Debate Club

Are Cuts to the Defense Budget Necessary? >

Cutting Back on Defense Spending Will Make the World Safer

Reducing the military budget means less war, not more

November 21, 2011

About Patrick Takahashi:

Patrick Takahashi is director emeritus at the University of Hawaii and has served as a full professor of engineering, director of the Hawaii Natural Energy Institute, and vice president of development for the Pacific International Center for High Technology Research.

I've had several postings on defense spending and the national deficit over the past few years in the Huffington Post, so let me start with a two by four statement that the simple solution to our deficit problem should be to increase it. That said, we nevertheless have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to switch spending for defense to more sensible priorities, such as the amelioration of peak oil and global warming, while optimizing educational, public infrastructure, and environmental needs. Except for a few politically necessary expendables, however, the military-industrial complex will prevent what should be a slam dunk obvious answer.

[See a collection of political cartoons on the budget and deficit]

Part of the problem, also, is us. I've long wondered why the American public mostly encouraged this spending insanity at a time when we have no enemy. But this is a group where 82 percent believe in some kind of afterlife (much less in most developed countries ) and where only three years ago three-fourths of Republicans believed in global warming, but today only a tad more than half do. Thus, compelling logic is meaningless in this analysis.

Our only fear should be China (Russia was a real threat as part of the Soviet Union, but will only decay over time), for it only spends one sixth what we do on war. On a per-capita basis, this is 1/25th the amount.

Oh, those Middle East terrorists? There are only a few thousand really bad ones. Let them fight among themselves and do everything possible to minimize those almost expected acts of terrorism to come. But taking over the world? No.

In my original HuffPo piece, "Well, Barack, We Have a Problem..., "I suggested that President Barack Obama go to the next G8 summit and pronounce a Gorbachev-like bombshell: America will reduce defense spending by 10 percent this coming year, and will continue to slice 10 percent every year if you all do the same. In just a very few years, military spending will be minimal and the world will be at a higher level of peace forever.

[See photos of U.S. troops in Afghanistan.]

This is the 10 percent simple solution to peace. Before you make any inane comments, click on my various postings to appreciate that Russia is getting feeble, and China will also become old before it gets rich. The United States will be supreme for a long time to come, and those war funds can better be applied to help our country, cure planet earth, and enhance the fate of humanity.

Oh, while our president totally ignored my 2008 advice, he has another chance. He personally hosts the 2012 G8 Summit to be held in Chicago. Only so fair, as he just greeted the APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation) gathering in Honolulu (he calls both cities home). What are the odds for him to embrace the 10 percent solution for world peace forever? I'm afraid I answered that question in the first paragraph.

Tags:
Department of Defense,
defense spending,
deficit and national debt
Other Arguments
#1

Yes — By limiting expenditures, U.S. can actually solidify its defense

RON PAUL, U.S. Representative and Republican Candidate for President

#3

Yes — Reductions should be a gradual process led by the military braintrust

TRAVIS SHARP, Bacevich Fellow at the Center for a New American Security

#4
#5

Yes — Cuts may be necessary, but don't shift the entire burden to the military

KORI SCHAKE, Bradley Professor of International Security Studies at the United States Military Academy at West Point, N.Y.

#6
#7

No — The solution to the debt crisis lies in entitlements and taxes, not the military budget

DOUG BERENSON, Director of the Defense & Aerospace Group at Avascent Group

#8
#8

No — The consequences of cutting the military budget are still not understood

J. RANDY FORBES, U.S. Representative and Chairman of the House Armed Services Readiness Subcommittee

About Debate Club

A meeting of the sharpest minds on the day's most important topics, Debate Club brings in the best arguments and lets readers decide which is the most persuasive. Read the arguments, then vote. And be sure to check back often to see who has gotten the most support—and also to see what's being discussed now in the Debate Club.

Have ideas about what the Club should be debating? E-mail it to dclub@usnews.com.

You can also join the debate on Facebook or follow Debate Club on Twitter.

Advertisement
Cartoons
Thomas Jefferson Street Blog
IRS, AP and Benghazi Are Not Obama Scandals

The word "scandal" doesn't appropriately describe anything going on in Washington these days.

Democrats Should Be Worried About Polls After Obama Scandals

Democrats should be more worried about President Obama's approval ratings.

Tea Party IRS Rally Should Wait Until After Moore Tornado Recovery

Tea party rallies against the IRS should wait until the tornado victims are taken care of.

God Bless America and the Boy Scouts

The Fund does the right thing by pushing the Boy Scouts to lift its ban on gay members.

IRS, AP and Benghazi Show the Failure of Obama's Big Government

Giving an inefficient organization like the IRS more responsibility makes it more likely to screw up, not better able to solve this nation’s problems.

Coburn Wants Oklahoma Tornado Aid Offset With Budget Cuts

Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn wants spending cuts before aid is sent to tornado victims in his own state.

Crowdfunding Zack Braff's Film And Robert Griffin's Gifts Is a Mistake

Rich people don't need donations from the public.

Poll Shows Americans Find Obama's IRS Story Barely Believable

There is still something fishy about the scandal at the IRS.

Advertisement