Should the US decrease military spending?

U.S. military spending has soared over the past decade, and they now spend $700+ billion a year on their military. This dwarfs the military spending of any other country on the planet.

SIPRI, Wikipedia

The No. 2 military spender in the world, China, spends about $140 billion a year on its military, less than a quarter as much. Their military spending is so huge, in fact, that it accounts for a staggering 41% of all the military spending in the world. 

So it isn't unreasonable to suggest that the US could cut their military spending while still easily being the best military in the world.

So, what does ot think? Should the US decrease military spending, or should it stay the same? Or should the us increase military spending? (although I doubt a lot of people would support the latter)

No

No

Squeets

nah, we need to double it. safety man! comp_atkins

Yes.

Cut number of active personel & bases(likely in half), but maintain number of equipment.

So if in the event of war we could rearm in a 6 month time frame.

We don't need to be ready to invade any nation in the world at the drop of the hat all the time, it's overly costly with no benefit.

Yes we should.  It's not sustainable.

No. If America decrease the military spending that means the terrorists have won. If anything they need to increase it even more.

No. If America decrease the military spending that means the terrorists have won. If anything they need to increase it even more.

Aljosa23

No.  When all our would-be enemies are dead and only then should we cut back.  And leave mosts all of Africa a barren dead desert....then we maybe cut-back.

I dunno. those terrorists are doing a pretty good job blowing themselves up.

Then again, Osama Bin Ladens corpse could get reanimated by demonic sharks. Better safe than sorry.

[QUOTE="Squeets"]

No

deeliman

We created a globalized world in the aftermath of WW2 with us at the center.  Our economy shapes the world economy, likewise the world economy shapes our economy.  We can not isolate ourselves ever again, nor should we.  Given our central position and the fact that we put ourselves here 70 years ago, we have a responsibility to maintain the order we created.

People say we shouldn't involve ourselves in various world affairs, but that is just stupid... EVERYTHING that happens in the world affects our economy.

Just look at places like Syria.  What could happen if we didn't involve ourselves?  A civil war that goes on for years and ends with a failed state?  What does a failed state mean for the region?  More unsanctioned attacks from non-state entities against Israel which means more support from us which means more detriment to our relations with Arab states?  Instability in border regions which leads to instability in general?  Instability which leads to increased oil prices?  A haven for terrorist activities given there is no centralized government with the power to prevent it?  All of that from a civil war that people just pass off and piss and moan about us involving ourselves in.  And any situation can devlove like that and even the most minor of things influence our economy.

Thus we have to protect the world economy and our own economy by involving ourselves.

[QUOTE="deeliman"][QUOTE="Squeets"]

No

Squeets

We created a globalized world in the aftermath of WW2 with us at the center.  Our economy shapes the world economy, likewise the world economy shapes our economy.  We can not isolate ourselves ever again, nor should we.  Given our central position and the fact that we put ourselves here 70 years ago, we have a responsibility to maintain the order we created.

People say we shouldn't involve ourselves in various world affairs, but that is just stupid... EVERYTHING that happens in the world affects our economy.

Just look at places like Syria.  What could happen if we didn't involve ourselves?  A civil war that goes on for years and ends with a failed state?  What does a failed state mean for the region?  More unsanctioned attacks from non-state entities against Israel which means more support from us which means more detriment to our relations with Arab states?  Instability in border regions which leads to instability in general?  Instability which leads to increased oil prices?  A haven for terrorist activities given there is no centralized government with the power to prevent it?  All of that from a civil war that people just pass off and piss and moan about us involving ourselves in.  And any situation can devlove like that and even the most minor of things influence our economy.

Thus we have to protect the world economy and our own economy by involving ourselves.

[QUOTE="deeliman"][QUOTE="Squeets"]

No

Squeets

We created a globalized world in the aftermath of WW2 with us at the center.  Our economy shapes the world economy, likewise the world economy shapes our economy.  We can not isolate ourselves ever again, nor should we.  Given our central position and the fact that we put ourselves here 70 years ago, we have a responsibility to maintain the order we created.

People say we shouldn't involve ourselves in various world affairs, but that is just stupid... EVERYTHING that happens in the world affects our economy.

Just look at places like Syria.  What could happen if we didn't involve ourselves?  A civil war that goes on for years and ends with a failed state?  What does a failed state mean for the region?  More unsanctioned attacks from non-state entities against Israel which means more support from us which means more detriment to our relations with Arab states?  Instability in border regions which leads to instability in general?  Instability which leads to increased oil prices?  A haven for terrorist activities given there is no centralized government with the power to prevent it?  All of that from a civil war that people just pass off and piss and moan about us involving ourselves in.  And any situation can devlove like that and even the most minor of things influence our economy.

Thus we have to protect the world economy and our own economy by involving ourselves.

Yeah they are. In ten years they are going to cut the budget by 2.1 trillion. pff- :lol:

So it isn't unreasonable to suggest that the US could cut their military spending while still easily being the best military in the world.deeliman

If spending the most meant the best then America should be the smartest and healthiest too.

[QUOTE="Squeets"]

[QUOTE="deeliman"] Any reasoning behind this or just a +1 post?Person0

We created a globalized world in the aftermath of WW2 with us at the center.  Our economy shapes the world economy, likewise the world economy shapes our economy.  We can not isolate ourselves ever again, nor should we.  Given our central position and the fact that we put ourselves here 70 years ago, we have a responsibility to maintain the order we created.

People say we shouldn't involve ourselves in various world affairs, but that is just stupid... EVERYTHING that happens in the world affects our economy.

Just look at places like Syria.  What could happen if we didn't involve ourselves?  A civil war that goes on for years and ends with a failed state?  What does a failed state mean for the region?  More unsanctioned attacks from non-state entities against Israel which means more support from us which means more detriment to our relations with Arab states?  Instability in border regions which leads to instability in general?  Instability which leads to increased oil prices?  A haven for terrorist activities given there is no centralized government with the power to prevent it?  All of that from a civil war that people just pass off and piss and moan about us involving ourselves in.  And any situation can devlove like that and even the most minor of things influence our economy.

Thus we have to protect the world economy and our own economy by involving ourselves.

You do if you want to run the world as you see fit, which given our position is all we can do if we want to maintain our economy, the world economy, and stability.

I think they should raise even further their military spending.

Yeah they are. In ten years they are going to cut the budget by 2.1 trillion. pff- :lol:

LOXO7

2.1 trillion from what it could be in 10 years.  Our budget has been growing quite a bit.

The Federal Budget in 2013 was upwards of 3.5 trillion dollars... In 1999 the Federal Budget was 1.7 trillion dollars.  In just 14 years the budget more than doubled and expanded by 1.8 trillion dollars... 10 years from now will be the same as now only we will have a larger, older, fatter population and thus more things to spend money on.

They should also spend more on surveillance technology and military street patrol. In this century, you can never be too safe.

When you look at military spending you have to look at the whole picture, not just the final number. Yes, we spend more on military spending than China. But how much does China pay their troops? How much do they spend on their training? Comparing their budget to ours doesn't make a lot of sense when you look at the fact that we pay our privates several times what we pay their privates.

China isn't the only one that pays their troops dirt. South Korea pays their privates less than a hundred dollars a month while we pay our single ones around $1,600 a month. If they are married you can add between $1,000 and $2,000 to that depending on their duty station.

We could cut military pay, but then you have a bunch of disgruntled troops getting out in droves because they can make more in McDonald's. When we can't meet voluntary enlistment numbers Congress just reinstates the draft, meaning half of the people ere from the US who are going on and on about cutting the budget from the sidelines are suddenly looking at possibly being drafted.

While there are plenty of things we can do in an attempt to reduce the budget, flat out slashing it in half would not work right now. Also, while the defense budget is large, those troops put money in the local economies of the towns surrounding their bases. El Paso alone gets an estimated 5 billion a year from the troops in nearby Fort Bliss.

Yes we should.  It's not sustainable.

sonicare

When you look at military spending you have to look at the whole picture, not just the final number. Yes, we spend more on military spending than China. But how much does China pay their troops? How much do they spend on their training? Comparing their budget to ours doesn't make a lot of sense when you look at the fact that we pay our privates several times what we pay their privates.

China isn't the only one that pays their troops dirt. South Korea pays their privates less than a hundred dollars a month while we pay our single ones around $1,600 a month. If they are married you can add between $1,000 and $2,000 to that depending on their duty station.

We could cut military pay, but then you have a bunch of disgruntled troops getting out in droves because they can make more in McDonald's. When we can't meet voluntary enlistment numbers Congress just reinstates the draft, meaning half of the people ere from the US who are going on and on about cutting the budget from the sidelines are suddenly looking at possibly being drafted.

While there are plenty of things we can do in an attempt to reduce the budget, flat out slashing it in half would not work right now. Also, while the defense budget is large, those troops put money in the local economies of the towns surrounding their bases. El Paso alone gets an estimated 5 billion a year from the troops in nearby Fort Bliss.

ad1x2

Its insane.

U.S. military spending has soared over the past decade, and they now spend $700+ billion a year on their military. This dwarfs the military spending of any other country on the planet.

 

SIPRI, Wikipedia

 

The No. 2 military spender in the world, China, spends about $140 billion a year on its military, less than a quarter as much. Their military spending is so huge, in fact, that it accounts for a staggering 41% of all the military spending in the world. 

So it isn't unreasonable to suggest that the US could cut their military spending while still easily being the best military in the world.

So, what does ot think? Should the US decrease military spending, or should it stay the same? Or should the us increase military spending? (although I doubt a lot of people would support the latter)

deeliman

As a Dutch teen that does not work or pay US taxes, what impact does US military spending have on you? 

[QUOTE="ad1x2"]

When you look at military spending you have to look at the whole picture, not just the final number. Yes, we spend more on military spending than China. But how much does China pay their troops? How much do they spend on their training? Comparing their budget to ours doesn't make a lot of sense when you look at the fact that we pay our privates several times what we pay their privates.

China isn't the only one that pays their troops dirt. South Korea pays their privates less than a hundred dollars a month while we pay our single ones around $1,600 a month. If they are married you can add between $1,000 and $2,000 to that depending on their duty station.

We could cut military pay, but then you have a bunch of disgruntled troops getting out in droves because they can make more in McDonald's. When we can't meet voluntary enlistment numbers Congress just reinstates the draft, meaning half of the people ere from the US who are going on and on about cutting the budget from the sidelines are suddenly looking at possibly being drafted.

While there are plenty of things we can do in an attempt to reduce the budget, flat out slashing it in half would not work right now. Also, while the defense budget is large, those troops put money in the local economies of the towns surrounding their bases. El Paso alone gets an estimated 5 billion a year from the troops in nearby Fort Bliss.

Person0

Its insane.

[QUOTE="deeliman"]

U.S. military spending has soared over the past decade, and they now spend $700+ billion a year on their military. This dwarfs the military spending of any other country on the planet.

 

SIPRI, Wikipedia

 

The No. 2 military spender in the world, China, spends about $140 billion a year on its military, less than a quarter as much. Their military spending is so huge, in fact, that it accounts for a staggering 41% of all the military spending in the world. 

So it isn't unreasonable to suggest that the US could cut their military spending while still easily being the best military in the world.

So, what does ot think? Should the US decrease military spending, or should it stay the same? Or should the us increase military spending? (although I doubt a lot of people would support the latter)

WhiteKnight77

As a Dutch teen that does not work or pay US taxes, what impact does US military spending have on you? 

[QUOTE="deeliman"][QUOTE="Squeets"]

No

Squeets

We created a globalized world in the aftermath of WW2 with us at the center.  Our economy shapes the world economy, likewise the world economy shapes our economy.  We can not isolate ourselves ever again, nor should we.  Given our central position and the fact that we put ourselves here 70 years ago, we have a responsibility to maintain the order we created.

People say we shouldn't involve ourselves in various world affairs, but that is just stupid... EVERYTHING that happens in the world affects our economy.

Just look at places like Syria.  What could happen if we didn't involve ourselves?  A civil war that goes on for years and ends with a failed state?  What does a failed state mean for the region?  More unsanctioned attacks from non-state entities against Israel which means more support from us which means more detriment to our relations with Arab states?  Instability in border regions which leads to instability in general?  Instability which leads to increased oil prices?  A haven for terrorist activities given there is no centralized government with the power to prevent it?  All of that from a civil war that people just pass off and piss and moan about us involving ourselves in.  And any situation can devlove like that and even the most minor of things influence our economy.

Thus we have to protect the world economy and our own economy by involving ourselves.

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

As a Dutch teen that does not work or pay US taxes, what impact does US military spending have on you? 

GazaAli

Then is he lying in the Is American police too overmilitarized today? Thoughts anyone? where he states:

Well, it depends how you look at it. If you compare it for example to my country, The Netherlands, it is. A lot of policemen here don't even carry a gun lol.

deeliman

[QUOTE="ad1x2"]

When you look at military spending you have to look at the whole picture, not just the final number. Yes, we spend more on military spending than China. But how much does China pay their troops? How much do they spend on their training? Comparing their budget to ours doesn't make a lot of sense when you look at the fact that we pay our privates several times what we pay their privates.

China isn't the only one that pays their troops dirt. South Korea pays their privates less than a hundred dollars a month while we pay our single ones around $1,600 a month. If they are married you can add between $1,000 and $2,000 to that depending on their duty station.

We could cut military pay, but then you have a bunch of disgruntled troops getting out in droves because they can make more in McDonald's. When we can't meet voluntary enlistment numbers Congress just reinstates the draft, meaning half of the people ere from the US who are going on and on about cutting the budget from the sidelines are suddenly looking at possibly being drafted.

While there are plenty of things we can do in an attempt to reduce the budget, flat out slashing it in half would not work right now. Also, while the defense budget is large, those troops put money in the local economies of the towns surrounding their bases. El Paso alone gets an estimated 5 billion a year from the troops in nearby Fort Bliss.

Person0

Its insane.

Also, since those things are mostly American made we are paying the salaries of American workers who are making them. When looking at who is second place in military budgets, China can make some of the same things for much less since they are paying the salaries of Chinese workers. It costs more to make an M4 than to make a QBZ-95, for example.

I have no problem if a solid plan is put into place to reduce the budget without screwing over too many people. That is what a lot of people who talk about slashing the budget lack. They don't think about the aftermath, all they are thinking is if they cut X amount of money from the DOD the economy will magically be fixed in a few years.

[QUOTE="ad1x2"]

When you look at military spending you have to look at the whole picture, not just the final number. Yes, we spend more on military spending than China. But how much does China pay their troops? How much do they spend on their training? Comparing their budget to ours doesn't make a lot of sense when you look at the fact that we pay our privates several times what we pay their privates.

China isn't the only one that pays their troops dirt. South Korea pays their privates less than a hundred dollars a month while we pay our single ones around $1,600 a month. If they are married you can add between $1,000 and $2,000 to that depending on their duty station.

We could cut military pay, but then you have a bunch of disgruntled troops getting out in droves because they can make more in McDonald's. When we can't meet voluntary enlistment numbers Congress just reinstates the draft, meaning half of the people ere from the US who are going on and on about cutting the budget from the sidelines are suddenly looking at possibly being drafted.

While there are plenty of things we can do in an attempt to reduce the budget, flat out slashing it in half would not work right now. Also, while the defense budget is large, those troops put money in the local economies of the towns surrounding their bases. El Paso alone gets an estimated 5 billion a year from the troops in nearby Fort Bliss.

Person0

Its insane.

That picture is ages old. Newsflash, each new generation of hardware is always going to be more expensive than the last. The next fighters to be designed and built in the next 20 years will be even more expensive than the F-22. 

[QUOTE="Person0"]

[QUOTE="ad1x2"]

When you look at military spending you have to look at the whole picture, not just the final number. Yes, we spend more on military spending than China. But how much does China pay their troops? How much do they spend on their training? Comparing their budget to ours doesn't make a lot of sense when you look at the fact that we pay our privates several times what we pay their privates.

China isn't the only one that pays their troops dirt. South Korea pays their privates less than a hundred dollars a month while we pay our single ones around $1,600 a month. If they are married you can add between $1,000 and $2,000 to that depending on their duty station.

We could cut military pay, but then you have a bunch of disgruntled troops getting out in droves because they can make more in McDonald's. When we can't meet voluntary enlistment numbers Congress just reinstates the draft, meaning half of the people ere from the US who are going on and on about cutting the budget from the sidelines are suddenly looking at possibly being drafted.

While there are plenty of things we can do in an attempt to reduce the budget, flat out slashing it in half would not work right now. Also, while the defense budget is large, those troops put money in the local economies of the towns surrounding their bases. El Paso alone gets an estimated 5 billion a year from the troops in nearby Fort Bliss.

ad1x2

Its insane.

Also, since those things are mostly American made we are paying the salaries of American workers who are making them. When looking at who is second place in military budgets, China can make some of the same things for much less since they are paying the salaries of Chinese workers. It costs more to make an M4 than to make a QBZ-95, for example.

I have no problem if a solid plan is put into place to reduce the budget without screwing over too many people. That is what a lot of people who talk about slashing the budget lack. They don't think about the aftermath, all they are thinking is if they cut X amount of money from the DOD the economy will magically be fixed in a few years.

[QUOTE="Person0"]

[QUOTE="ad1x2"]

When you look at military spending you have to look at the whole picture, not just the final number. Yes, we spend more on military spending than China. But how much does China pay their troops? How much do they spend on their training? Comparing their budget to ours doesn't make a lot of sense when you look at the fact that we pay our privates several times what we pay their privates.

China isn't the only one that pays their troops dirt. South Korea pays their privates less than a hundred dollars a month while we pay our single ones around $1,600 a month. If they are married you can add between $1,000 and $2,000 to that depending on their duty station.

We could cut military pay, but then you have a bunch of disgruntled troops getting out in droves because they can make more in McDonald's. When we can't meet voluntary enlistment numbers Congress just reinstates the draft, meaning half of the people ere from the US who are going on and on about cutting the budget from the sidelines are suddenly looking at possibly being drafted.

While there are plenty of things we can do in an attempt to reduce the budget, flat out slashing it in half would not work right now. Also, while the defense budget is large, those troops put money in the local economies of the towns surrounding their bases. El Paso alone gets an estimated 5 billion a year from the troops in nearby Fort Bliss.

WhiteKnight77

Its insane.

That picture is ages old. Newsflash, each new generation of hardware is always going to be more expensive than the last. The next fighters to be designed and built in the next 20 years will be even more expensive than the F-22. 

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

[QUOTE="Person0"] Troop pay isn't the reason we spend so much. Things like the F-22 are and stuff like this

Its insane.

Person0

That picture is ages old. Newsflash, each new generation of hardware is always going to be more expensive than the last. The next fighters to be designed and built in the next 20 years will be even more expensive than the F-22. 

[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

That picture is ages old. Newsflash, each new generation of hardware is always going to be more expensive than the last. The next fighters to be designed and built in the next 20 years will be even more expensive than the F-22. 

wis3boi

Yes.

[QUOTE="wis3boi"][QUOTE="Person0"] The main idea has not drastically changed.... the US military is so much bigger and more advanced then any other military its not close.(not referring to personal) Yeah each new generation of fighter is more expensive, the jump in price compared to the previous gen is insane though. And its not necessary its just a waste of money.Person0

not 66 billion dollars worth

[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="wis3boi"] the only reason the f22 is a laughing stock failure and cost so much is because they rushed it out for testing way too early, pissed money away on the wrong places, and ended up with a failure of a jet that shouldnt have cost that much....or have been made to begin with. wis3boi

not 66 billion dollars worth

[QUOTE="wis3boi"][QUOTE="Person0"]The main idea has not drastically changed.... the US military is so much bigger and more advanced then any other military its not close.(not referring to personal) Yeah each new generation of fighter is more expensive, the jump in price compared to the previous gen is insane though. And its not necessary its just a waste of money.Person0

Sounds like video games. Fact, all military hardware has some bugs that have to be worked out. 

[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="wis3boi"] the only reason the f22 is a laughing stock failure and cost so much is because they rushed it out for testing way too early, pissed money away on the wrong places, and ended up with a failure of a jet that shouldnt have cost that much....or have been made to begin with. WhiteKnight77

Sounds like video games. Fact, all military hardware has some bugs that have to be worked out. 

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

[QUOTE="Person0"] The problem is this kind of shit happens all the time with the military...and then we just throw more money at them.Person0

Sounds like video games. Fact, all military hardware has some bugs that have to be worked out.