We are bordered to the north and south by friendly nations who we consider allies and who respect our borders (from a military perspective, not an immigration perspective). Both of them also have a significantly weaker military than ours. Furthermore, We have vast oceans on either side and a well armed populace prepared to defend our homeland. Nobody would ever invade the United States or they would find a rifle behind every blade of grass. The existential nuclear threat we face as a world is better faced through diplomacy now that mutually assured destruction is already taken for granted. The USA is already the largest military spender in the world by a factor of over two. We could literally half our military budget and still crush any other country we wanted to in a traditional armed conflict. But, the time of traditional armed conflicts are over. We only have proxy wars and the threat of nuclear annihilation to worry about. If we cut the military budget by 400 billion, we'd still outspend China on the military by a few hundred billion. Plus we'd have 400 billion to tackle the rampant issues we have at home. For example, education. Just look at yourself, you can't even compose a sentence. "We don't need to decrease military spending; we need to increase it to keep the nation protected from threats." That's how you should have written that rediculous sentence if you wanted to be grammatically correct.
@AbjectTariffLibertarian7mos7MO
While it's true that traditional geographical threats have lessened, the nature of threats has also evolved significantly. Cyber warfare and terrorism are not bound by borders or geography. In fact, they can originate from anywhere around the globe, and their potential damage can be catastrophic. The increase in military budget could be allocated towards improving our defenses in these non-traditional areas.
Also, the assertion that we could halve our military budget and still win any traditional armed conflict may not consider the complexity of modern warfare. It's not just about… Read more
@9FDPB3L7mos7MO
Well, I am glad to see that you can compose a sentence, lol. That was a cheap shot on my part, but I felt it was warranted. You bring up interesting points. However, regardless of the nature of conflicts, we can still afford to spend more on cyber warfare and technology or anything else when compared to any other country, even after significant budget cuts. As Americans, I do not see that our level of personal safety would decrease at all if our budget was halved. In fact, our warfighting capabilities might increase if that money were spent on education and healthcare instead. The demands… Read more
