Monday, March 7, 2011

Offense vs Defense Budget

Full piece at The Cross Culturalist


If Congress were to require that the current defense budget were to be broken down into two separate budgets, defense and offense, then it would, at the least, be eye opening to many about where those dollars are going. While there are plenty of neocons who wouldn't bat an eye at the idea of spending away our children's future on offensive measures, some republicans may sit up and take notice at just how much of the budget is going to offense. Furthermore, there is a nobility associated with the word defense. The proponents of American imperialism hide behind this noble idea of defending our country. They gussy up actions that are not remotely defensive by calling them defensive, and because republicans are unwilling to police their own side, the neocons get away with it. If offensive efforts were to be called offensive, the shroud of nobility would be pulled back. Maybe, just maybe, the ugliness of the offensive actions of our imperialism would start to see the light of day in republican circles.

9 comments:

ConMan said...

Pablo, you don't get it.

We're in Europe to defend our interests. There are treaties involved as well.

By keeping our enemies IN CHECK over there with short range missiles, we make our shores here less of a target.

Better to shoot out a Russian or Chinese missile from Germany or Japan than waiting for it to arrive at NYC.

The best defense is a GREAT OFFENSE!

Anonymous said...

Con, The article is not by Pablo.

Dan, I disagree wih your position on this, but I do like your style. However, I can not, and will not go to Pablo's blog to read the rest of your post. Bad career move.

ConMan said...

Sorry Pablo.

My response was for DanL. I saw Cross culturalist and just assumed Pablo. My bad.

BTW, Why are people forced to leave this site to read the complete article?

Why not just cross post in both places?

DanL said...

Anon, it isn't a career move. I do not write for employ, only for fun. Why can't you go to Pablo's blog? Because you are unwilling to have your thinking challenged?

DanL said...

ConMan, why do we need tens of thousands of troops in Germany or Japan to have missile defense systems there? Why not make the Germans, Japanese, or other so called allies take on that role of shooting down missiles over their own soil? Why can't we use carrier groups in the Atlantic and Pacific as shields instead of land bases in Europe or Asia? I'm sorry, these are tired old arguments that are killing us financially just as surely as Social Security and Medicare are.

Ann said...

I feel a lot safer knowing that our shores are not America's first line of defense.

Anonymous said...

DanL, there is not specific enough information here to decide what you are even talking about. I didn't notice that you posted this somewhere else, but now that I know, I don't have any inclination to go there to read it. If you really want our comments, you should cross post it.

AZ

Pablo said...

Dan,

I would not be offended if you posted the full piece here and maybe only a portion at The Cross Culturalist. There are certainly more readers here. Lol.

bob said...

Conman,

"We're in Europe to defend our interests. There are treaties involved as well.

By keeping our enemies IN CHECK over there with short range missiles, we make our shores here less of a target.

Better to shoot out a Russian or Chinese missile from Germany or Japan than waiting for it to arrive at NYC.

The best defense is a GREAT OFFENSE!"


AMEN!