Someone At The Pentagon Is Smoking Something

Only $100 billion in Pentagon cuts?

 

That’s laughable.

 

There was an interesting debate in the December 2nd, 2010 issue of USAToday on defense spending.  One side opened with:

 

     “No one wants to look weak on defense, or unsupportive of the troops.  But with national security accounting for one-fifth of the budget, there’s no good reason to take Pentagon spending off the table.”

 

The author then goes on to make incredibly cogent observations about excessive projects… even citing specifics like the over-the-top benefits military retirees get… such as family health coverage for $460 a year for life — as compared to non-military families having to pay $13,770 annually for the same coverage.

 

The rebuttal?  A good start… also cut wasteful spending… but a bad ending… where the author essentially argues to keep most of military spending intact… and pussyfoots around the real issue with the military: 

 

That we have 5,113 active nuclear warheads… 14 big ass ballistic missile submarines… etc., etc… enough to destroy the entire planet many times over… certainly a helluva lot more than we need in a post-Cold War world.

 

Here’s a start:  Cut our military spending in half.  We’ll still be the biggest, baddest superpower on the planet!  And, like any organizations run by reasonable people, the reduced spending will force us to spend only on priorities… which is exactly what we should be doing right now.

 

After all, the gravest danger to the American way of life might not be a military war… rather — because of huge deficits — it might just be bankruptcy. 

 

Go figure the irony in that one.