Start with 25% in the next four years and keep cutting 25% until we get down to less than the next 13 nations combined.

Pentagon gets could be better spent on schools and medical centers.

I think world peace stands a better chance with that kind of investment.

Voted big decrease in military spending in the poll in hopes of a world more willing to invest in the things that bring peace.

Realistically, most great empires fall when they get soft on military. We spend a shit ton now, but we're also developing water bullets and space defenses.

I look at the military as a jobs and science creator. It helps drive private technology and we need a trained military in case anything happens.

We don't need another World War, and we sure as fuck don't want to be under prepared. The world lost millions of people when we didn't have a "world police".

Just my personal opinion.

Doesn't that idea sort of contradict with trying to be a democracy?

Democracy is a political ideology.

A great "empire" is a descriptor.

You could try to attack my word use of "empire", but I think that would be a deflection of my post, for which you can substitute the word "nation" for "empire" to help you get back on track.

We outspend the next largest country (China) 3 to 1 on military. We outspend the next top 10 or so countries combined, and most of those countries are our allies. And that's just counting money going to the pentagon. That doesn't account for black box spending or off the books war spending. How much is enough to protect ourselves and our interests? Do we really need a trillion dollar a year military budget to fight terrorists?


The only countries who's military could be considered a remote threat to us are China and Russia's. Not only do we have a substantially larger military budget than the two combined, we have lots of allies who combined spend nearly as much as they do. Iran has no means to threaten us. North Korea has no means to threaten us. ISIS has no means to threaten us. Short of a terrorist sneak attack they can't do anything to us. So where is this massive threat that deserves a trillion dollars a year in spending? Are we expecting an alien invasion or something? It's not like we can't ramp up our spending if a major war break out, which has happened in all the past large wars.


Yes military spending is a boon to jobs. But all the military spending does is create destruction. It creates very little that's actually constructive. 200 Billion dollars in military spending creates a lot of jobs making bombs and things to deliver the bombs. 200 Billion dollars in infrastructure also creates a lot of jobs. But unlike the military, it creates up to date bridges, dams, and locks. Spending in infrastructure creates an alternative energy economy to combat global warming. Spending in infrastructure can create a modern fiber network to every home and business in the country. Spending in infrastructure instead of military creates both jobs and a better life for everyone.


Yes military spending drives scientific research. But so does spending in NASA. So does spending in medical research. So does spending in general scientific research. All of these things advance science and create jobs. But unlike military spending, these scientific breakthroughs aren't designed for military (ie destructive) use first.


We need a military. No one is saying otherwise. We have to spend money to maintain that military and make sure we are protected. We have to spend money to make sure our allies are protected and to protect our interests abroad. But there comes a point beyond which every dollar spent on the military is simply stealing from making our lives better.

Waste, fraud, and abuse, as they say.

It starts with a proper audit so that's what we ought to be pushing for as a first step.

And here's the guy trying to make it happen:

contract terms that allow huge overruns.

To fix bridges, cover some health care and pay for college for a shitload of people

The budget for "war" per se is the Overseas Contingency Operations Fund, which is budgeted and accounted separately from normal defense spending.

The OCO authorization is about $55 billion as compared to an overall defense budget of $550 Bn; so roughly 10% of our defense spending is for "the wars" (though OCO also gets slushed around to fund some normal operational expenses, which I'm against).

In terms of our overall defense budget, I'd like to cut it by maybe 10% or so, so that basically defense + OCO = defense currently. I'm not sure whether you would consider that "moderate" or "slight" but I can tell you the US electorate would call it "extreme".

This would fully fund the VA, at long last, and shrink the remaining defense budget accordingly. But even if it might be a good idea, good luck passing it.