brad's View - American Militarism
Feb 08 '08
The Bottom Line The United States would be better served by redeploying our armed services to our own shores, shrinking the military, and investing in domestic programs.
Many Americans are under the illusion that our federal government has grown because of entitlement programs. If they examined a record of history, they would see that in particular, this is true under the administrations of FDR, LBJ, and The Crook.
It is true that entitlement programs such as Social Security (FDR), Medicare (LBJ), and New Deal/Great Society expansionism (The Crook) are costly programs that expanded government.
But those programs are a drop in the bucket compared to the single source of the greatest increase of our federal debt since the beginning of the Reagan administration: New American Militarism.
Conservatives like to blame liberals for “taxing and spending” on social programs such as Social Security and Medicare, but they never publicly admit the elephant in the room.
Since 1980, our federal debt has grown from $930 billion to $9.007 trillion dollars in 2007. In case you are wondering, it grew from $930 billion in 1980 to $3.233 trillion in 1990 (all but one year under neo-conservative rule). It grew from $5.674 trillion in 2000 to the latest available figure of $9.007 trillion in 2007 (again, all but one year under neo-con rule).
Where has all this money gone?
The military. The United States military is widely regarded as the largest and most powerful military force in the history of the world. It is built to fight wars on multiple fronts. It has permanent military bases in over 100 locations and dozens of foreign states.
Our annual defense expenditures have driven this country to the brink of bankruptcy. We no longer raise money to pay for our expenses; we merely borrow and print it.
The United States accounts for nearly half of the world’s military expenditures.
Long before the events of 9/11, neoconservatives such as William Kristol, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Charles Krauthammer, and Frederick Kagan advocated a foreign policy of American “hegemony.” While some of these names aren’t household brands, any historian worth his salt acknowledges that these people were highly influential in the “Bush Doctrine” (preemptive/preventative war/foreign policy).
All of this costs money. Some people say “we’re at war. What choice do we have?” It justifies spending another $90 billion on Iraq. It makes the figure digestible.
I want people to keep in mind that it is not social programs that are bloating this federal government. It is not Social Security, it is not Medicare, and it certainly is not welfare. The bulk of our annual deficits are run up by the Department of Defense. And the DOD’s request come at the behest of a foreign policy agenda hell-bent on dominating the world.
Is this what you want? Do you think America should be spending your tax dollars on world domination? Are you prepared to embrace the “blowback” from our interventions in foreign states and foreign opinion of America? How is this part of “small government?”
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
brad
|
 - Top 500 |
|
Member: Brad Engelmann
Location: Helen Township, MN
Reviews written: 161
Trusted by: 94 members
About Me:
brad@engelmann.us (email address)
|
|
|
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.