Thursday, October 7, 2010

Military Bling Bling

"...Oh! Spending all your money on me and spending time on me..."

A wonderful soundtrack for all the inappropriate jazzhanding about military bling bling, nicht war? 

Being hot!, funny, cool, fun to be with, sexy smart and desirable as the world's only fully crunk, off the hook hyper puissant bears certain costs.

It's true! And to be blunt, high time to make the case that Great Satan's military strength is totally key to an overall strategy of American leadership which - sacre bleu - is the key for keeping the lid on the modern world that Great Satan herself created in the last millennium.

Certain defeatists, wishful thinkers and the domesticus giganteus entitlement posse enjoy pointing out Great Satan will decline in the near near future.

"...Some even believe that decline offers us a better future, in the model of relatively pacifist social-democratic allies.

Big mistake!

"...This is an error. A weaker, cheaper military will not solve our financial woes. It will, however, make the world a more dangerous place, and it will impoverish our future.

 Concern with military bling bling is totally suspect

"... It is neither the true source of our fiscal woes, nor an appropriate target for indiscriminate budget-slashing in a still-dangerous world.
"...Consider the actual dollars. According to theCBO's most recent projections, the president's proposed budget for 2011 will add $10 trillion in debt over the next decade. By 2020, the federal government will owe $20 trillion, or $170,000 per American household.
"...That's a beast that must be stopped, but it is a beast that has not principally been fattened on a diet of Pentagon spending. Even with the costs of Iraq and Afghanistan, this year the DoD will spend some $720 billion—about 4.9% of our gross domestic product, significantly below the average of 6.5% since WWII
"...Defense spending has increased at a much lower rate than domestic spending in recent years and is not the cause of soaring deficits. Even as the United States has fought two wars, the core defense budget has increased by approximately $220 billion since 2001, about a tenth as much as the government devotes each year to "mandatory" spending: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, lesser entitlements such as food stamps and cash assistance, and interest payments on the debt. These expenditures continue automatically, year after year, without congressional debate.
"...We should be vigilant against waste in every corner of the budget. But anyone seeking to restore our fiscal health should look at entitlements first, not across-the-board cuts aimed at our men and women in uniform.
"...Furthermore, military spending is not a net drain on our economy. It is unrealistic to imagine a return to long-term prosperity if we face instability around the globe because of a hollowed-out U.S. military lacking the size and strength to defend American interests around the world.
 "...But the peace does not keep itself. The Global Trends 2025 report, which reflects the consensus of the U.S. intelligence community, anticipates the rise of new powers—some hostile—and projects a demand for continued American military power. Meanwhile we face many nonstate threats such as terrorism, and piracy in sea lanes around the world. Strength, not weakness, brings the true peace dividend in a global economy.
"...We have not done enough to help our military preserve the peace and deter (and if necessary, defeat) our enemies. Americans have fought superbly in Iraq and Afghanistan, and have prevented any further terrorist attacks on the scale of 9/11. But faced with a nuclear Iran, or a Chinese People's Liberation Army that can deny access to U.S. ships or aircraft in the Asian-Pacific region, there are many missions ahead.
"...Yet we face those challenges with a baseline defense budget—defense spending minus the cost of the wars—that is 3.6% of GDP, significantly less than the Reagan-era peak of 6.2%. Our active-duty military is two-thirds its size in the 1980s. The number of ships, helicopters, fighters, strategic bombers and other combat vehicles is declining. Much of what remains in service is decades old and in need of replacement.
"...The recent report of the Independent Quadrennial Defense Review Panel—a bipartisan body —described our military decline as a looming "train wreck." 
"...At a minimum, it was necessary to retain current land forces, accelerate Air Force modernization, and perhaps most urgently, halt and reverse the shrinking of the Navy. Meeting these requirements "will require a substantial and immediate additional investment that is sustained through the long term."


Anonymous said...

America's going to be completely unrecognizable politically speaking in 50 years, and this sort of commitment to militarism / empire is part of the reason why.

(Not saying it's wrong. Whatever, fuck that. Saying it's non-sustainable over the long term, and that fact is going to lead to massive political problems w/ civil military relations)

Render said...

It has little or nothing to do with "empire", although Alfred Mahan and Teddy Roosevelt might disagree if they were still around.

It has everything to do with why America has remained politically recognizable (if vaguely so) over the last 150 years.

Anony - Did you actually read the linked article?


Old Rebel said...

So -- because the "defense" budget isn't the biggest contributor to the deficit, it isn't a contributor to the deficit?


Fact is, NATO is a relic and a waste of money, as are the bases we maintain in Europe, Japan, and Korea.

The US isn't a force for peace, it's the world's greatest source of instability. Those cowardly drone attacks are only inciting more Muslims to want to seek revenge.

J. said...

It's always about the money.

Dems/Repubs aren't going to screw with entitlements until it's a crisis. They're all cowards, House Repubs are the bigger hypocrites.

It's foolish to tie defense spending to the GDP, what if the GDP plunges for a few years? Do we chop all the defense spending too?

It's not how much you buy, it's what you spend defense money on. If we weren't tied down in two foolish conflicts for nine years, maybe there would be funds for modernization. But then again, defense acquisition is broke, has been broke for years.

GSGF don't get no bling-bling because her sugar-daddy can't produce any without 15 years lead time. OH YEAH babay.

GrEaT sAtAn'S gIrLfRiEnD said...

Old Rebel! HMMMM - look - if the 'terrorists' wanna stand up fight - Great Satan has made it very easy to get into.

NATO's worth in the new millennium has been proven - if somewhat uncool - with current news that Europa is the target of Waziristan's Drone haters - with chances to take hits from enemies instead of Great Satan. Not to mention being a force multiplier

Decorum prohibits addressing your other concerns - we are all well aware of your curious, bizarro Great Satan hating.

Old Rebel said...


Oh, give it a shot. Defend the Empire's bloodlust, from the murder of nearly a million Filipinos who resisted foreign domination, to killing two million Vietnamese in that senseless war, to the 5,000 Serb civilians who died to distract attention from Monica, to the 500,000 dead in Iraq. I could go on.

BTW, the instability in Pakistan is the direct result of DC's intervention in Afghanistan.

So yes, the world's greatest source of instability.

Centurion said...

Old Rebel,
If you think that the US is the leading source of world instability then you are sorely mistaken.
The US is by far the largest donor of aid in the world. You state 5,ooo Serb civilians died as a mere political distraction. What of the million Bosniacs that the U.S. Saved enforcing the Dayton Peace Accords? What about the Kosovar Albanians? Oh, and they were all Muslim by the way.
You state we destabilized Pakistan? I think not. The problems in Pakistan are of their own making. Pakistan's ISI have supported the Taliban and other militants to use as a strategic reserve against India. Pakistan's problems stems from their paranoia of Indian hegemony and their willingness to harbor radicals just in case they need them.
I guess if we ignored the problems in the world they would go away- right?
Then again, you would probably offer some morally relative argument that the U.S. had 9/11 coming because of our imperialist policies I'd bet.

Old Rebel said...


Get the blinders off your eyes. Look up what the US did to the innocent civilians in East Timor in 1975.

The US props up dictators all over the world, and sticks its nose where it doesn't belong -- then wails when it gets its wrist slapped.

Yes, 9-11 would never have occured if the evil empire didn't stir things up all over the world.

Anonymous said...

"The fact that slaughter is a horrifying spectacle must make us take war more seriously, but not provide an excuse for gradually blunting our swords in the name of humanity. Sooner or later someone will come along with a sharper sword and hack off our heads."

Where is that quote from? Inquiring minds and all.

GrEaT sAtAn'S gIrLfRiEnD said...

It's from v. Clausewitz - a rough xlation from Vom Kriege

GrEaT sAtAn'S gIrLfRiEnD said...

Well, nobodys perfect Old Rebel - yet GrEaT sAtAn"S the best ever. By miles.