this is a good article on CNN about why we should cut military spending. I find it quite reasonable. much of our spending is due to basically covering the military costs of many other countries. CNN
Actually, the article is very superficial and shortsighted. First, the troops we have stationed overseas aren't there just to defend the nations where they're located, though they would do that if attacked. They support and participate in US operations in countless ways that would be impractical if not impossible from the US mainland. Second, there are diplomatic and economic reasons for our overseas installations. We defend Japan and Germany because we don't let them rearm. We're also huge trading partners with many of these countries. If we pull out, it could hurts us economically. Third, the article makes it sound like we have a huge overseas force, when it's actually been reduced in size. The author bellyaches about 80.000 personnel in Europe. We had 400,000 just in Germany and far more installations 25 years ago. Clearly we don't need that many anymore, but we've scaled back enough. Fourth, it's shortsighted to close overseas installations, because what if we ever need them back? If we close a US base and in 10 years regret it, no big deal. We can simply rebuild it. If we close an overseas base, it's gone. We might be able to get it back diplomatically, but the host nation would have us by the balls. It would cost us a fortune, and it would be on far less favorable terms than what we currently have. Why? Because they would have all of the leverage. And what if they didn't want to give it to us? Do you wan to invade Japan to get a base that you had on good terms just a few years ago? I'm not suggesting there's no waste in our military budget. There clearly is, and certainly we don't need the colossal European force we used to have. (And sure enough, we don't have it anymore.). However, most of our bases came as a result of situations in which we had the leverage (remnants of a military occupation or defense against a huge threat). I wouldn't just piss that away because we don't want to address domestic spending.
some great points guys. I am very ignorant of such things but feel comfortable thinking we could easily cut our military budget by 10%. that doesn't seem too difficult and the result would be great. of course, my plan would be 10% budget cut across the board (no sacred cows, everything gets cut!) and then hold that budget until we have a deficit of 0. then raise the budget as the economy allows but still allow about 5% per year of debt pay down. it seems if we did that, we would remain the strongest economy in the world after we had taken our "medicine" so to speak.
it is sort of looking like a possibility! I am hoping that Romney pulls it off. I am always amused at people who call themselves "moderate" and then pass over a very moderate McCain and a very moderate Romney. Heck, as a conservative libertarian who nonetheless votes Republican, I would want guys considerably more conservative (particularly fiscally), but what we have are very moderate candidates the past 2 elections on the Republican side.
Personally I thought McCain was a crappy candidate. I think Romney is very good. We will see. I know all the women that I work with are voting for Obama. I don't talk politics at work, but they all told me that abortion was the main reason they vote straight Dem.
that sword cuts both ways. i know plenty of women who vote pro-life and won't even consider the Democrat ticket because of their pro-abortion (yes pro-abortion) stance.
