Heritage In Focus: Myths About Defense Spending: Part 4

[investortownhall]

Most military spending is 100% discretionary. Military pumpers and fat-cat arms lobbyist work diligently daily, to convince everyone it needs to be 100% entitlement.

"The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals." - Dwight D. Eisenhower, 5 Star General and President of the United States

[SashaShokolova]

Harry ... do you know what 'correlation' means? Please point out the false correlation I made in my earlier post. Otherwise, I shall assume you are merely trolling and not interested in honest discussion, merely polemics. I fancy I shan't be surprised by the outcome.

[SashaShokolova]

Harry, you fail to show any causality between standard of living and defense spending, yet cite Switzerland and Lichtenstein as reasons to spend less. You might as well say that less land area = prosperity, for surely there is a strong correlation there using your examples. Or how about percentage of mountainous terrain or proximity to Innsbruck? False correlations of unrelated facts are fuzzy thinking, at best.

[alonelychild]

Yes, but are they the hegemon? Is their currency the standart amongst international trade? Are they present in very hot spot in globe, preventing conflicts? Such as between India, Pakistan and China. Or in the 70s, between China and USSR? Or in Europe, for 1/2 century, between France and Germany? North and South Korea? Taiwan? China-Japan? Israel and Saudi Arabia? Turkey-Iraq? Brazil-Argentina? Colombia-Venezuela? Argentina-Chile?

Switzerland is a very small state, out of comparison

[alonelychild]

The Swiss are secure because they play the westphalian balance of power game very well, and that is only possible due to geography. Europe in general is safe only because USA spends their share in defense, through NATO. So, in other words, the american taxpayer pays for the european welfare state.

[ALITL8]

George Orwell's "1984"

Doublethink:

The power of holding two opposite beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies, all this is indispensably necessary.

[awksedgreep]

I'm having trouble thinking. Can the Heritage Foundation please help me out?

The Framers WERE AGAINST STANDING ARMIES. The military industrial complex is completely out of control.

[carafano]

the defense industries of the US are a shadow of what they were during the cold war-a very small percentage of the national economy.

there is no constitutional prohibition against standing armies.

[anoptforout]

Good God. This could be Tony Snow or Scott McClellen. Where are these supposed "myths"? All I heard was: 4% of our GDP is good and entitlements exist but are expensive, so we should defend freedom. All I heard was THE STATUS QUO IS GOOD. CHANGE is the myth to them.

Here it is:

0.04x$13,244,550,000,000=$529,­782,000,000 is the general LOW ESTIMATE THEY WANT. This is what we are spending FY2007: $532,800,000,000

We aren't even in a Constitutional war. The Cold War is alive well.

[anoptforout]

*alive and well

My point is...when Representatives and Senators say they created jobs, what they mean is that they got the contracts for a new defense operation in their state: a new base, logistical headquarters, or a factory. This country is, in many ways, hiding the vestigial WWII effort from the view of many.

[anoptforout]

Was having the bomb or, in the case of the US, 10,000 of them (LITERALLY) not enough? I know it isn't, because we are not secure in territories where we claim sovereignty. Our war is for economic interests. What happened to peacekeeping and preventing world wars? Now it's warmaking.

[carafano]

nuclear weapons are only useful for deterring nuclear war.

[brisas2k]

Not so fast.

Nuclear arms are very useful to deter conventional military agression. i.e., North Korea.

[greg2777mail]

Looking at the CIA-The World Factbook, that amount is about the same as the rest of the world combined military expenditure.

PLUS ... THE INVASIONS OF IRAQ AND AFGANISTAN ARE FOUNDED OUTSIDE THE FEDERAL BUDGET, they are not included in the military budget figures listed above.

[greg2777mail]

THE INVASIONS OF IRAQ AND AFGANISTAN ARE FOUNDED OUTSIDE THE FEDERAL BUDGET, they are not included in the military budget.

In addition, the United States has black budget military spending which is not included in published military spending figures. Maintenance of the nuclear arsenal and the money spent by the Veterans Affairs Department, are not included in the official budget. Thus, the total amount spent by the United States on military spending MAY BE CONSIDERED EVEN HIGHER

[carafano]

the "black" budgetis buried in the regular defense budget. It does not represent additional spending. Iraq and Afghanistan have been funded with supplemental appropriations, but they are still considered part of the federal budget and at the end of the year are rolled into the overall total.

[MaxwellDangerPowers]

these videos are really badly done. all the points could have been made in a single 5 min video. the first and last 20secs of each 1.40 video is intro and conclusions that say the exact same things.

[carafano]

calling defense spending "waste" is bit unfair when you look at all the men and women volunteers who are in harm's way around the world. They need the right equipment and our support. They will be sent forth by presidents democrat and republican for wars we like and do not like. They deserve to be adequately funded.

[MaxwellDangerPowers]

Carafano, to say the phrase "waste" is a bit unfair on the soldiers is odd. as this equates this "waste" entirely to support. Since this waste often does not seem to contribute to the fighting situation how is "waste" beneficial?

PS good to see your not trying to hide your identity.

[PoopSlop]

1:30 seconds sleeping pill.

[RatkoUSA]

MatthewPA1972, agreed, I like these Heritage people, thank God someone has common sense.

Thank you Heritage.

[oneslickjackrabbit]

Illtron3030 is absoulutly correct in saying we've mis-assigned our troops we have in the field. That is primarily a political and leadership failure, not a result of wasteful spending. I disagree with ImpliedBodyMan's misdirected rage, however. We need to get better leadership and management and fund the military, or there won't be a USA left where we can burn, say, 20% GDP on social programs.

[illtron3030]

What a well made piece of propaganda here! First of all they say 4% of GDP so it sounds like such a small number, we spend more money on defense than ALL of the NATO members, Russia, and China COMBINED. We have troops on the Korean borders and the Syrian/Iraq borders and NONE on our own porous borders!

[ImpliedBodyMan]

Wow!! Preppies!! Freedom? it's like a portmanteau - a word you can pack any meaning into you like...waging unsucessful unpopular wars which raise the threat of terror = freedom? How about some potlatch - perhaps you NeoCons should just go and burn a lot of money (say 4% of the GDP, perhaps?) and stand around chanting "freedom!!" - it amounts to the same kind of fantastic waste.

[MatthewPA1972]

I like these guys at Heritage.