RangerDave wrote:
DE, what's your opinion of our current level of military spending? I know you'd allocate funds differently, but I'm not clear on whether you think the aggregate amount is too much, too little, or Goldilocks.
Our current level of military spending is adequate in terms of raw dollars. It's inadequate in terms of what we're getting for the money. Our military strength has been in constant decay since 1992. We've spent the money that could have fixed it, and some areas have been fixed, but we need the complete package. It's only been compounded by more strategic blunders dating back to Robert McNamara.
I have a mental picture of what I'd like our overall structure to look like, and what strategic goals it would have, and I think it would result in greater combat power, and ultimate savings, but would cost us in terms of our ability to conduct long-term, low-intensity operations like we are now (which would be rapidly brought to an end in my fantasy football military world). I'd also include major restructuring of high-level commands, just as Gates is trying to do, to eliminate extraneous generals and their headquarters, and major reform of procurement. That would be reform in industry, in the military procurement apparatus, and in Congress. I'd also ditch a number of international agreements; INF might stay, but NPT, Partial and Comprehensive Test Ban, anything that might be left of ABM, any and all SALT/START/SORT and other strategic armaments treaties would be withdrawn from.
It's a very complex question, because a lot of changes I'd make would have cascading effects.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
