• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The US Needs More Defense Spending

In Opinions, same place it always runs.

Let me get this correct; your OP is an opinion piece, where are your thoughts and the facts to back up your position?


I have only been here two weeks, when I get my laundry back, but posting an “opinion “ piece as a backup to your position is frowned on here. Have I been misinformed?
 
You demanded accountability in DoD; there is plenty already. Then you laughably characterized Samuelson's column as a "puff piece." If you knew anything at all about Samuelson you would know he doesn't do those. No, you demanded something already present, and then demonstrated complete lack of familiarity with the issue. My use of the term "excuse" was perhaps too kind.

A. To anyone even cosmetically, tangentially familiar with the pentagon, there isn't even remotely enough financial accountability. That's simple reality. Something I notice you almost always fail to recognize
B. W/out addressing that reality, his is a puff piece.
C. Your imagination is no replacement for that same reality.

Yet again, you've been trapped in a device of your own making based on your own laughable ignorance.

Please lean words.
 
Let me get this correct; your OP is an opinion piece, where are your thoughts and the facts to back up your position?


I have only been here two weeks, when I get my laundry back, but posting an “opinion “ piece as a backup to your position is frowned on here. Have I been misinformed?

Shhhhhh!!!!! Don't spoil the fantasy!
 
Let me get this correct; your OP is an opinion piece, where are your thoughts and the facts to back up your position?


I have only been here two weeks, when I get my laundry back, but posting an “opinion “ piece as a backup to your position is frowned on here. Have I been misinformed?

Yes. You are misinformed. Not all opinion pieces are alike. This one is dense with facts, as befits the work of a much-awarded columnist and Pulitzer nominee for commentary.
 
Yes. You are misinformed. Not all opinion pieces are alike. This one is dense with facts, as befits the work of a much-awarded columnist and Pulitzer nominee for commentary.

I must have missed your opinions. I cannot debate a WAPO opinion columnist.
 
A. To anyone even cosmetically, tangentially familiar with the pentagon, there isn't even remotely enough financial accountability. That's simple reality. Something I notice you almost always fail to recognize
B. W/out addressing that reality, his is a puff piece.
C. Your imagination is no replacement for that same reality.

Yet again, you've been trapped in a device of your own making based on your own laughable ignorance.

Please lean words.

Shhhhhh!!!!! Don't spoil the fantasy!

DoD has some of the most stringent financial accountability rules and procedures in our government. Your claim is based on ignorance.
Samuelson is a much-awarded columnist and Pulitzer nominee.
You can't insult your way to debate success.
 
OPs link claims that because other countries lie about and get more for their spending, they aren't as far behind as they appear, and they actually have comparable forces, in terms of numbers of troops and vehicles.

Great! We spending several times as much, and somehow we're supposedly falling behind. Thanks for acknowledging we're getting ripped off by our military industry.

Also, I don't believe the tank/ship numbers at all, because (unless we are again being lied to):

Our troops and vehicles (particularly our tanks and planes) are much higher quality, with much higher quality crews, and a technology gap that gives us a clear edge in nearly any situation we find ourselves in. China's ramped up spending doesn't translate into experienced troops or quality gear. When was the last time they played a part in a military confrontation? Korea? Russia's military is more experienced, but are dragging from a few decades of internal turmoil.

The other reason is the raw troop count appears intentionally misleading. Just about anyone acquainted with the modern military will tell you simply isn't a factor the way it was in WWII. We don't fight with massed troops anymore. Even massed tanks are just targets, without air cover.

There are two "good" reasons to keep our military spending as high as it it (nevermind an increase.)

1. We want to keep stomping on 3rd world countries, so we maintain our clout in the world.
2. The economic benefits to the MIC.

If you're good with these reasons, you're good with our spending.

No need for squirming around trying to rationalize it in some new way every couple years.
 
Last edited:
My opinion is the opening sentence in Post #1.

In 2015, the US spent 54% of the budget on the military, not including veterans. As I posted I cannot debate the author of your opinion piece that you agree with.

View attachment 67249090

How much is enough?
 
DoD has some of the most stringent financial accountability rules and procedures in our government. Your claim is based on ignorance.
Samuelson is a much-awarded columnist and Pulitzer nominee.
You can't insult your way to debate success.

And you have one of the most active imaginations on this board.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/01/opinion/sunday/pentagon-spending-audit-failed.html
https://www.thenation.com/article/pentagon-audit-budget-fraud/

His awards and nominations mean nothing other than in your fantasy life.

I haven't insulted you. Why keep lying about that?

Please learn words better.
 
In 2015, the US spent 54% of the budget on the military, not including veterans. As I posted I cannot debate the author of your opinion piece that you agree with.

View attachment 67249090

How much is enough?

That's 54% of the discretionary budget, which is well less than half the whole. This is from the OP linked article.

". . . Defense no longer dominates the federal budget, as it once did. That distinction has fallen to health and retirement benefits. During the Cold War — from 1950 to 1990 — military outlays averaged 40 percent of federal spending and 7.4 percent of the economy’s output (gross domestic product). Now those figures are 15 percent and 3.13 percent, respectively, according to a recent CSIS report co- written by Harrison and Seamus P. Daniels. . . ."
 
That's 54% of the discretionary budget, which is well less than half the whole. This is from the OP linked article.

". . . Defense no longer dominates the federal budget, as it once did. That distinction has fallen to health and retirement benefits. During the Cold War — from 1950 to 1990 — military outlays averaged 40 percent of federal spending and 7.4 percent of the economy’s output (gross domestic product). Now those figures are 15 percent and 3.13 percent, respectively, according to a recent CSIS report co- written by Harrison and Seamus P. Daniels. . . ."

Where does the US need to spend more funds?
 
Where does the US need to spend more funds?

For starters:

[h=3]US Army warns of crippling sealift shortfalls during ... - Defense News[/h]
[url]https://www.defensenews.com/.../us-army-warns-of-crippling-sealift-shortfalls-during-
...
[/URL]



Nov 11, 2018 - The U.S. Army is troubled by a looming sealift shortfall that will create ... onto the Navy's Military Sealift Command ship, the USNS Benavidez.

[h=3]Is the U.S. military ready for the threats it faces? Experts discuss[/h]




https://www.brookings.edu/.../is-the-u-s-military-ready-for-the-threats-it-faces-experts...




Nov 7, 2018 - The United States vastly outspends its rivals and allies on defense, but ... how themilitary is seeking to improve its readiness shortfalls while ...






 
More:

[h=3]Saving America's military edge will take money ... - Defense News[/h]
[url]https://www.defensenews.com/.../saving-americas-military-edge-will-take-money-and-
...
[/URL]



Nov 17, 2018 - HALIFAX, Canada — The U.S. military needs Congress to provide sustained defensespending to maintain its eroding military edge against ...

Thanks, Jack. I’m not debating articles. What are your positions? You can back your positions up once we enter the debate......
 
Thanks, Jack. I’m not debating articles. What are your positions? You can back your positions up once we enter the debate......

Readiness and equipment replacement come first. Continuous operations since 9/11 have taken a toll on both people and their equipment. Example: too many old aircraft down for maintenance too much of the time.
Then investment in new technologies and weapons; the Russians and Chinese are not standing still.
Then the 355 ship navy; the US is fundamentally a maritime power.
Then space. Trump gets most things wrong but he got this right. Space is already being militarized; the only question is whether the US will protect itself.
 
Yes, the NYT and the Nation continue to attack DoD. Nothing to see here, move along.

LOL! Sorry you can't actually address what's in the reporting but have to whine about where it's hosted.

Can't say as I'm surprised.
 
More:

[h=3]Saving America's military edge will take money ... - Defense News[/h]
[url]https://www.defensenews.com/.../saving-americas-military-edge-will-take-money-and-
...
[/URL]



Nov 17, 2018 - HALIFAX, Canada — The U.S. military needs Congress to provide sustained defensespending to maintain its eroding military edge against ...

Greetings, Jack. :2wave:

Outstanding article! :thumbs: This was the first time I had ever heard of Joseph Dunsford, US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but after reading his opinion on maintaining our "military edge," if he states we should spend "x" amount of dollars on defense, then we should do it! He obviously knows what he's talking about, and with the world acting crazy these days..... :damn
 
Greetings, Jack. :2wave:

Outstanding article! :thumbs: This was the first time I had ever heard of Joseph Dunsford, US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but after reading his opinion on maintaining our "military edge," if he states we should spend "x" amount of dollars on defense, then we should do it! He obviously knows what he's talking about, and with the world acting crazy these days..... :damn

Greetings, Polgara.:2wave:

Glad you liked it.
 
So you support significant wartime tax rates, I would guess.

I do. For any war we are in there should be a war tax - probably as a federal sales tax.
 
Back
Top Bottom