I saw President Trump has proposed a military spending increase. He is proposing removing around $50 billion in foriegn aid and using on the military in three strategic points: Naval Ship Building Air Power (Jets and Drones) More forward projection of power So the US spends around 3.5 of GDP on its military. While high as a percentage of GDP, it is not highest in the world (Russia, Israel, and Saudi Arabia spend much more of GDP). In real dollars, however, the US spends FAR more than anyone. Some things my officer friends in the military say: The rank and file get shafted. Whenever we project force into an area, our forces face shortages of key resources such as armor plating for vehicles, body armor, etc. The military has been cutting "people" overhead. Thinning the officer ranks, offering early retirement packages, etc. The biggest expenditures are on new, advanced weapon systems that are "sexy" and create jobs. Rather than spend lots of money on the latest and greatest "on the ground" MRE kits, weight shifting backpacks, communications equipment, computerized "friendly tracking" in personal HUDs, simple but strong plate armor the government wants to give Lockheed Martin billions because we get fancy jets and we get to employ people. We need to spend billions to upgrade our nuclear arsenal...security measures, maintenance, etc. It is politically incorrect to recommend spending billions to maintain nukes, but it really needs it. Kind of like spending $10 million to run maintenance on a bridge is boring vs. building a new park in a city. We overspend on NATO because our allies under-spend. They are supposed to spend 2% GDP on military, but few do because why spend money when you can piggy back of US spending. Everybody points to Canada not spending as much on the military, but they know they don't have to because they are covered by the US. I'm not sure increasing or decreasing spending is the right answer. I think spending "Shifts" which are often harder, are the right answer. Make sure each soldier on the ground has the bet kit in the world. Make sure our technology stays ahead of everybody. Make sure to invest in things that are more likely to be needed in future warfare. Invest in maintenance. Get our allies to spend what they should so we don't have to.
The US needs across the boards spending cuts, including military, until they can get the debt paid down a bit. Free spending Republicans will shift spending from one area to another which accomplishes nothing while free spending Democrats will just add new spending to bulk back up the areas that Republicans "cut" without cutting spending anywhere. That's how you get in the mess the country is in now. At some point adults need to take control of the checkbook and ground both the Republicans and Democrats until they learn their lesson....but of course that probably won't happen because people love "free stuff" and that's what you get when you have out of control spenders in power.
Nothing like the hypocrisy of so called "Fiscal Conservatives" continued support of insane military spending. How long did Republicans b**** non-stop about Obama and the deficit. Is this supposed to help the deficit? Not a knock on military spending (if we send them to war, need to give them the supplies), but just want to point to the hypocrisy of the Republican party hiding behind "fiscal conservatism". However I agree with the OP about spending "shifts", and prioritizing on technology for future warfare & staying ahead on technology. Especially on cyber warfare where we are most susceptible. The amount that goes to Lockheed and Boeing is staggering & as the OP mentions its almost more focused on the private sector and jobs as it is practical government spending. Naval spending is interesting. The South China Sea situation could turn into a bigger deal than most think. With this amount of spending, you'd think we were preparing to go to war or something...
Spend enough to ensure that the American soldier is and will continue to be the best trained and best equipped warrior on the planet.
Republicans are political masters at de-funding Democratic programs to death and then when they are running for office can say "See... I told you the Democrat programs aren't working". While Democrats focus their energy on more social government spending that they know the Republicans will de-fund, and think the American people are smart enough to blame the Republicans.... which they aren't. It just turns off more independent voters who don't care the details of politics. Its all a big childish game both sides play, and now that the general American public caught on they thought it would be "cute" to vote in a so-called "outsider" who just so happens to be a NON LIQUID millionaire/kinda-billionaire who will probably screw middle America over as bad as we've seen. There is blame to go around on all sides. Especially the American people for not being informed enough to hold our government accountable. There are also smart powers in the private business sector even who could have funded support for better candidates from the private sector. They have blame too. This spending spree here is just comical though... yes of all the problems we have, more big Navy ships please.
I don't understand this strange obsession of having at least the same # of war ships, military aircraft etc as sometime in the 50s. Modern destroyers, frigates, cruisers, submarines, fighter jets, bombers etc are all vastly more capable & also vastly more expensive & complicated than their 50s & 60s counterparts.
I think the US defense strategy isn't so much as "we need to match up with Russia", its more we need to match up with Russia AND China, and carry our allies with us...so we have to maintain a force that overwhelmed "everybody combined" not a single state. I think that is why we keep a backbone of large numbers of forces. That being said, most modern warfare will be smaller, and often stateless organizations such as ISIS. Modern, fancy jets are helpful, but a well trained and well equipped force of Marines that can move fast and move independently is vastly more valuable in most of the future engagements. I also agree with the above: cyber warfare is going to be critical, and digital security should be a MAJOR investment going forward. It is expensive to do correctly, and a large part of the expenditure is training people that work in sensitive areas on how to protect data.
I just don't see the need for such an increase in spending. Maddis is a fan of getting rid of waste just like Trump is, rhetorically. They are trying to put pressure on NATO nations to increase their own spending. This could be a way for Trump to cite increase in manufacturing jobs or some bullshit like that.
The biggest threat to security is our own damn economy tanking. Trump pretended he was good at business: I wish he would pay attention to the U.S. economy. Orange Clown is a bigger disaster everyday.
Foreign aid go to $0? Actually, probably negative considering 2017 foreign aid total less than $43B. I believe this would also need 60 votes to move funding from one area to another - thanks Obama and the last Congress for that.
I guess we'll see more news like this in the future. " Pentagon Tells Congress to Stop Buying Equipment it Doesn't Need" http://www.military.com/daily-news/...-to-stop-buying-equipment-it-doesnt-need.html
Military spending? WTF? WHY?? Seriously Trump is going to bankrupt this country - we already spend FAR too much on the military, you could cut it by 70% and still spend more than the next biggest. We need to drastically cut back....we have 19 aircraft carriers - Russia has 1.....this is ridiculous. DD
Technically, defense is at a 10 or 11% deficit(correct me if I'm wrong)of its Iraq/Afghanistan high water mark so he can argue he's "restoring"....which is of course nonsense. Another head scratcher from a brain-dead aministrstion.
Modern wars are fought in economics, cyber warfare, human resources, progressive technology, and culture. This administration and its constituents have mental capacities stuck in the stone age.
This is also a three-fold political strategy as well. A. Lets face it... Military folks like to be funded at their jobs. This is why a majority of them were on the Trump train. B. White Republicans outside of Urban areas love to tout themselves as "Patriots" every chance they can. They love their guns, Bibles, & their Flags. This base will LOVE this & will love a good war. C. If/When a Democrat comes into office & HAS TO cut military spending, its a play for Republicans in the future to say "Look... he cut military spending and made us less safe". The Republicans and their use of our Military is about nothing but Politics. Except with Trump I also think its about his macho-ism. Always needing to show everyone that he's the biggest bad-ass on the planet. Trump & the Republicans are going to end ALOT of lives in the name of politics & Macho-Ism in the next 4 years. I hope I'm wrong, but all signs sure as hell pointing that way.
“The president will propose and the Congress will dispose.” “We’ll look at his budget, but at the end of the day we in Congress write the appropriations bills, and I am not one who thinks you can pay for an increase in (military) spending on the backs of domestic discretionary programs, which constitute 13 or 14 percent of all federal spending.” Kudos to Charlie Dent, House member representing PA.
WH and Trump: Yesterday, promised a dollar-for-dollar cuts to offset the increased military spending. Today, a stronger economy and a surge in tax collections will pay for it (wishful thinking of course). Can't get basic right over the course of 2 days.
Trump spent the last two months saying weapons programs like the F-35 or Air Force 1 were too expensive and pretending to negotiate savings. Now he wants to give the military more money to funnel to defense contractors. This is why he was a sh-tty businessman too.
