Starving the beast: the U.S. Military

[Guynemer]

Given that the founders were totally against standing armies and that was one of the reasons for the second amendment in the first place, maybe you should just disband the US military?

Kentonio said this in another thread.

I've railed on before about how our military spending is completely out of ****ing control, is a major driver of our national deficit and debt, and absolutely no one wants to cut the military because that would be a sure ticket to Not Getting Electedburg.

Here are a couple charts I stole shamelessly from Andrew Sullivan's blog.









Can someone, ANYONE, make a cogent, coherent, understandable argument for maintaining our current military spending? And can anyone else make a cogent, coherent, understandable argument detailing why this is going to change in our current sociopolitical climate?

[Tuberski]

Because, in today's political climate, any cut in defense spending is seen as not supporting the troops.

ACK!

[Koyaanisqatsi]

We have to manufacture something, and if it's something that blows up then the odds are pretty good we'll need to manufacture more of them in the future?

[Dauphin]

Are the bar charts in current or nominal dollars?

And, the military spending doesn't look as bad against other economies (of equitable GDP, such as when you lump the EU together as a single unit). I also recall an argument that given that the US has to pay more to its soldiers than many other countries (due to market forces) the bill is bound to be higher for maintaining the military.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Are the bar charts in current or nominal dollars?

And, the military spending doesn't look as bad against other economies (of equitable GDP, such as when you lump the EU together as a single unit). I also recall an argument that given that the US has to pay more to its soldiers than many other countries (due to market forces) the bill is bound to be higher for maintaining the military.

They're current dollars.

A lot of what we spend ends up being pork driven, but we're the only country who has the ability to deploy our forces near continuously, at an operationally tolerable casualty and equipment loss rate, and actually keep using them. Look at NATO in Libya for example - uh, gee, we have one missile per plane then we're all out until we make some more.

[giblets]

IIRC current dollars means nominal. I'm pretty sure these charts are adjusted for inflation in some way.

[Elok]

Possibly-irrelevant question: I've read (or rather skimmed from WaPo headlines) that Obama is putting most or all of his drone ops under the mantle of the CIA. Are they considered part of the DoD for budgeting purposes?

[Dauphin]

IIRC current dollars means nominal. I'm pretty sure these charts are adjusted for inflation in some way.

It's late, I meant constant (real) or nominal.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Possibly-irrelevant question: I've read (or rather skimmed from WaPo headlines) that Obama is putting most or all of his drone ops under the mantle of the CIA. Are they considered part of the DoD for budgeting purposes?

Not for any purposes. CIA ops are totally outside the purview and authority (and rules and constraints) of the military. Their drones (and related staff/facilities) are budgeted in a separate, classified budget. (the total amount is approved by Congress, but only leadership and some select members of the respective intelligence committees are privy to the actual operational details in those budgets. The rank and file members of Congress just know that X dollars are budgeted for CIA DO covert operations, and that the budget contents and amount is approved by leadership of their respective intelligence committee. There is also some slightly different procurement authority - in terms of flexibility of moving funds from non-classified to classified ops, or between classified programs. In conventional DoD procurement, if X dollars are remaining when Project Y is cancelled, that money is deallocated from the budget and must be reallocated to another program by Congress. With CIA covert ops (and other agencies get in on this classified budget action) there is generally pre-existing authority to reallocate other funds available to the agency. In practice, there's typically a pool of "extra" covert operations funds that can be tapped. Eventually, it gets reconciled, but there's a lot more flexibility than with typical operational or procurement budgets for other agencies.

[Al B. Sure!]

Modern equipment costs more than an M1 Garand, a uniform, and a canteen.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Modern equipment costs more than an M1 Garand, a uniform, and a canteen.

Which is irrelevant, since most armies in the world other than Bananastans' have modern equipment as well, and the US expenditure is still disproportionate.

[Ben Kenobi]

I've railed on before about how our military spending is completely out of ****ing control, is a major driver of our national deficit and debt, and absolutely no one wants to cut the military because that would be a sure ticket to Not Getting Electedburg.

Wrong. Look at domestic expenditures. Social security alone (and yes, Obamacare), are far more major drivers of the deficit and debt. Even if you eliminated the military entirely, the deficit would still exist, and the fiscal position of the US would be perilous.

Social security, welfare, Obamacare, all the entitlements are going to have to be cut - that is the fiscal reality. If these are not cut - the US will be in the exact same position as Europe. No military AND massive debt and deficits year after year.

Americans spend more per capita than in Europe. THAT is the problem, not the military. The spending is just too damn high.

[Berzerker]

We have to manufacture something, and if it's something that blows up then the odds are pretty good we'll need to manufacture more of them in the future?

thats a good one, we need a war every decade or so to make room for the new stuff

[Ben Kenobi]

Which is irrelevant, since most armies in the world other than Bananastans' have modern equipment as well, and the US expenditure is still disproportionate.

Well duh, that's because they are relying on American military expenditures to protect their sorry asses. Canada the *********ing leader in that bull****.

[MrFun]

Modern equipment costs more than an M1 Garand, a uniform, and a canteen.

Thank you for this facetious, stupid post.