Defense Spending

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/07/everything-chuck-hagel-needs-to-know-about-the-defense-budget-in-charts/

While Congress quibbles over ways to save (or increase revenue) a few trillion dollars over 10 years, if we just cut military spending by 10%, we'd save $7 Trillion over that same time span.

Defense cuts? Pfft.
 
Try telling the folks at Academi, Halliburton, Boeing, Raytheon, Bechtel, Lockheed Martin, etc. that you're making defense cuts. Also, try telling that to the banks they collude with, which in turn create monopolies with government support. 
 
The military industrial-complex and the surveillance monstrosities it has spawned (NSA, DHS, CIA, etc.) are so ingrained that going over the fiscal cliff and, by law, cutting defense spending would have been one of the only ways to start down a path of less militarization.
 
 
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: There was a coup d'etat of corporate, banking, insurance, and big business powers some time ago. There is no solving this problem. There is no coming back. Get used to it.

There is sooooo much more that goes into that.

Why defense?

Why not cut Welfare spending?

Defense is very important to protect the USA from foreign enemies.

Welfare is about taking from people willing to work for a living and giving to people not willing to do anything for themselves.

@Edamame: Maybe not now, but becoming moreso with each passing day.

Cut pork barrel.

Why defense?

Why not cut Welfare spending?

Defense is very important to protect the USA from foreign enemies.

Welfare is about taking from people willing to work for a living and giving to people not willing to do anything for themselves.

@HammerTron said:

Why defense?

Why not cut Welfare spending?

Defense is very important to protect the USA from foreign enemies.

Welfare is about taking from people willing to work for a living and giving to people not willing to do anything for themselves.

Why defense?

- Because it's a very large part of the budget. It's also clear from the graphs in the article that we spend way out of proportion to what other nations spend. Even if we agree that we want to have the strongest military in the world, cutting the military spending by 50% would still give us this.

Why no cut welfare spending?

- Who said we shouldnt cut welfare spending? But, if we are going to be cutting things, why should we start by cutting programs that help needy people here in the US, instead of cutting spending on wars?

Defense is very important to protect...

- No one said we cant spend on defense. BTW, how much "defense" did the war in Iraq get us?

Welfare is about taking from people willing to work for a living and giving to people not willing to do anything for themselves.

- My family came to the US as political refugees with nothing, and welfare programs helped us to live while we worked and studied to become self-sufficient. We've already contributed back far more than we ever got. Are you calling us lazy freeloaders? What gives you the right? I suppose you'd rather spend tax money on dropping bombs on people in other countries than giving food stamps to starving Americans.

I still don't see any reason why spending on defense should be cut. What other countries spend on their defense is irrelevant. Defense is of vital importance to any and every soverign nation. There are many large parts of the budget that are of significantly less importance to the nation.

The title of this thread and the initial post implies that no other part of the budget and spending should be cut. Defense was clearly singled out for the purpose of cutting.

As for how much 'defense' te war in Irag gave the USA it is difficult to determine. Life is not a neatly contained system that can have variables changed like a laboratory experiment can. Conventional wisdom does support the belief that it is better to have wars and fighting in places other than in your home.

I have the right to call any welfare recipient a free loader due to the fact that I prvide the welfare and I have never received any handouts. Considering that I don't know anything about you WillPayton or your family how you came to the conclusion that i was specifially referring to you when I said "Welfare is about taking from people willing to work for a living and giving to people not willing to do anything for themselves." is beyond me.

I stand by my statement. This is what welfare is in the USA.

I don't have a problem dropping bombs on people who hate me or are jealous of me.

I work for everything that i have including all the food I eat. If other people want to eat they'll have to work for it.

To take food away from me, a person who works for it, to give to anothr person, who doesn't work for it, is an indefensable position to take.

No doubt a lot of things are beyond you.

The UK, France, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Germany, Italy, South Korea, Australia, and Canada are all staunch US allies. The US has numerous deals with the Indian government, sells them all sorts of neat toys, and has made leaps and bounds in the last decade and a half to bolster relations with them.
 
That leaves Russia, China, and Brazil.
 
China relies on US, EU, Canadian, Indian, South Korean, and Japanese markets heavily. If China manages to infuriate a majority of these countries/organizations (looking at you, EU), they would probably fall into a depression overnight. 
 
So that leaves Russia and Brazil.
 
Anyone want to do the next part for me? I don't feel like going through Russian politics/economics/power projections, and Brazil is alien to me. Keep in mind that Russia still suffers from limited naval capabilities and useful ports.

We need to make cuts all around but yes we also should cut defense.

However can we cut defense now that we are so involved in world affairs???? the answer is simply NO

The only way I ever see America's military being reduced is either through revolution or through a catastrophic collapse of the American nation (probably economically)

I worked at The Welfare Office for many years. I can honestly say at least 30% were taking advantage of the program.

@Matchstick said:

@HammerTron said:

Why defense?

Why not cut Welfare spending?

Defense is very important to protect the USA from foreign enemies.

Welfare is about taking from people willing to work for a living and giving to people not willing to do anything for themselves.

Do you not realize that not everyone on welfare is jobless? Not to mention that most people are ashamed to be on welfare and only do it to feed their kids. Sure there are people that abuse the system, and they should rightfully be weeded out of the program, but they are far from the majority.

QFT

@WillPayton said:

No doubt a lot of things are beyond you.

Pathetic.

Your 'ideas' are sorely lacking in logic and depth. When confronted with henest debate you have no recourse but to hurl infantile insults.

Pathetic.

There will be cuts in defense spending. Mostly in the areas of personal. We've expanded the rank and file a great deal to meet the demand for boots on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan. But as those engagements wind down, we don't need those kind of numbers anymore.

There MIGHT be cuts in aerospace and naval technology. A lot of that comes down to internal politics inside the pentagon itself. Time will tell ;-)

@pooty said: