• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What would you do with our defense spending?

What would you do with our defense spending?


  • Total voters
    57
Cutting it in half sounds great...to be sure. And the 20-30 million military, civilian, contractor, support, and other personnel...well...its not like unemployment would be a problem. To say nothing of the devastation to local economies across the country.

'cutting' isnt a simple proposition. It can be done...but not without some real thought.

There will always be people employed supporting any subsidized industry. But if you take away the subsidy then they will find better jobs due to the growth in the economy from less tax and the fact that what they are then doing is actually wealth creating. It would take a little time but that's got to happen some time.

When you are spending more on war than the rest of the world combined you have a problem. When you have the best tec and a vast quality advantage over your foes as well you have a fixation. When there is no real threat to the political situation and your vast armed forces are chasing shadows they them selves probably created you have lost all sanity and there is a con going on.
 
At this point it appears the Ukraine is falling to harsh words and rudeness from the ruskies. Certainly not yet. I would think the US should get involved about the same time our European allies do.
Where would you suggest Putin be stopped, or should he be allowed to do as he wishes?
 
There will always be people employed supporting any subsidized industry. But if you take away the subsidy then they will find better jobs due to the growth in the economy from less tax and the fact that what they are then doing is actually wealth creating. It would take a little time but that's got to happen some time.

When you are spending more on war than the rest of the world combined you have a problem. When you have the best tec and a vast quality advantage over your foes as well you have a fixation. When there is no real threat to the political situation and your vast armed forces are chasing shadows they them selves probably created you have lost all sanity and there is a con going on.
Many would say ensuring peace against would be tyrants by never firing a shot is well worth the cost. History has also shown it is more risky and even expensive to stand up to meet challenges than it is to maintain preparedness. WHt is undeniable is that while we know the cost of maintaining peace, we can only speculate as to the world picture had the US not done so since WW2.

Which isnt to say there shouldnt be cuts...just that you cant be an idiot about how you decide on and implement those cuts.
 
What would you do with our defense spending? Would you downsize it? Increase it? Leave it the same? Please explain each of your choices.

I would decrease it and give the money to 1) Low income kids who need money for college. That way they wouldn't have to take out loans. 2) Low income older folks who need help paying for living expenses, medical expenses and medicine.
 
What would you do with our defense spending? Would you downsize it? Increase it? Leave it the same? Please explain each of your choices.

I would decrease it. Our time to rule the world is over. We need to slowly and methodically hand over the reigns to China. It's their turn. This is a good thing. This will allow us the luxury to start solving some of our domestic issues without being saddled down with the burdnesome expense of policing the world.

We're not even good at it any more. Examples: Vietnam, Somolia, Iraq and Afghanistan.
 
Cut 90%.

Pay off Debt

Create USA jobs,

Jail all wall Street criminals............and thats about 500,000 convictions.............
 
I would leave it the same.

Then I would start a massive downsizing of the civilian sector of the DoD, and increase the number of people in uniform. Probably 2/3 of the civilians and contractors are not needed, so cut them away and let them find jobs in the civilian sector. Keep the needed ones in skilled areas, and get rid of the deadwood.
 
Cut 90%.

Pay off Debt

Create USA jobs,

Uh, create jobs by laying off over 3 million people?

Pay off the debt, where even with 100% of the DoD budget it would take over 30 years to pay off what we have now?

Think much, you do not.
 
Uh, create jobs by laying off over 3 million people?

Pay off the debt, where even with 100% of the DoD budget it would take over 30 years to pay off what we have now?

Think much, you do not.

Create jobs doing something useful is much better than making over priced war junk.
Building bridges, factories, roads, hospitals is needed in USA, not IRAQ..............(thank our moron in chief BUSH2)

No it would pay off the debt in say 10 years............... including ALL defence spending.

Facts much, you do not.
 
No it would pay off the debt in say 10 years............... including ALL defence spending.

Facts much, you do not.

Defense Budget: $683 billion

US Debt: $17.5 trillion

After 10 years, that would still have paid off only $6.8 trillion of the debt. Of course, you have also not found a solution for the over 3 million people out of work, which would cost even more.

As I said, think much, you do not. Facts, less you have of.
 
I would increase military spending, but only in areas where it is needed: soldier pay and benefits, and technological advancements. I am a Democrat, but I believe, as I have stated in other threads, that we must maintain the most powerful military in the world so that we do not have to use it. Simply put, if we are strong enough, no one will challenge us.

Now, that being said, I also feel that we should not use that might in order to just gain access to oil reserves and the like, but rather to defend our values of freedom and human rights around the world.

We could make significant cuts to our military spending and still easily remain the most powerful and advanced military force on the planet. I agree with peace through strength, but like anything it is subject to diminishing returns, the point of which we are well past.
 
Defense Budget: $683 billion

US Debt: $17.5 trillion

After 10 years, that would still have paid off only $6.8 trillion of the debt. Of course, you have also not found a solution for the over 3 million people out of work, which would cost even more.

As I said, think much, you do not. Facts, less you have of.

Defence is much higher than that. it is just hidden in other budgets. Like the seperate war budgets, and the VA budget.

And maybe some taxes on the rich are needed just like in WW2. Say 94% taxes like in 1944, except on all income, earned and unearned................
 
First thing I'd do is make sure $7,600 is not being spent on coffee makers, or $604 for toilet seats, or other outrageous prices for easy to obtain commodities.

This doesn't happen. The military will book an expense like a $500 hammer, pay a wholesale price that Home Depot does and use the balance of the appropriation to pay for off the record operations. It's been like this for a long, long time. Black ops don't get funded via Congress traditionally. They get funded by overbooking expenses on paper but paying the normal rates and banking the balance for no/low oversight operations.

Third would be eliminating redundancy amongst the services while integrating them to maximize cooperation and cost effectiveness. For instance, I don't believe that the U.S. military needs two versions of the infantry - one Army, one Marine Corps. - when one of them can get the job done by itself and historically with less money and the "new toys fresh out of the box."

So basically merge the two. The army right now isn't that well equipped for the primary reason the marines exist. So you'd have to spend sizable amounts of money merging the two.
 
We could make significant cuts to our military spending and still easily remain the most powerful and advanced military force on the planet. I agree with peace through strength, but like anything it is subject to diminishing returns, the point of which we are well past.

Considering how personnel costs are eating more and more of the budget, that won't remain for long. Gates was right in his statement that healthcare costs are eating the Pentagon alive. Soon we won't be able to afford new weapon systems. Obama however, took huge amounts of flak over attempting to make Socialist TRICARE less Socialist. We spend alot of money on our military, but vast sums of it go towards salaries, healthcare and retirement.
 
This doesn't happen. The military will book an expense like a $500 hammer, pay a wholesale price that Home Depot does and use the balance of the appropriation to pay for off the record operations. It's been like this for a long, long time. Black ops don't get funded via Congress traditionally. They get funded by overbooking expenses on paper but paying the normal rates and banking the balance for no/low oversight operations.

Actually, they do and did which is why there was an expose back in the '80's about it and subsequent stories years afterward.

The black budget is in the defense budget. The expenses are not out in the open, but are in other line items and the classified programs line item.
 
What would you do with our defense spending? Would you downsize it? Increase it? Leave it the same? Please explain each of your choices.

I wouldn't want to cut any defense spending that would reduce any of our war fighting capabilities, however if things must be cut, there are a few things that could save money and have the least amount of pain for military members. For example the idea of closing stateside commissaries on bases that have large grocery stores nearby them could save 1 Billion dollars a year according to some reports. And another unpopular example, cut back a little on the Post 9/11 GI Bill, it is incredibly generous right now and pays for almost everything so perhaps just cutting the housing allowance part of it could save millions. By the way, I benefit from both the Post 9/11 GI Bill and the commissaries, but I just see the reality of the federal budget and if they have to cut, then I would rather they not cut any war fighting capabilities.
 
Would help if we didn't have a Congress who was constantly tying the shoelaces of his shoes together.

Lots of people don't understand how an obstructionist Congress can tie the hands of a President in foreign policy.

True. But that is no excuse for the man in the top job.
 
Defence is much higher than that. it is just hidden in other budgets. Like the seperate war budgets, and the VA budget.

And maybe some taxes on the rich are needed just like in WW2. Say 94% taxes like in 1944, except on all income, earned and unearned................

Oh don't give me that crap... "Oh, it is much higher then that, it is just hidden". This is for serious discussions on the military, not conspiracy theory crap. But the VA budget is not the military budget. Hell, people who had been in the military also collect Social Security, so why not throw that into this "super-secret military budget" as well?

And hey, that other ideal is good too. And if they don't like it, we can treat the rich like the enemies... you know, put them in camps like we did the Japanese, Italians and Germans! After all, everybody knows that they are the real enemy, right?
 
Build reusable spacecraft to shuttle astronauts and supplies.
 
I wouldn't want to cut any defense spending that would reduce any of our war fighting capabilities, however if things must be cut, there are a few things that could save money and have the least amount of pain for military members. For example the idea of closing stateside commissaries on bases that have large grocery stores nearby them could save 1 Billion dollars a year according to some reports. And another unpopular example, cut back a little on the Post 9/11 GI Bill, it is incredibly generous right now and pays for almost everything so perhaps just cutting the housing allowance part of it could save millions. By the way, I benefit from both the Post 9/11 GI Bill and the commissaries, but I just see the reality of the federal budget and if they have to cut, then I would rather they not cut any war fighting capabilities.

In other words, you are going to cut the budget by sticking it to the Veterans?

Excuse me, are you freaking nuts?

Especially the GI Bill cut... myself for almost a year and a huge number of others rely upon that stipend to even be able to go to school at all. As for me, if I was not married I could not have gone, because the "housing stipend" literally only paid for my monthly rent (Rent was $950, stipend was $1,100).

But hey, I guess we could just strip that all away, and go back to the old GI Bill, the one we had when I first joined.

VEAP.
 
In other words, you are going to cut the budget by sticking it to the Veterans?

Excuse me, are you freaking nuts?

Especially the GI Bill cut... myself for almost a year and a huge number of others rely upon that stipend to even be able to go to school at all. As for me, if I was not married I could not have gone, because the "housing stipend" literally only paid for my monthly rent (Rent was $950, stipend was $1,100).

But hey, I guess we could just strip that all away, and go back to the old GI Bill, the one we had when I first joined.

VEAP.

VEAP sucked. I had that when I first got in but converted to the Montgomery GI Bill (for a fee), then I moved to the Post 9/11 GI Bill after that. I am simply suggesting that if cuts absolutely positively have to happen, then find some places in the military budget that doesn't directly effect war fighting capabilities. And I am not suggesting GI Bills go away, just trim it down a little for budgetary reasons. Like I said, cut stuff the hurts the least. Nobody seems to want to cut anything.
 
Especially the GI Bill cut... myself for almost a year and a huge number of others rely upon that stipend to even be able to go to school at all. As for me, if I was not married I could not have gone, because the "housing stipend" literally only paid for my monthly rent (Rent was $950, stipend was $1,100).

I would guess many people would still go to school if they were going to have 4 academic years of 100% tuition and 100% school fees paid for and most likely all of their books. A part-time job would make up for the E-5 housing allowance. And/or a small loan.
 
Oh don't give me that crap... "Oh, it is much higher then that, it is just hidden". This is for serious discussions on the military, not conspiracy theory crap. But the VA budget is not the military budget. Hell, people who had been in the military also collect Social Security, so why not throw that into this "super-secret military budget" as well?

And hey, that other ideal is good too. And if they don't like it, we can treat the rich like the enemies... you know, put them in camps like we did the Japanese, Italians and Germans! After all, everybody knows that they are the real enemy, right?

Yes the VA is part of the war budget.

See if you have no war, then you create no wounded vets, and so the VA budget does not explode, and in fact should go away.

Imagine if Iraq had no happened at all? And Afganistan was a 2 month operaion like i should have been.............

no 10,000 deaths
No "“All that can be said with any certainty is that as of last December more than 900,000 service men and women had been treated at Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals and clinics since returning from war zones in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that the monthly rate of new patients to these facilities as of the end of 2012 was around 10,000" Forbes

Yup, its all just nut job stuff, no war no wased money and lives................
 
Decrease it by at least half. Even with half of the resources we would still have the wherewithal to put together a massice military force in time of need.

I agree.

I would;

- cut military budget by at least 1/2
- close every foreign military base
- bring every soldier home...immediately
- mothball 1/2 the fleet
- adopt a very small full time/massive reservist armed forces
 
Back
Top Bottom