US military budget: How would you change it?

[Zevico]

i think you'll find that severe economic problems, high unemployment, low wages, rising food and energy prices, were one of the catalysts for the revolution. unsurprisingly, these problems have not vanished into thin air with the fall of the murbarack regime. equally unsurprisingly, many of those connected with the dictator have fled now that the dictator has fallen.

True, and never argued otherwise. My point is they got worse and they're only going to get worse.

the army appears to want to hand over control to a civilian government

No, not in the way we understand it. The army controls 20% of the Egyptian economy. They deal in cars, for goodness sake. They want to keep that slice of the pie. They want the power to go with it. And they're not going to take orders from some civilian government if and when those orders are in conflict with their interests.

perhaps because they are afraid of the public reaction to a permanent military government

Yes they are. More accurately, to a government openly run by the military.

or perhaps more likely, because they know that egypt faces serious problems and don't want to carry the can for a failure to solve them.

Both this and the above are true. These are not mutually exclusive motivations.

primarily they want to preserve their status as a respected institution in egyptian society.

Also true--but they do not deserve that status by any means.

in fact what is happening at the moment is that some people, who we in the west might call liberals, are calling for the army to remain in power for longer, to give them time to form parties and build a political base to fight the elections.

Also true.

personally, i think that elections should be held sooner rather than later.

Well, given that the only large, organised mass movement and political party in existence a the moment is the Muslim Brotherhood, I'm not surprised. Better that the quasi-democrats get some time to get their act together (if such a thing is even possible, frankly).

clearly however, it's not a case of the army clinging on to power, but rather being asked (begged might be a better word) to stay on until other political forces can organise themselves.

The army is looking to hand off power to a stable, 'we can work with this person' party, and all the while preserve its own interests.

the second half of your post is just guff, a mixture of 'no **** sherlock' obviousness, irrelevancies, and falsehoods.

You've pointed to no falsehoods at all. And I can link to credible sources for each of these statements. In fact, all you probably need do is google the words "egyptian army imprisons blogger", or "egyptian army imprisons israeli on charges of espionage." The point of these 'irrelevancies' is to demonstrate that the army, this 'widely respected' institution, is quite happy to imprison people for insulting it, or even so much as attack its status in Egyptian politics; and it is quite happy, also, to imprison people on plainly false charges. The point is to say that the army is not a democratic institution. It does not support democracy, and nor should we expect it to. It acts in the interests of its officers.

it's especially laughable to suggest that egyptians aren't aware that their last three leaders have come from the military.

I never suggested that they weren't. That's not what I was suggesting at all.
I do suggest that it is a plain fact that they are unaware of the how strong the army's undue and undeserved influence in Egyptian society is. "The army and the people are one" was a common chant during the protests. Well, the "army and Mubarak" were "one" for the past few decades. Mubarak was ditched because the army was getting unhappy with him (he wanted his son the civilian Gamal to take charge after he left rather than an army guy).
That Egyptians chant this slogan is one of the many, many reasons that indicate their ignorance of the army's true role in their country's affairs.

this is either paranoia or a laughable ignorance of the situation in egypt.

War is the worst case scenario. However, it is unlikely to happen until Egypt's economy gets much, much worse. Yes, that economic worsening will probably happen, as every economic analyst attests. Egyptian simply doesn't have the money to buy food for its people any more and that will hit it hard over the next year. That's not to say that a coup is in the works, or that it will ever come about, or, indeed, that Egypt will make war with Israel. It's a plausible scenario, not a fixed outcome.

In this respect, note that it is the army that has
--ceased enforcing Egyptian borders and permitted Hamas to smuggle arms;
--permitted terrorists to attack the Egypt-Israel gas pipeline without repercussion, effectively allowing Egypt to engage in a national "two minutes of hate" against a symbol of cooperation with the Israeli enemy;
- permitted Gazans to enter Egypt, albeit on strict conditions.

The revolution has dictated a change of course in the foreign policy of the Egyptian military--the military currently in charge of government (hint---it was in charge of the government before, too).

This change is designed to ensure that Egyptian policy remains in line with Egyptian popular opinion, even if that means pursuing policies it once opposed and (in as much as there ever was one) undermining the rule of law in Egypt. Populism is not a new development for Egypt, but it is a change for the Egyptian military, which backed a peace treaty with Israel for the last few decades, and directed its interests and activities against Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood as well.

That change of course was pursued by the military, and it was dictated by concerns about the military's domestic standing. The same military that was quite happy to pursue the opposite policies under Mubarak. It is doing so to maintain its status as a "respected institution." It will do more--much more, if necessary--to maintain its status as a "respected institution", if it must. If it means maintaining their seats of power the Egyptian military will do anything. Is this getting through to you?

[OneFootInTheGrave]

cut it down to 10% of what it currently is, save yourself and save the world... all in one... in more ways than one... multi purpose decision

[DaShi]

I'd shift all government spending to the military and replace social security and medicare with the spoils of war.

[dannubis]

Growth strategy

[C0ckney]

True, and never argued otherwise. My point is they got worse and they're only going to get worse.

in the aftermath of a revolution of course there's going to be a period of economic uncertainty. once stability returns and investment starts again, the economy will improve. in the longer term things likely to be better for the majority of people, especially with a responsive democratic government as opposed to a dictator and his thieving friends. hopefully they will be able to achieve a more equitable distribution of the country's wealth (oh noes socialism!).

The army controls 20% of the Egyptian economy. They deal in cars, for goodness sake. They want to keep that slice of the pie. They want the power to go with it. And they're not going to take orders from some civilian government if and when those orders are in conflict with their interests.

the army certainly has its fingers in many pies. it's a similar situation in pakistan. the people are well aware of this, despite your unsupported claims that they are ignorant. the demilitarization of the economy and society is obviously not going to happen overnight. it may not happen at all. if it does will be a long term political process that will transform egyptian society.

you seem to be arguing that everything happening in egypt right now is bad. would you have preferred that mubarack was still in power? i'd like to hear your view of the egypitan revolution, as you seem to be terribly displeased with it.

Well, given that the only large, organised mass movement and political party in existence a the moment is the Muslim Brotherhood, I'm not surprised. Better that the quasi-democrats get some time to get their act together (if such a thing is even possible, frankly).

well i disagree with you here, but it's just a difference of opinion. i will say though that the muslim brotherhood has given every indication that it abide by the democratic process. the liberals can't make the country wait until they've had enough time to build a political base.

"The army and the people are one" was a common chant during the protests.

that is the sum total of your evidence for your proposition that the egyptian people are ignorant of the army's role in the country. that's pathetic. it's not evidence for anything like that, there are a whole range of interpretations for that statement. let me suggest just one that the protesters might have had in mind. "the army are drawn from the ordinary people, they are our sons, brothers and husbands. we are ordinary people just like the army, don't shoot your brothers and sisters."

you're going to have to do a lot better than that i'm afraid.

The point of these 'irrelevancies' is to demonstrate that the army, this 'widely respected' institution...[does bad things]..

i merely argued that the army is a widely respected institution in egypt, which it plainly is. i never argued that they were a democratic force or that they were good. hence irrelevancies.

That's not to say that a coup is in the works, or that it will ever come about, or, indeed, that Egypt will make war with Israel. It's a plausible scenario, not a fixed outcome.

ah the old "anything could happen" line. always good to justify one's paranoia.

In this respect, note that it is the army that has
--ceased enforcing Egyptian borders and permitted supplies to enter the area, maybe even giving a little hope the people;
-- permitted Gazans to leave their 'collective punishment' holding pen, albeit on strict conditions.

so the army has started to stop co-operating with the israeli blockade of gaza. the horror! well that is very warlike. how dare they not connive with israel to abuse and humiliate the palestinians, like that great leader mubarack. and that's it zervico. that pretty much sums your view i think. you are hostile towards the egypitan revolution because it will weaken a particular aspect of israeli foreign policy. you want the west to fight iran, you want to defend dictators in the ME, why? israel, israel uber alles! that's really all that matters in your world view.

[Zevico]

Actually, Qutb's Milestones sum it up for me. It's a basic window into the Islamist worldview and it's not pretty. Like I said: if you can prove that the Muslim Brotherhood has expressly denounced their founding members as would-be tyrants, theocrats, racists and scoundrels, essentially because those were the views they advocated in their founding publications and journals (and which Muslim Brotherhood members continue to express support for to this day), you will be proven right. But given that Muslim Brotherhood members continue to express support for those very ideas, I find that implausible.

In the absence of such, it is foolish to suppose that the Muslim Brotherhood has changed a single iota, and it is foolish to suppose that their flowery statements about democracy are intended to do anything other than fool those who wish to be fooled by them.

[Pax]

The earlier idea of reducing the marines and/or army is a bad one. When we invaded Iraq and Afghanistan we did not have enough ground forces to support the operations so we sent in Navy/Air Force/Coast Guard personnel that had to be trained to support the ground mission. We also had to hire private security firms/mercenaries.
I like the idea of cheap drones. I like the idea of a more littoral role for the navy.
I would withdraw from a lot of bases around the world and focus on being able to deploy from the sea or air as well as bomb the **** out of targets prior to our entrance in theater. If we close overseas bases then the tax dollars will be spent inside the U.S. creating more revenue for the U.S.
Also, it would make the other countries have to spend more on there own defense possibly creating more opportunities for defense contractors to sale to foreign governments. I.E. revenue for the U.S.

[C0ckney]

zervico, i will be proved right when egypt holds elections and begins its transformation into a more democratic society. you will be proved right if your paranoid fantasies come true...

pax, maybe the answer is to stop invading other countries...

[DaShi]

Interesting chart...

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/06/us-defense-spending-the-mismatch-between-plans-and-resources

I think Dan Drezner is right on in this post, where I saw the chart above. The United States could reduce defense spending by over $200 billion (in 2005 dollars) and still be at a level close to the defense spending average during the Cold War. This should be more than sufficient given the more benign threat environment facing the United States today, and might spur necessary readjustments in American global strategy and defense procurement processes.

With the global economy about the fall into the toilet...more so, a lot of hungry nations will become more aggressive. Not even WWII spending will be enough.

[Pax]

zervico, i will be proved right when egypt holds elections and begins its transformation into a more democratic society. you will be proved right if your paranoid fantasies come true...

pax, maybe the answer is to stop invading other countries...

maybe, maybe not.

[Zevico]

[QUOTE=C0ckney;6002879]zervico, i will be proved right when egypt holds elections and begins its transformation into a more democratic society. [/q]
Elections do not make a democracy. As to whether Egypt "transforms into a democracy" as a result of this--well, who can say? Nothing is impossible. But that doesn't mean it's inevitable and it is silly to think that it is.
Which brings me to my next point:

you will be proved right if your paranoid fantasies come true...

I've offered one worst-case scenario. This, apparently, is a "paranoid fantasy" and I will be "prove[n] right" if it comes true. But it is not my purpose to convince you of its inevitability but of its possibility. When the Brotherhood calls for the "revision" of the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty, what do you think this means? When it denies the Holocaust, and calls for war with Israel, what do you think this means? When Presidential candidates running in an election threaten to side openly with Hamas in the next Israel-Hamas conflict, is that mere empty posturing? If it is, why is it striking such a chord?

There are strong pro-war currents in Egypt, and it is foolish to dismiss them as nothing. That doesn't mean an invasion will happen tomorrow, but it does mean that an Egyptian government feeling the heat of popular discontent may calculate that a war would be in the interests of its own self-preservation (at the expense of the Egyptian public). That doesn't mean it will; it does mean that a war would be useful for it. Which means it might.

I'm not a fortune teller: this is informed speculation, not an attempt to divine the future of Egypt. Frankly, the confidence with which you proclaim that you will be proven "right" if a more moderate, democratic Egypt arises strikes me as quite foolhardy. That's not an inevitability. Not in a country where large groups (the Muslim Brotherhood included) that employ catch phrases like "the Koran is our Constitution," and where apostates are still hounded out of society or sometimes, out of the realm of the living, as if they were vermin.

My contention is not that that war is inevitable (it isn't); my contention is that the MB is an Islamist organisation; opposes democracy; wants to impose a totalitarian form of Islam over Egypt; and yes, it will, is and has used violence to achieve its goals. This is not a contention founded in idle speculation. It is founded in their public, openly stated sentiments in favour of each of these matters. I provided a sampling of those statements by its General Guide. These statements, unlike their English language proclamations of fidelity to democracy, are made to their supporters, who have been hearing the same for years from their leadership--and who continue In that circumstance it is plain that this new-found devotion to democratic ideals is nothing but a ruse.

My analysis is founded upon evidence, namely, speeches, statements and actions of the MB's leadership in recent years. To which you offer some English language, blase quotations about democracy designed to fool Westerners like you. If you disagreed, you would, at the very least, make an effort to respond and state why those very speeches, statements and actions cited by myself are not what I say they are. But you don't even bother. Instead you bleat about my politics, as if it were my politics which shaped these very speeches, statements and actions. What is an open declaration of war against America other than an open declaration of war against America? What is "Islam is our Constitution", other than openly expressed defiance and oppostion to democratic norms, inter alia the separation of religion and state?

[C0ckney]

can you read arabic zervico, or are you too relying on translations?

and it's not your politics that shapes egypt or the muslim brotherhood, merely your view of it. you (rightly) believe that a future government of egypt will less friendly towards israel, especially when it comes to gaza. therefore you seek to demonise everyone that might form a future government of eygpt. the muslim brotherhood are extremists bent on destroying the west (oh and socialists to boot - this must be a combination made in hell for a right wing israelphile), the liberals are useless, divided 'quasi-democrats' who'll never be able to get their act together. certainly none of them are like that good old boy mubarack who might have oppressed the hell out of his own people but at least he helped israel oppress the palestinians.

i'm just exposing you and your views for what they are.

[Zevico]

[QUOTE=C0ckney;6003189]can you read arabic zervico, or are you too relying on translations?
Translations.

therefore you seek to demonise everyone that might form a future government of eygpt.

Laughable. Quotation from their own work, speeches and statements=demonisation.

the muslim brotherhood are extremists bent on destroying the west (oh and socialists to boot - this must be a combination made in hell for a right wing israelphile),

Right wing AND israelophile? Two thought crimes in one day. I'm getting slack.

the liberals are useless, divided 'quasi-democrats' who'll never be able to get their act together.

Edited.
1. Firstly, the appellation 'quasi-democrat' is a kindness to some of the openly racist "liberal" groups like al-Wafd, a party which is the historical vanguard of liberalism in Egypt. Its leader, in an English language interview, has openly denied the Holocaust and accused "American-Israeli" troops of stealing antiquities from Iraq and planting them in Jerusalem to make it seem like a Jewish city.
Source: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...aust-is-a-lie/

This is Egyptian "liberalism" (or Egyptian "democracy") unfiltered. The deliberate concoction of historical falsities is bad enough. But the point of these concoctions is to cast Jews as vermin deserving of extermination. Not only is that immoral. It is inimical to the concept of a liberal democratic state. All of which is damned obvious.
2. Second, the "liberals" are divided. There's no question of that: there's 4 main liberal (or notionally liberal) political parties and they're all stealing votes from one another. All told they may (or may not) win more votes than the Muslim Brotherhood but that won't matter if they're split and don't command a majority.

certainly none of them are like that good old boy mubarack who might have oppressed the hell out of his own people but at least he helped israel oppress the palestinians.

Says the man who supports, wait, is it Hamas or Fatah? Or better one than the other, and better both than Israel? The two groups whose idea of peaceful coexistence is a civil war, where the loser gets his fighters killed point blank in hospital? And the winner uses Gaza like their own personal playground, even stealing aid from the very UN aid groups that supply the populace with essentials? Is this is what you want for Egypt as well? My but you are an optimist. You envision such a sparkling future for the people of the Middle East. Unfortunately, I do not share your "optimism."