From the Politics of Personal Destruction to Reasonable Compromise:

#2 Defense Spending

It is unfortunate that candidates for president concentrate their statements on character attacks of their opponents and polarized and intransigent policy positions.  I believe that candidates themselves would better serve the public by presenting proposals for viable compromises on the issues that have lingered in the limbo of inaction and gridlock.  Surrogates and the media will take care of the personal destruction part.  May I humbly propose here in my blog and probably simply repackage some of the thinking of many others, a series of what I consider reasonable compromises.

Defense spending in our nation is by any standard excessive, and one side wants to make major cuts, while the other side is insisting that we are weakening our military with draconian cuts to its budgets.  I believe both sides are right.  First, we should remember that our nation has been and continues to be the indispensable nation that draws the line, preventing powerful dictatorships like Russia from invading Europe and China from imposing Communism in all of Asia.  In the words of President John F. Kennedy, "Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty."  Today, we have weakened our defenses by the undue shrinkage of our naval fleet and the

inadequate supply of spare parts for our planes, tanks, and other equipment.  Manpower is often also in short supply.  In conclusion, we need to increase spending in these areas.

Nevertheless, while some defense spending increases are warranted, the waste and mismanagement are astronomical, and much of it is caused by Congress.  Costly military bases that the Pentagon would close but that the local district congressmen and state senators prevent.  The purchase of fighter jets and battleground vehicles was not what the military wanted but that congressmen forced them to buy.  The general public would support legislation and even a constitutional amendment preventing Congress from altering the military requests.  The cost of recruitment and retention of soldiers in a professional army is ruinous, and although the American population dreads the idea of a lottery draft, presidential and congressional leadership should step up.  Our commitments to cover the high cost of defending some of our allies, which are wealthy nations invariably failing to pay their promised fair share, should be renegotiated.

I dare guess that we could spend more to bring our military up to par and save money at the same time.

Visit my website at www.CarlosArce.net

Visit my blog at American Analysis (carloslarce.blogspot.com)    

Purchase my books at Amazon.com : Carlos L. Arce

Purchase my art at www.TheStatuette.com

Use my Real Estate Service at www.FindaFloridaHome.com