America has the largest military machine in the world.
America has more troops stationed abroad than any other country in the world.
American citizens posess more hand guns than any other country.
Imagine what would happen if....
America cut it's military budget by 50%
America pulled it's troops out of other countries, and insisted other countries take more responsibility in defending themselves
American families owning multiple hand guns limited themselves to only one.
...would America be any less secure? No
...would American citizens see a tax savings as a result of a smaller military budget? YES!
...would American citizens be just as safe with only one hand gun, rather than 3 or 4? Yes they would!
*Most other countries have military complex's that are tiny compared to America's, yet they are attacked no more than America.
*Most other countries do not feel the need to have armed citizens, yet there crime rates are no greater than America's.
America...Armed and Paranoid!
Cutting the military budget by 50% would save around $300Bill or more per year. So the long-term budget picture would include deficits of around $600Bill-yr instead of around $900Bill-yr. There would still be a lot of work to do to balance the budget, and skyrocketing healthcare costs would continue to be a central issue - but clearly, the budget picture would be better.
Could we do this without undermining American security needs? I really don't know. You'd have to ask military experts. But usually, where there's a will, there's a way. If everyone could agree on making this sort of cost reduction, I'm sure we could come up with new innovations or arrangements.
But the main reason why these cuts would be so difficult is because the military has in many ways become a de facto welfare system that provides education, job training, and employment for many people who otherwise have few options. And there are many communities whose very existence depends on the existence of some military base or installation. Eliminating those bases threatens the livelihoods of everyone in those communities, whether or not they are personally part of the military. And there are many jobs that depend on the manufacturing of weapons or aircraft for military use - or the construction of various military facilities.
So in all likelihood, much of the $300Bill you saved from reduced defense spending would have to spent on additional social programs and other services to replace all those side-benefits that the military provides.
Taiwan becomes Communist Chinese.
The Korean War goes hot again.
Iraq and Afghanistan become fundmentalist Islamic theocracies and terrorist bases again.
Russian pressure increases with Bears harassing what American warships are left.
Australia wets itself remembering the Japanese in WWII and how they no longer have American backup.
Piracy explodes.
Petty dictatorships increase in brazenness knowing the USA won't be able to step in and help (e.g. Iraq attacking Kuwait)
Massive war in the Middle East...
Could be bad!
Originally posted by AThousandYoungWhere were USA when Iran harrassed Irak? Ah, financing Saddam Husein, yes now I remember.
Petty dictatorships increase in brazenness knowing the USA won't be able to step in and help (e.g. Iraq attacking Kuwait)
(let's try another one... eh...)
Where were USA when Sovjet harassed Afganistan? Ah, financing Usama bin Ladin, yes, now I remember.
(Hope noone will ever harass anyone else in the future...)
Originally posted by AThousandYoung1. no one is advocating a total elimination of the US military
Taiwan becomes Communist Chinese.
The Korean War goes hot again.
Iraq and Afghanistan become fundmentalist Islamic theocracies and terrorist bases again.
Russian pressure increases with Bears harassing what American warships are left.
Australia wets itself remembering the Japanese in WWII and how they no longer have American backup.
Pir ...[text shortened]... in and help (e.g. Iraq attacking Kuwait)
Massive war in the Middle East...
Could be bad!
2. the reduction in US defense spending would presumably be phased in, allowing other nations time to develop their own forces and security arrangements - why does the US have to do the brunt of the world's heavy military lifting?
3. innovations can be developed to allow the military to achieve many of its aims at a fraction of the cost.
Originally posted by MelanerpesYou're advocating the USA reduce it's military and other nations increase their military right?
1. no one is advocating a total elimination of the US military
2. the reduction in US defense spending would presumably be phased in, allowing other nations time to develop their own forces and security arrangements - why does the US have to do the brunt of the world's heavy military lifting?
3. innovations can be developed to allow the military to achieve many of its aims at a fraction of the cost.
The US does the brunt of the world's heavy military lifting because Eurasian superpowers keep trying to expand through vicious, ruthless means.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungso you feel that the only way the world can be made safe is to pretty much declaw the rest of the world and have everyone be defended by Uncle Sam? Because we Americans are just so much more awesome than everyone else?
You're advocating the USA reduce it's military and other nations increase their military right?
The US does the brunt of the world's heavy military lifting because Eurasian superpowers keep trying to expand through vicious, ruthless means.
Originally posted by FabianFnasWhere were USA when Iran harrassed Irak?
Where were USA when Iran harrassed Irak? Ah, financing Saddam Husein, yes now I remember.
(let's try another one... eh...)
Where were USA when Sovjet harassed Afganistan? Ah, financing Usama bin Ladin, yes, now I remember.
(Hope noone will ever harass anyone else in the future...)
The same place most of the world was, including the USSR, all of NATO, France, UK, Brazil, Yugoslavia, Spain, Italy, Egypt, Saudi Arabia...
You think if Brazil, Europe, Egypt and the Saudis had stronger militaries at the time and the US a weaker one that Hussein wouldn't have been supported?
Where were USA when Sovjet harassed Afganistan?
Helping protect Afghanistan.
Originally posted by MelanerpesI think history has provided quite a lot of evidence for that conclusion and if it's true and we disarm the results will be catastrophic, and we'll just have to rearm again like we did during both world wars and the Cold War - throughout the 20th century - in response to Eurasian empires.
so you feel that the only way the world can be made safe is to pretty much declaw the rest of the world and have everyone be defended by Uncle Sam? Because we Americans are just so much more awesome than everyone else?
Maybe not, but I'm not sure I'm willing to take that chance.
EDIT - To lighten the mood a bit:
http://angusmcleod.deviantart.com/art/World-War-Two-Simple-Version-73625561
Originally posted by AThousandYoungHysterical nonsense.
Taiwan becomes Communist Chinese.
The Korean War goes hot again.
Iraq and Afghanistan become fundmentalist Islamic theocracies and terrorist bases again.
Russian pressure increases with Bears harassing what American warships are left.
Australia wets itself remembering the Japanese in WWII and how they no longer have American backup.
Pir ...[text shortened]... in and help (e.g. Iraq attacking Kuwait)
Massive war in the Middle East...
Could be bad!
At present, the US spends 41% of the total military spending in the entire world (China is next at 6😵. Surely this is a ridiculous amount. I'd say military spending could be cut by at least 2/3 and all that would happen is the US would be less inclined to engage in dubious military adventures (less toys to play with).