Jump to content

Military Dollars, and Sense


Draggingtree

Recommended Posts

military-dollars-sense

Military Dollars, and Sense

By Angelo Codevilla| February 16, 2018

The bipartisan agreement to increase the Pentagon’s budget by $81 billion lets the U.S defense establishment fatten current programs and continue to do business as usual while avoiding questions about how to win wars. Such disconnection between ends and means puts bureaucratic interests over strategic success in war. Increasing the budget should be conditioned upon making sure that each increase actually contributes to victory in any theater of operations where the U.S is committed. And this means evaluating which missions—and in what ways—the dysfunctional parts of fiscal year 2019’s $678 billion should be reallocated

It would be difficult to argue that today’s budget does not contain at least $81 billion in waste. A few examples.

Since 2001, the U.S government has spent $2 trillion to $4 trillion—depending on whose estimates you believe—waging the “War on Terror.” The fight has been less than a shining success and, as currently conceived, is supposed go on forever. Why continue this hemorrhage of blood and treasure? Why not aim at ending it? What would it take to do that?  :snip: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hawks Win

By Srdja Trifkovic - FEBRUARY 08, 2018

The Pentagon’s National Defense Strategy, which Defense Secretary James Mattis presented on January 19, envisages aggressive measures to counter Russia and China and instructs the military to refocus on Cold War-style competition with them, away from terrorist threats and “rogue nations.”  This is in stark contrast to Barack Obama’s 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review, which called for “preserving strategic stability” in relations with the two Eurasian giants.  The new defense strategy openly treats them as the Pentagon’s “principal priorities.”  According to Mattis, “great power competition—not terrorism—is now the primary focus of U.S. national security.”

The unclassified 11-page summary indicates a major victory for foreign-policy hawks and for the military-industrial complex.  It marks the final defeat of candidate Donald Trump’s intention, repeatedly stated in the summer of 2016, to abandon the bipartisan quest for global primacy, to reexamine the purpose and utility of NATO, and to improve relations with Russia.  It reflects the National Security Strategy (NSS) unveiled in December 2017, which asserted that “China and Russia challenge American power, influence, and interests, attempting to erode American security and prosperity.” 

The reality is that the massive U.S. military machine and its suppliers need to justify their existence, and to convince the American people (as per Mattis) that further sacrifices are essential “to fund our military.”  The result is a blueprint for continued disaster, contrary to reason and to the American interest.    :snip:  https://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2018/March/43/3/magazine/article/10843352/ 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1711710009
×
×
  • Create New...