How about cutting military spending in half ?

Question

It would save about 250 Billion. With said Billions one could easily fund medicare for the whole nation AND have enough left over to
a) start paying off the national debt
b) give aid to third world countries. Not in the form of direct money, but in the form of helping them to become self-sufficient.

The U.S. military still would be the mightiest on earth and perhaps would have less reason to flex its muscle constantly (if you spend 500 Billion on the military you better use it, otherwise how the hell do you justify it ?)

I asked the question in three categories (Military, Economics and Religion) to see whether, and if so by how much, the answers are different.

If you calculate the Military Budget, interest on past military spending (debt service), extra money spend on the Iraq and Afghanistan war and Veterans benefits, military spending comes to almost 1/2 of the total budget. The 'official" budget forgets to include the last the expenditures in the official chart...

Answer 1

I think we could definitely stand to cut some fat off the defense budget, even in time of war, but I would think 50% is too much.

But, that's just my opinion. We could get by with 50% funding, but you would probably have the following effects:

-It would be much harder to sustain multiple operations in different parts of the world, because that is expensive. Of course, you might favor this outcome.

- The numerical size of our forces would be greatly reduced, again limiting the number of commitments we could maintain overseas. We'd probably have to pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan. (Again, something you might like, but it would also mean less peacekeeping missions)

-The posture of our defense would change from offensive to defensive.

-Perhaps most importantly, we would lose our greatest military advantages, technological superiority and innovation. In terms of size and standard equipment, we would still be superior to most nations, but that edge would shrink pretty rapidly over time. Our control of the skies would be up for grabs.

All told, this would mean that in future conflicts, we'd have substantially more casualties. The era of the push-button, 100 casualty war would be over. You can only enjoy that kind of success with unprecedented aerial, communication, and weapons superiority. With only half the spending we have now, we probably wouldn't have any of those things.

That sounds good if you want to make future conflicts less appealing to politicians, but you have to realize that some conflicts can not be avoided.

If these costs are still worth it to you for the benefits you described, then I guess you idea could work. Personally, I don't think they are, and I don't think most Americans would agree either.

Answer 2

I think a better plan would be to see that the money given to the defense budget is used wisely. The majority of that money is supposed to go to rebuilding Iraq and Afghanistan. There needs to be a tighter oversite committee on defense spending. Some of that money is also supposed to be used to arm and train Iraqi and Afghani forces, so we can eventually leave those countries. The problem is most of the money has been terribly mismanaged. Until Congress gets control of the situation, future budgets will have to be as high or higher to make up for poor management.

As far as what to do with the money if we did decide to let Iraq and Afghanistan wallow in the rubble we have created, I don't think putting it into any form of universal health care is the right thing to do. It would be better spent on educating the citizens of this country. We are consistently at or near the bottom of the list when it comes to education in industrial nations. If we keep sending uneducated Americans into the global market, we will start to see a decline in our economic might in the world. In return for educating our citizens, they will be better prepared to be self sufficient from government aid, and thus tax payer money can be used less on welfare and more for moving this country forward into the global market.

As far as helping third world countries to become self sufficient, no other industrialized nation comes close to the amount of aid we give. We currently spend billions in aid all over the world.

Answer 3

How about NOT cutting military spending in half?? You're another liberal moron. Why should the government fund medicare for the whole nation? The government should be eliminating as many citizens from the medicare and welfare rolls as possible. We already give aid to third world countries, and most of them hate the U.S. for it... and most are run by corrupt regimes.

By what means could the U.S. help these countries become self sufficient? Building a poor country's infrastructure takes time and money. It takes educating the people, and when the U.S. attempts these things.. it is accused of interfering in the internal affairs of that country.

I would rather the U.S. be the mightiest nation on earth with $500 billion in the kitty than half that amount. And, finally, the U.S. only flexes its might when it's absolutely necessary, and remaining strong in the defense of freedom, needs no justification.

Answer 4

There are many other ways that the government could cut spending and save even more money. Why not just make people work for their welfare and put prisoners to work? Even if they are doing mundane farm work that no one wants to do it would at least be productive. And it would take jobs from illegal immigrants thus lessening the emmigration problems. It would also lessen the number of people on welfare, thus saving billions of dollars every year. Or why not hold every branch of government responsible for their spending habbits? There are so many little ways to cut down on the waste that would save us billions of dollars every year.

Yes, cutting the military budget would give us some money to use to pay off the national debt, but would it be used for that? We need to treat the causes of government debt (wate, greed, etc.) not just go for the symptoms.

Answer 5

No, w/o the US Army(Whether people in other countrys will admit it or not), Most of the worlds countries wouldnt be here...With the help and support that USA has given a number of countries, both in finance and military..Like w/o the USA Hitler would probably own most of Europe, America has been a part of most big wars in the past few decades and w/o our help, the World wouldnt be what it is today

Answer 6

the military spends every penny they get, granted its not always the best spending but they do spend it. if we cut military budgets, then u ask to shrink the military in a time of open war where every enemy we have is comming out of the wood work? well all that extra money you save by cutting the military doesn't do squat when all of your infrastructure and daily lives come crashing down when ole muhammed starts setting off his bombs in your back yard

Answer 7

No way, cut off foreign aid and eliminate all enemies first. A strong America is a Free America.

As for flexing its muscles, this world has a few jacka$$es who create the need for that flexing.
And it is our politicians who order that flexing when needed. It should have been harshly flexed in the Mid-east in 1983, then the Islamo-facists would not be making trouble today.

Answer 8

Oh yeah, cutting the budget, well, now all the soldiers that we have would get discharged, and now they are unemployed and homeless. And now the defence contractors will have to lay off people, (more unemployed), which will cause our economy to go down the tubes even more, with all the thousands and thousands on unemployment and welfare. No, that would only create more problems, not to mention that Mexico would be able to overpower our armed forces.......

Answer 9

how about eliminating programs that the government is not authorized under the Constitution first, like most of the executive departments cancel welfare, medicare, and social security and we will have plenty of money to pay off the debt and then lower taxes.

Answer 10

Yeah that's always a good idea to cut military spending in the middle of a war. Do you know how many of our troops have died in this war because they didn't have the right equipment for them? We weren't prepared because we closed down bases and cut spending in the 90's