Military/Defense Spending Should NOT Be Increased

While watching the Senate debate on the continuing resolution to keep from shutting down the government, I heard many senators (from both parties) talking about how we need to "rebuild" our military. For that purpose, they want to once again increase the military budget. I disagree.

Look at the chart above showing military spending in billions of dollars. Note that the United States already spends far more than any other nation does on defense/military spending. In fact, you can combine the spending of the next 11 biggest spenders (both friends and enemies) and you would still not quite equal the spending of the United States.

How can it be that we spend so much more than any other country and still have a military that needs to be rebuilt? That makes no sense. We are spending enough to have the readiest and most capable military in the world -- and if we don't have that, then it is obvious that money for defense is being spent poorly (or wasted).

And that is exactly what is happening. Money is being wasted on things that do not contribute to our national defense. A prime example is that the U.S. is operating about 900 military bases around the world.Do we need 900 military bases around the world to defend our country? Of course not. We could cut that number by half (or even three-quarters) without affecting our national defense at all.

If we really need to rebuilt our military (or increase its readiness), we could easily close many (if not most) of those bases, and redirect those funds to rebuilding the military or its readiness.

We also waste money by pumping billions into the military-industrial complex for weapons that do not work and for weapons the military has said it doesn't want or need. Too much of this money doesn't help the military or national defense, but just goes to fatten the bank accounts of corporations.

We already spend enough to have the best military and national defense in the world. We do NOT need to spend more. We just need to stop funneling unnecessary money into the military-industrial complex and operating bases that are not needed for our defense. We need to spend smarter -- not spend more!

Only 49% Of Americans Say U.S. Has #1 Military

The chart above is from the Gallup Poll. They surveyed 1,021 adults between February 3rd and 7th, and their poll has a margin of error of 4 points.

For the first time since Gallup has been asking this question, less than half of Americans say the United States has the number 1 (strongest) military in the world. And equal number (49%) say the U.S. is only one of several nations with the strongest military.

That's a shockingly low percentage. Evidently the Republican propaganda (lies) about our military have been pretty effective. This is crazy.

People need to examine the facts, instead of listening to what politicians say to get elected. The United States spends more on it's military than the next seven biggest spending nations (see chart below). And we could cut our military spending in half, and still be spending more on our military than any other nation in the world.

In addition, the United States still has about 800 military bases (or more) around the world -- hundreds of times more than any other nation.

If the United States doesn't have the number 1 military in the world strength-wise, then our politicians and generals are wasting an incredibly large amount of money.

Time For U.S. Military To leave Okinawa

Two US troops have been arrested over the alleged rape of a Japanese woman on the island of Okinawa.

The two men, identified as 23-year-old sailors, were detained by police on the southern island on Tuesday.

Japan's top spokesman called the incident "completely unacceptable" and the US ambassador said it was being taken very seriously.

The US bases some 26,000 troops on Okinawa, where there is opposition to the ongoing military presence.

The sentences above are from the BBC website a few days ago. I don't know whether the two accused American sailors are guilty or not. That will be decided by a court of law. It is the last sentence that needs to be understood and discussed by all Americans. The map above shows the Japanese island of Okinawa, and the orange spots on that map are the American military bases on that island -- bases that have been there for many years now.

Note that American military bases cover at least a quarter of all the land on Okinawa (if not slightly more). And the people of Okinawa want those bases gone. Can you blame them? Back in 1995 a 12 year-old girl was raped by three American servicemen. At that time there were many demonstrations demanding the Americans leave the island. The U.S. government at that time promised to close all the bases and bring 35,000 troops back home -- but only if they could build a new Air Force base on the north end of the island.

It is now 2012, and nothing has been done. The U.S. refuses to close any bases unless it gets the new base it wants, and the people of Okinawa oppose the new base being built. They just want ALL of our troops to leave. Frankly, I agree with them. It is time to bring those troops home. The Japanese are our best friend in Asia, and all we are doing by trying to hold on to Okinawa is to create ill feelings toward Americans -- both on Okinawa and in the rest of Japan. Is it really worth it?

Don't we have the ability to deliver missiles anywhere in the world in a matter of minutes, and bombs in just a few hours? Wouldn't a carrier task force in the area be just as effective (and cost a lot less, both in money and angry feelings)?

It is time to bring all our troops home, and let the people of Okinawa have their island back. And while we're at it, we should close a few hundred more military bases we have around the world. It would create better relations with both our friends and our enemies, and we could use the billions of dollars that would be saved to fix our own economy.

Right now we are the biggest bullies in the world, and we use our enormous military power to force other countries to do what we want. That needs to stop. I often hear Teddy Roosevelt's saying repeated often by people in this country -- "Speak softly and carry a big stick". But far too often our government forgets the "speak softly" part and just resorts to the "big stick" method of diplomacy. And we simply cannot afford to be the self-appointed policeman for the world anymore -- not diplomatically or financially.

Bush's Iraq Defense Pact Is Falling Apart

The United States has a very tenuous legal justification for invading and occupying Iraq. That justification is a United Nations mandate that was approved after Bush sent Colin Powell to lie to the United Nations about reasons for the war. But that mandate runs out at the end of this year. At that time, the United States would either have to withdraw or get the mandate extended.

But Bush doesn't like either option, so he has been trying to force the Iraqis to agree to an American-Iraqi Defense Agreement. Such an agreement would let him bypass the United Nations and commit the United States to keeping troops in Iraq for many years. For a while it looked like he might be successful in that endeavor, but now opposition is growing in both countries.

Although the Bush administration says it's still on target to complete the agreement by July 31st, anonymous sources in the administration and the Iraqi government say they don't think an agreement can be reached by the end of the year. The sticking point in the negotiations are the terms of the agreement each side is demanding.

The Bush administration wants:

* Dozens of bases from which U.S. troops can launch attacks or arrest Iraqis without prior consent of the Iraqi government.

* Complete immunity for U.S. troops and security contractors.

* Control of Iraq's air space.

* No guarantee the U.S. will protect Iraq from foriegn attacks.

The Iraqi government wants:

* U.S. troops to stay on bases outside the cities.

* No immunity for troops and security contractors.

* U.S. will act only when Iraq requests help.

* U.S. will not control Iraqi air space.

It doesn't look like the two sides are close to an agreement. But even if they were, opposition to the agreement is growing in this country. Even some Republicans are afraid Bush is trying to force a future administration into accepting an unending occupation of Iraq.

Obama has spoken up about the agreement and says it must be "absolutely clear that the United States will not maintain permanent military bases in Iraq." He also says that any security commitment to Iraq must have Congressional approval. Obama is on solid constitutional grounds here.

Any such agreement reached would have the effect of a treaty, and according to the United States Constitution, "He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur". It seems clear enough that the agreement could not take effect without approval of the Senate.

If Senate Democrats would just show a little backbone, they could stop this ridiculous agreement in its tracks, and that's just what they should do! Without the agreement, Bush would have to go back to the United Nations. They certainly wouldn't agree to a long extension of the mandate, if they extended it at all.

It is time to withdraw ALL American troops from Iraq. A good step toward achieving that goal would be to deny Bush this defense agreement. That would give the next president the option of starting an orderly withdrawal.