Squaring the Pentagon
Former Antiwar.com columnist Doug Bandow writes this week in The National Interest
President Barack Obama has unveiled his new budget, which proposes continued increases in military outlays. What for? The United States is spending far too much on the Pentagon.
There is no more important federal role than providing for the common defense. But what is required for defense depends upon circumstances. Military requirements in 1900 differed dramatically from those in 1940 and in 1980. What are the requirements today?
The latest Pentagon budget suggests that the United States is embattled and isolated, its territory threatened and its future imperiled. The Obama administration has proposed a $40 billion (8 percent) hike in military outlays in 2010 to $527.7 billion. (Counting Iraq and Afghanistan will push annual military spending up to around $700 billion.) President Obama plans to continue increasing the size of the Army and Marine Corps.
Read more by Doug Bandow
- Balancing Beijing – February 27th, 2009
- The Asian Century – February 20th, 2009
- Peace, Prosperity, and Liberty: The Battle Continues – February 6th, 2009
- Diplomatic Means to Militaristic Ends – January 30th, 2009
- Investigate and Prosecute the Bush Administration – January 23rd, 2009
ericsiverson
July 14th, 2010 at 8:19 pm
Our military pudjet is not for defense , but more claerly portreys the world empire budjet , about equal to the military budjet of the other 5.5 billion people . We are only 300 million people . So we are spending about 20 times more per person for defense . Its gotten to the point we the people might rather surrender and be captured by more sensable people .
ericsiverson
July 14th, 2010 at 8:27 pm
You put a plus 1 on my above statement . I did not vote with a thumbs up on my statement . I dont nessicarly aprove of all my staements . I dometimes just make statements for other people to approve or disaprove . I wish you would let me do my own voting .