Military funding cuts...
Are a double edged sword, hiltless, with no crossguard. Look at what we got out of the "peace benefit" the Clintons "found" when the Cold War ended. 9/11 among other things. No matter what your personal views, it remains a fact that there are people in this world who hate us, hate our ideals, envy and resent our success. And some of them have the means to make their displeasure felt. Some of them have no respect for human life, their own or anyone else's. Some of them are absolutely convinced that God is on their side, and we are agents of Satan, therefore nothing they do to us can be wrong or evil. And some of them are just evil.
But they do have one thing in common, and that is that they respect military might, when it is matched with the determination to use it. Without both of those, we are seen as a "paper tiger", and they can do as they please with impunity. It is because of where we have been that we are where we are now. I do not agree with all the tactical and strategic decisions of the current administration, but one thing is clear, they are, at least, doing something. And the something that they have been doing may have been responsible for the fact that there have been no further attacks in the US since 9/11/01. It may not have been, but since we'll never know for certain, the argument is moot.
Cutbacks in military spending should be done, BUT not without careful forethought. We may not have a nation state as combat enemy today, but that doesn't mean that we never will again. There are two basic problems with military spending, and a host of smaller ones. One problem is the actual cost of what is procured (and the procurement system is as flawed as anything any bureaucrat ever came up with), and the other basic problem is the apparant benefit seen by the public for the money spent. In training it is a well recognised fact that sweat saves blood. What is not well understood, outside the military, is that when it comes to equipment, money saves blood as well.
Just look at some of the crap we have been through with our troops in Iraq. We have a significant portion of the country that constantly bemoans the fact that our boys and girls are "being sent out to die", and yet these same folks don't want to spend the money for the tools that will help keep our boys and girls from dying!
We are flying 20+ year old airplanes, in some cases 40+ years old. And because there is only so much money to go around, we aren't doing as well as we should keeping up the spare parts. Priorities. Ground pounders carry the load today, and get the biggest share. Deservedly so. But the other components must not be neglected, or we risk not have them when needed. Yes, new designs are horrendously expensive. This is, after all, the USA, where we have made a national icon of profit. But another reason they are so expensive is that they (by our demand) must be capable of meeting and defeating the most powerful enemy equipment that they might concievably be up against. And if they can't, our boys and girls will die. To have even reasonable sureity that our equipment will meet the acid test costs money. And today, it cost a lot of money. But how much are the lives of our sons and daughters worth?
We may not have a visiable need for new aircraft carriers, today. But what about the day after tomorrow? These kinds of things are not made overnight. They cannot magically be conjured into existance at need. But the idea that we will be able to, as we did in WWII, still exists, and even persists, despite the clear facts that first, we did not win WWII overnight, that it took us a couple of years, with the whole nation on a war footing (rationing, wage and price controls, etc.) to produce those ships, planes, tanks and troops that did win the war. And second, the nation today is not even remotely the same kind of nation, as far as manufacturing capacity as it was then. Not even close.
Other small problems with military spending are the civilians who make their living building what we do buy and use, having a vote, and a voice in government, and nobody I know of will vote for somebody who will put them out of work, at least not knowingly. And then there are the boys and girls actually in uniform. We pay them. Not well, certainly not as well as they deserve, although better today than ever in the past. There is a big chunk of money, right there. And it only gets less if you reduce the number of people you pay. We have an all volunteer military. The people in it are there because they want to be. They have chosen to take the risks that come with putting on the uniform as a way of life. One huge benefit of this is that they do this so others of us won't have to. I have been there, my children are there now. Where are yours? In college? At the mall?
Also remember that when you cut military spending, not all of the decisions about where the remaining money gets spent are made by people with a vested interest in the military. Congress can kill this program, or that one at will, and will do so for percieved political gain. Base closings, reduced maintenance, skilled, competent people being forced out of the military (re enlistment bar) to save money, all these things and more will happen. It isn't just the fat that gets trimmed.
And before you go too far on those lines, consider also that the VA is figured into the mix as well. The care and benefits given to our veterans for their service is often shameful from a nation as blessed as ours. In my opinion, if we can live without another aircraft carrier, we should take that money and put it in veterans benefits. NOT in the VA bureaucracy, but in real benefits.
Yes, we are spending way more than we used to on our military. But in case you didn't notice, we are at war. You may not agree with it, you may not believe it is being handled correctly, that the money is being spent wrongly, and most of it is only going to line the pockets of fat cat contractors, and you may even be right. But you cannot, and should not deny the fact that we are at war with a real, if neblous enemy, and war costs. It costs lives, and it costs money. Short one, and you will spend the other to make up the difference. I prefer to spend money. How about you?