
already passed us in purchasing power GDP and almost passing us in nominal GDP.
They have the economic clout and ambition to be a serious threat. Back to NATO
as it pertains to curbing Russia, I seriously doubt that many of the NATO
countries would seriously support another NATO country that has been invaded. I
think US and UK will join in on the fight, but I personally think most NATO
countries want the association and safety rather than militarily help someone
within that association.
Where was this opinion when the Obama administration was spending 10 trillion
dollars?They doubled the national debt. His administration spent
more than any prior administration, put together.Where was your angst when
better than no check and that is what they would get from a Democrat
The article didn't talk about what the increase represented. I listened to
a report on the defense budget, and it seemed that most of the increase was due
to big ticket one-time expenditures - new ships, planes and tanks.Yes, this budget, along with every other spending appropriation, needs to be
gone over with a fine-tooth comb, and every expenditure the government makes
should be audited to ensure it happened as it should have, and was really worth
it.But we need to do the same thing with entitlements. No one wants
to even talk about them, but the cost of entitlements is projected by the CBO to
expand to nearly 100% of the federal budget in the next few decades if something
isn't done. Simply cutting payments to Medicaid doctors won't do the
job. And with many politicians promising even more entitlements, it won't
be long before we look back fondly on "only" having a $21 trillion debt.
Here's the stupidity of what Donald Trump just did."national defense is a vital function of the federal government. A strong
defense is the best way to ensure peace. It also allows the United States to
support peace in other freedom-loving nations and promote U.S. interests
abroad."In fact "national defense" for well over a
hundred years has meant defense of other nations and continents. We built
tanks, ships, and airplanes for use on foreign soil. When was the last time we
fought a foreign enemy on American soil? It's been a good
strategy for American peace even with several tragic and blatantly immoral
tactical encounters (Vietnam, Iraq etc.). Now Trump simultaneously
pursues the tactic of disengaging from these foreign encounters but building up
a military of gargantuan proportions to fight a home war that has never
occurred, and likely never will with nuclear weapons. It's all
for show. Mr. tough man, while sky rocketing debt for a cause that serves ego
not purpose. Once again the disconnect in the Trump brain, (or is
it always for show), is on full display.
I don’t know where it’s written in stone that military spending is a
conservative ideal or principle. It always surprises me that Republican
candidates often preach that we need to support the military more. I’d
agree that far more $$ should go into the pockets of servicemen/women than
defense contractors. This is an obscene amount of money to spend when the govt.
hasn’t even collected enough to pay for their spending habits (in a good
“collections”/economy year). This is just sad. And frustrating. And
shows Congress is clearly owned by the defense industrial complex. The article
doesn’t share this, but I’d respect our Utah delegation more if
they’d vote against this greed.
Excellent editorial.It is mind-blowing that when the Democrats are
in charge, Republicans howl about deficits. But as soon as the Republicans take
over, they lower taxes and increase spending, causing the deficits to grow even
more.I can't help but think that when the military-industrial
complex wins, the American people lose.
The Deseret News is absolutely right about this outrage. I'm afraid the
sad truth is that our representatives in the United States Congress no longer
represent the best interests of their constituents, but only the needs of the
people who contribute "campaign contributions" to them. In my opinion,
this is little more than a form of legalized bribery, and the only thing that
might stop it is to replace our current system with public financing of all
elections at the federal level.