they should all kill each other,,,

wheelrite wrote:

I know...right. Its working so far andwe want to meddle.

HockeyDad wrote:

Well if you want to let Pesky things like facts get in the way, actually we spend about four times as much on Defense as the next highest spender, the Chinese. Not ten times.

Though we do have almost 40% of all the defense spending in the world, the Army recently announced it is going to cut its budget 25%. Looking at spending graphs of defense budgets in the last century, we're actually following a wholy consistent and predictable pattern of build up and draw down reflected in every period of conflict and post conflict since world war 2

Mathen wrote:

Well if you want to let Pesky things like facts get in the way, actually we spend about four times as much on Defense as the next highest spender, the Chinese. Not ten times.

Though we do have almost 40% of all the defense spending in the world, the Army recently announced it is going to cut its budget 25%. Looking at spending graphs of defense budgets in the last century, we're actually following a wholy consistent and predictable pattern of build up and draw down reflected in every period of conflict and post conflict since world war 2

Mathen wrote:

I am not the brightest bulb here, but exactly who is China worried about?

frankj1 wrote:

The "so" is that I get sick of wildly exaggerated claims about the defense budget.

Our defense spending is 4.4% of GDP which is exactly on par with Russia (third largest spender). Combine the defense budgets of Russia and China--two sovereign states that are soft belligerents-- and we're outpacing them in spending by a bit more than double.

There are a lot of things that contribute to our massive spending. Some of which are all the scary industrial military complex perpetual war machine stuff that the tin foil hat club likes to point at. It's there, I'm not going to pretend its not. But there are a lot of things that people don't consider. To whit: our professional and *all volunteer* military needs to be paid a living wage if you want to keep them around. Though you will never hear me say that SGT Bagodonuts is making too much money for standing in harms way, it is indisputable that he's getting paid quite a bit more than his peers in just about every military on earth. Human capital alone is a huge recurring cost. Which is why every time there is a budget cut, there is a RIF.

Also, we develop and field bleeding edge technology that is deployed quickly. Take our frequency hopping radios, for example. In order to communicate with our allies, we have to GIVE them away. Give. Allies. Expensive. So that they are able to participate in coalitions. To some extent, were subsidizing just about everyone of our allies. If you have a problem giving radios to Aussies I would ask is it a fiscal or a moral objection?

When troops started getting killed by IEDs we developed the MRAP in an effort to improve survivability. Did you know those were flown individually into theatre as they came off the assembly line rather than waiting for a few dozen and putting them on a ship? A quick cost analysis shows we could have spent a fraction of the money if we had done the latter, but instead we elected to protect the force at greater expense. (The motivations for which can be argued about ad nauseum)

Do I personally believe we could reduce our defense budget? Oh hell yes. I've been in the defense business as a soldier and a civilian *almost* my entire life. I believe truly we are inefficient and wasteful-- quite frankly, very poor custodians-- of tax payer dollars. The Federal Acquisition Regulation is, in my mind, the best example possible of the old cliche about the road to hell being paved with good intentions. Want to maintain a real posture that keeps other nation states from poking at us while cutting our spending in half? Start with the FAR. Then tackle the (internal) political structure of both the military and the civilian work force. Then you need to incentivize towards cost avoidance vice spend everything. Finally, you need to get past congressional interference when realizing efficiencies... Which could be the topic of an entire book and probably should be.

Mathen wrote:

Who are we TRULY worried about? Not Russia or us.
We fear violent extremist groups and a few unpredictable, small to medium size countries, which is all the same as fearing unpredictability IMO.

rfenst wrote:

In the future, I predict a very small work force supporting pensioners, disability recipients, and Third World folks looking for a new start.

bloody spaniard wrote:

VERY near future. Percentage of "get out of bed every morning and go to work" vs. those who watch Povich/Ellen and wait for the mailbox to clunk with their government goodies each afternoon is nearly over-centered. When it happens, we can watch the Greece/France style riots from the sh*theads who aren't getting enough free stuff and they're pissed.
We're already well on our way, with the Occupy idiots and the vapor heads who protest they want doctor wages to put fries in a paper sack.#-o

snowwolf777 wrote:

Sadly not, Brew. Problem is, mutilating and maiming our kids, many of whom have no real skills, is a major boon for small sectors of our economy. We get involved in selective nation rescue and recovery projects while the Europeans, Chinese, Saudis and gang laugh at our naivete and corporate whore- greed and STILL pick up many of the contract bids put out by the "grateful" host countries. Now they're trying to confuse us with the great switcheroo by re-directing our make believe ire at nuclear Iran from al-Assad's inconsequential Syria. What ever happened to North Korea? I guess we're saving that one in our cupboard for presidential debate emergencies.

I was a big proponent of the Vietnam war when I was a kid. My betters told me about the Asian domino theory and how much better a democracy would be for those poor brown people- a better standard of living for them and new markets for us. Well, that worked out really GREAT for me and the American taxpayer, didn't it?

In the future, I predict a very small work force supporting pensioners, disability recipients, and Third World folks looking for a new start.
Great recipe for success, don't you think?

bloody spaniard wrote: