PDA

View Full Version : Cutting Military Spending Does Not Mean Cutting Defense, by Ron Paul




kylejack
11-21-2011, 12:26 PM
Cutting Military Spending Does Not Mean Cutting Defense,
By Ron Paul
November 21, 2011

When asked about my intention to cut the U.S. defense budget, I am always quick to clarify that I want to cut military spending, not defense. I want America to be the most strongly defended nation in the world, but I oppose our current foreign policy that stretches our troops thin across the globe so we can play world policeman. This foolish endeavor costs us dearly in lives, and it has become far too expensive to sustain.

In the past 10 years, overall military spending has more than doubled, which should be extremely troubling for those claiming to be fiscally conservative. Frankly, it is impossible that government does not waste any of the hundreds of billions we spend on defense yearly.

We cannot control government's growth without reining in the expansion of the military industrial complex. If we are really serious about balancing the budget and addressing our unsustainable debt, nothing can be off the table.

For instance, President Obama claimed we were drawing down troop levels this year and turning over operations to the Iraqis. Surely, at least a 10 percent cost savings should have come from that move alone. Yet the funding for 2011 was exactly the same as 2010, and the spending outlook for 2012 doesn't seem to indicate any reductions in this area.

We will remain in great jeopardy if we do not immediately change course. Either we make the tough choices now, or we face the even tougher consequences later.

My Plan to Restore America does not cut one penny of defense. But it helps make America more secure, and it brings our troops home to defend this country. Under my plan, America will retain the strongest national defense in the world, but we will end expensive foreign wars, overseas nation building, and foreign welfare.

Under my presidency, the United States will still spend more money on defense than President Bush did in FY 2005. America will still spend four times more on defense than China and more than all the countries of Western Europe combined. We will continue to maintain our status as the most dominant military force on the planet, but we will do so with a much more sensible and sustainable foreign policy.
http://www.usnews.com/debate-club/are-cuts-to-the-defense-budget-necessary/cutting-military-spending-does-not-mean-cutting-defense-cut-military-spending-to-strengthen-us

IndianaPolitico
11-21-2011, 12:32 PM
Fantastic! Short, and to the point. Really hits home that we can cut military spending dramatically, and still spend more then anyone else!

anewvoice
11-21-2011, 01:21 PM
"Under my presidency" - that part gave me chills for a moment. :)

lx43
11-21-2011, 01:32 PM
Good article.

libertygirl2
11-21-2011, 01:37 PM
Ha, I am doing the "100 Reasons for Ron Paul" series on YouTube, and my video today was about this. Didn't even see that article until now.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00nvEeZPC-E

georgiaboy
11-21-2011, 01:43 PM
Under my presidency, the United States will still spend more money on defense than President Bush did in FY 2005. America will still spend four times more on defense than China and more than all the countries of Western Europe combined. We will continue to maintain our status as the most dominant military force on the planet, but we will do so with a much more sensible and sustainable foreign policy.

He needs to talk this up more. Its implications are jaw-dropping.

wgadget
11-21-2011, 01:48 PM
Tweeted to major neocon talk radio hosts. :D