Don't read this if you have a weak stomach or common sense is a strong factor in your life....

2004 Budget
34% Human resources
13% General government
06% Physical resources
27% Current Military
20% Past Military

Current Military, $459B:Military Personnel $99B, Operation and Maintenance $133B, Procurement $68B, Research and Development $58B, Construction $6B, Family Housing $4B, Retired Pay $39B, DoE Nuclear Weapons $16B, 50% NASA $8B, International Security $7B, 60% Homeland Security $16B, misc. $5B Note: President Bush does not include any funds for the war on terrorism or the war on Iraq in this budget, which he expects to request later as supplemental funding.

Past Military, $345B: Veterans’ Benefits $63B; Interest on National Debt (80% estimated to be created by military spending) $282B

Human Resources, $593B: Education, Health/Human Services, HUD, Food/Nutrition programs, Labor Department, Soc. Sec. Admin.

General Government, $235B: Legislative, Justice Dept., State Dept., International Affairs, Treasury, Gov’t. Personnel, 20% interest on national debt, 50% of NASA, 20% Homeland Security

Physical Resources, $99B: Agriculture, Commerce, Energy, Interior Dept., Transportation, Environmental Protection, Army Corps Engineers, NSF, FCC, 20% Homeland Security

T o t a l F e d e r a l F u n d s ( O u t l a y s ) : $ 1 , 7 3 1 B i l l i o n

The Soviet Union is no longer around or a threat, we spend five times what Russia spends on their military, China is downgrading its aggressiveness, North Korea is a bluff. So what does that leave us to spend 459 billion dollars on? Global Terrorism? Do we need a military presence this large to fight terrorism (not included in the military figure) when we have the nuclear capability to demolish the rest of the world? Seems like a strong market call for bounty hunters would be more productive and a lot cheaper.

All in, we spend more on our military than the next 21 countries in the world put together (that's most of the recognized military forces) without Iraq or the war on terroism.

You need to ask yourselves these questions folks. The past military debt service alone will be bigger than current military spending with the new military renumeration and retirement tables.

 

We have an obligation to arm our military with the best and most advanced equipment. Technology costs.
And we have an obligation to take care of them and their dependants.
I wish we would spend more, especially on a missile defense system.
Peace and security through superior fire power.

Semper Fi,
zanny

 

Who's threatening us with missles? China, the emerging world power, has no invasion capability, downgraded missle development in their current budget and Soviet Russia is a shadow of the Soviet Union. We needed more technology to run over a third rate army like Iraq? Or fight 'rebels' in S. America, Columbia, the Phillipines or any of our other multiple crusades? Seems the economic approach has become a much more effective force in the contemporary world. Read your history and discover the downfall of most powers over the centuries.

A poster on another list put it well in stating our military was like owning a blown big block. You can either use it for power or as an image to intimidate. Who but a fool would want to spend 47% of their budget on intimidation? It requires wealth to properly run a nice toy like that.

 

Before complaining about the cost of defending this country, go see how many countries hate Americans. If America did not have the mightiest armed forces on earth, there would be a wailing in our streets audible across the globe. Many countries would dearly love to destroy America, and someday may try to form an alliance with other countries who hate us. How would you feel if that threat became immanent, and there was no force to combat it effectively. Technology wins wars, and that costs a lot of money. If we wish to feel safe, we have to pay.

Go ahead, cut the cost of defense, and see how long you last. I would estimate that a defenseless America would be invaded in less that one year. We have enemies ALL over the world.

Carry a big gun, and use it.

Theo

 

North Korea already has intercontinental missile capability.
And there are other third world countries that will develope it.
All it takes is one missile with a nuclear warhead.
Russia still has a vast number of i.c.b.m. in their arsenal.
There political climate could change.
Yes we do need more technology to defend ourselves against third world countries like iraq. Why? Because every American life we can save through technology is worth it. And if we can avoid collateral damage and civilian deaths, yes it's worth it.
I'm sure the spouses and children will want the very best for their loved one fighting a war.
I agree with theologian, there are a lot of countries that want to bring us to our knees.
Yes it takes a lot of wealth to run a strong military.
America is the wealthiest nation on earth.
And you must keep in mind, the government doesn't biuld the military. Our friends and neighbors across this nation does.

Peace and security through superior fire power.

Semper Fi,

zanny

 

There are less visible benefits to militay spending. The R&D for military helps to make this country a technology leader and many fields. Not just in defense technology.

We still have one if the strongest economies, even in this time of lay-offs and hiring freezes. I credit this strength to our military strength. I would rather maintain that the US is without a doubt, the superior military machine. We one the cold war by outspending the Russians. Yes, eventually we have to pay for this technology.

I think the war on terrorism is a never ending war, but with a much superior military and intelligence system, we will minimize casualties to our own people at home and abroad.

I'd just as soon they spend it on Military than on another welfare couch potato.

 

Common sense huh, thanks. There isn't a country on this planet that can compete with the USA in anything, ever wonder why?

Infrastructure, you have to spend it to make it, even school children know that. It has always keep us a zillion miles ahead of the rest of the world. Now spending is bad. The freeways of the 40's were insane priced, they shot us ahead of everyone.

The moon round trip cost 26 Billion and invented everything from Teflon to tiolet paper.

What defeated the USSR? Ron Reagun was going to toss a Trillion dollars into 'Star Wars' defense systems. That ran those amateurs off like a huge bluff in a poker game.

I'm not sure spending is all bad, Spending is how we got here and hiding money in the mattress is how they got there. North Korea is a bluff? College students can make a nuclear weapon if they get the material, N. Korea has the material, South Korea wants us out of their country. We are not being attacked by many sides while our friends cower? There isn't 100 million Muslims in the world and we have no litmus paper to tell the good ones from the bad ones yet? I'm not voting for you!

 

I am not sure where to start on this. In order for us to remain ready to move at a moments notice to defend our country against threats here and abroad we need to constantly train. Also we need to ensure that our vehicles and equipment etc....Are safe and serviceable. We also continue to upgrade weapons systems to increase the lethality and accuracy of them and to also defend ourselves from our enemies. If you think for one minute that we can just cut our spending because their isnt a major military action going on (Which by the way if you havent been watching the news lately, there are still major military operations going in the middle east) you think we can just turn the money off and forget about all of the soldiers, sailors, marines and airman still there. I watched some good friends die in Iraq doing their best to defend our country, the Iraqis and the rest of the world against this regime. Don't try to tell me these people werent a threat to us I observed alot of things that raised the hair on the back of my neck that you will never see or probably even hear about due to the fact that you dont have a need to know. I really hate when people say that the military does not deserve raises and better benefits more than 50 percent of our enlisted force live under the national poverty level. Alot of them rely on foodstamps and WIC to feed their families. Many of them get part-time jobs to make ends meet. We proudly go to foreign lands to put our lives on the line to ensure the freedoms you enjoy everyday. Even the freedom to start this thread! Please think about all the troops that must spend more time away from their families than ever before because Bill Clinton reduced our military forces dramatically during his time in office. And the fact that we have forces performing peacekeeping and humanitarian operations in numerous other countries. When we have people deployed we at home have to pick up the slack and work harder at home to ensure that the mission gets completed and that all of our people and equipment remain deployable because terrorists dont pick the most opportune times to do stupid things. And when that happens we need to be ready to respond. If you care anything about your family, friends and fellow americans you should stand behind your nations military because the next life they save might be yours. Think about things like the fact that korea has missiles that can reach california next time you decide to say that we dont deserve the money to defend you.

SSgt Bringhurst, USAF

 

georgedavila,
I don't know where you get your figures from as you don't give a source. Reckon that's one way to keep someone from contradicting them.
I'm not going to get into the current military spending as it seems that has been covered pretty well so far.
As for the past military spending. Obviously, you have never served yourself. In order to defend ourselves, we need a professional volunteer military. Draftees who only serve 2-3 years at most won't cut it. By the time they are trained well enough at thier jobs to be proficient, their time is up and they're out. And we haven't had a draft since VietNam.
So to get that professional cadre of military folks, we have to provide them benefits that are worth their putting their lives on the line to defend this country. I don't have enough room here for all the benefits of a military career, but these are a few of the biggies
One of those benefits is VA care should they become disabled while in the service. It's pretty nice to know that if you get disabled, you won't just end up kicked to the curb and forgotten.
Another is the Montgomery GI Bill where the service member has some of his/her pay put away towards a college fund and the government matches it dollar for dollar. This mainly applies to folks who do one hitch just for the college benefits.
For the ones who stick it out for 20+ years, there's retirement from half to 3/4 pay depending on how long they served. Some can retire as early as 37 if they joined when 17 and stayed in for 20 straight. This money is usually figured in separately for each branch's annual budget and is not from the VA.

I guess from your post that you think we should stop all spending on our veterans along with our current military spending. If we do, who would be willing to put in the the long hours, go on dangerous missions in service? You? I don't think so from the tone of your post. You get what you pay for in life. And I'll tell you from firsthand experience that for the jobs they do, the hours they put in (16hr days were the norm for me, not counting duty days when it was 24hrs), and the dangerous nature of the work, the military is grossly underpaid. The benefits supplied by the VA and the service branches help out, but still, as far as the paycheck went, I could have done better as a civilian. There are other things besides money that made me stick around for 20 years and a few days change. Like knowing I made a difference and love of my country.

Just my $.02

***** McCoy
Chief Engineman, US Navy, Retired

 

I agree with Chief Engineman ***** McCoy. BTW if the enemy shoots the limbs off a serviceman in Nam, what is the difference which bank account we help him with? Aren't we going to help him with welfare if not the VA? Why toss the brave man that offered his life for our country in with the terminally lazy and the too fat to work?

1997RangerXLT
Senior Chief Machinery Repairman, U.S. Navy, Retired

 

Any chance the political soapbox can be put away when starting and participating in a topic?

 

When two boxers get into the ring, the first thing they try to do is intimidate their opponent.

If intimidation means having your opponent have self doubt, back down and not having to engage in a fight, wouldn't this be more cost effective in terms of having to fight a war? Saving the lives of soldiers and cilivians? The cost of troop deployment? Not having to rebuild cities destroyed in a conflict? What price cap do we put on the prevention of human suffering? I think the best way to not fight a war, is to prevent one in the first place. Diplomacy, while always a good place to start, doesn't always work.

Intimidation with the correct image can be an effective weapon. Only a fool would bring a knife to a gun fight. And if he draws a gun, draw yours. Only you will have to be faster than he. But that comes with training with many trips to the range to hone your skills. This takes money. Ammo, targets, range membership, etc. Having a reputation of being well prepared to defend oneself if the spam hits the fan may prevent someone from throwing it in the first place. Be it firearms, martial arts, boxing, weight training or the military. If you look like prey, will will be preyed upon.

"You don't tug on supermans cape. You don't spit into the wind. You don't pull the mask of the ole' Lone Ranger and you don't mess around with Jim!"

 

I'm not sure what you mean by political soap box.
Politics, war and money are intertwined with each other.
I think this has been a very healthy debate. And a good excercise in freedom of speech.

Peace and security through superior fire power.

Semper Fi,
zanny