What would you do with $2.9 TRILLION?

[Eastleigh Seagull]

Where does the threat come from:

North Korea - crazy dwarf with nuclear weapons and a million man army
Iran - crazy religious fanatic potentially with nuclear weapons and a large military currently the driving force behind instability in Iraq
Israel - has to be kept reined in by the US and can only be done so if US will help to guarantee its security.
China - massive defence budget and aspirations to run most of Africa and the Caucasus
Russia - fluctuating between disintegration and Stalinist style centralism. Still with massive military and massive nuclear force (some of which may be on sale to the highest bidder).
Central Africa - basket case of failed states breeding the next generation of terorrists.
Saudi - who knows what that place will look like in ten years.
Japan - getting back in the military game
And then you come to today's terrorists.
Is that enough to start?

 

[sten_super]

The threat from terrorists is not non-existant, but the point, which Lokki makes quite well, is that it allows the US to justify huge defense spending to 'fight it'. The war in Iraq was part of the war on terror, yet what benefit, in terms of reduced terrorism, has been felt as a result? The 'war on terror' cannot be fought by pouring money into manpower; but the US have used it as an excuse to do exactly this.

Nations such as North Korea, China etc could be kept in check through use of the nuclear deterrent; this was probably also true to a large degree (although not entirely) in Iraq, but it seems that the US was far too keen to use the 'war on terror' as an excuse to get the ground troops in and invade. Entirely because it was self-serving. It allowed increased spending on defense (which boosts the economy) and allowed the government to fight a never-ending war (which is generally a vote winner).

 

[Lokki 7]

Where does the threat come from:

North Korea - crazy dwarf with nuclear weapons and a million man army
Iran - crazy religious fanatic potentially with nuclear weapons and a large military currently the driving force behind instability in Iraq
Israel - has to be kept reined in by the US and can only be done so if US will help to guarantee its security.
China - massive defence budget and aspirations to run most of Africa and the Caucasus
Russia - fluctuating between disintegration and Stalinist style centralism. Still with massive military and massive nuclear force (some of which may be on sale to the highest bidder).
Central Africa - basket case of failed states breeding the next generation of terorrists.
Saudi - who knows what that place will look like in ten years.
Japan - getting back in the military game
And then you come to today's terrorists.
Is that enough to start?

OK

North Korea. Will the US military budget remove the threat? Will it contain it?
Iran. See above.
China. Yes massive defence budget but when was the last time China invaded a country? They have learned from the US winning the cold war through economics and are now trying the same to gain global power. This is why Taiwan is so important to them and I agree with Buzzer this is an issue. But lets be honest, the Chinese have a better claim on Taiwan than the US does on Iraq. Is this a threat to the US?
Russia. Again, does the US budget spending improve anything?
Central Africa, Saudi, Japan? Please. Are these threats to the most powerful nation on earth? Only the Saudis if they stop exporting their oil, but hey, then we will just "liberate" them.

 

[Man of Harveys]

So the Americans are spending all this money because of sabre-rattling from, erm, Japan, Saudi Arabia and Russia, not because they like invading countries to try (and fail) to free up the oil? Is that really the case?

 

[Eastleigh Seagull]

but nuclear deterrence is reliant on rational actors - can Kim Jong il or Ahmedinijad be described as rational? In other words can they be deterred - probably not by nukes as they know the US will not use them. But they can be deterred by stealth bombers, bunker busting bombs, tomahawks and all those things that the US defence budget funds.

And are never ending wars really a vote winner - think not. Vietnam. Iraq.

 

[Lokki 7]

So the Americans are spending all this money because of sabre-rattling from, erm, Japan, Saudi Arabia and Russia, not because they like invading countries to try (and fail) to free up the oil? Is that really the case?

To para-phrase Al Murray. the Iraq war is a good thing. We need a war every 10 years to stay match fit in case the Germans have a third crack of the whip.

 

[Eastleigh Seagull]

Are these threats to the most powerful nation on earth?.

Weird disconnect there - the US is the most powerful nation on earth mainly due to its ability to keep funding the most powerful military in the world, which in many ways self perpetuates its strong economy.

If it stopped funding its military then I believe the threats I outlined would get worse. Who will oppose North Korea and Iran - the EU? We couldnt even sort out Yugoslavia.

Yes the US has many many faults but despite that I prefer them to be helping to keep the peace around the world (yes I know they started the war in Iraq but in general without the US there would be many many more wars taking place) than the Chinese.

 

[Lokki 7]

but nuclear deterrence is reliant on rational actors - can Kim Jong il or Ahmedinijad be described as rational? In other words can they be deterred - probably not by nukes as they know the US will not use them. But they can be deterred by stealth bombers, bunker busting bombs, tomahawks and all those things that the US defence budget funds.

And are never ending wars really a vote winner - think not. Vietnam. Iraq.

Who are they a threat to? I think their longest range missile capable of delivering a nuclear war-head is around 200km. Terrify the shit out of me if I lived in Seoul but I think Washington should be safe. Doesn't justify the US military spending in my opinion.

 

[Lokki 7]

Weird disconnect there - the US is the most powerful nation on earth mainly due to its ability to keep funding the most powerful military in the world, which in many ways self perpetuates its strong economy.

If it stopped funding its military then I believe the threats I outlined would get worse. Who will oppose North Korea and Iran - the EU? We couldnt even sort out Yugoslavia.

Yes the US has many many faults but despite that I prefer them to be helping to keep the peace around the world (yes I know they started the war in Iraq but in general without the US there would be many many more wars taking place) than the Chinese.

Agree with none of that. They are powerful through economics. Economics funds their powerful military.
Who will oppose N.Korea? Er.. South Korea maybe? And I have said nowhere that funding should be stopped, just cut by say one third. So I don't see what would change.
Why do we need a world policeman? Attempts so far have been disasterous. And I don't see China applying for the role.

 

[sten_super]

And are never ending wars really a vote winner - think not. Vietnam. Iraq. [/B]

Wars in which the US are the victims are yes. The problem with those wars is that the US public has become too far disconnected from the fight; that is where the US went wrong. But if the US public are constantly made to feel under seige, which is achieved through a large military presence, among other things, then yes. People forgive other short comings because you are having to fight a war.

 

[Eastleigh Seagull]

The north Koreans? Their longest range missile (which had a failed test last year) will just about reach Los Angeles. It goes a long way the other way too. More importantly it also easily reaches Japan. The large US defence budget is a security blanket for the Japanese dulling down their mostly unspoken debate about nukes and a greater military. If the US pulls out of that region then all bets are off. China, South Korea, North Korea, Taiwan and japan generally arent the best of friends. It is the US presence that keeps the peace

 

[Eastleigh Seagull]

Agree with none of that. They are powerful through economics. Economics funds their powerful military.
Who will oppose N.Korea? Er.. South Korea maybe? And I have said nowhere that funding should be stopped, just cut by say one third. So I don't see what would change.
Why do we need a world policeman? Attempts so far have been disasterous. And I don't see China applying for the role.

Its a chicken and egg situation. Economies grow strong through wars. South Korea will not stop the North - they know that within 24 hours of any conflict about half of Seoul would be flattened by the more than 30,000 artillery pieces across the border. The North has them over the proverbial barrel. As in so many other areas the US security guarantee protects the South and also makes it unnecessary for it to go nuclear - as it does with Japan.
Cut the budget by a third and these guarantees will start to disappear and conflict will not be far behind.

Anyway - its been fun - I'm off down the pub

 

[Man of Harveys]

I'm really struggling to get my head around the idea that the Americans - given their and "our" antics in Iraq - are spending all this money purely in order to keep global peace, certainly since the end of the Cold War. Because it really looks like very little more than a combination of very old-fashioned imperialism and post-9/11 cowboy politics showboating, isn't it? And even the American voters there haven't bought it one bit, although that took a while.

 

[desprateseagull]

get myself and all family a nice house, usual boys toys etc..


mass transport people in drought / flood ridden regions of the world to less hostile places, treat any diseases, feed/clothe'house them all, then train them up to be worthy citizens... rake 30% off anything they may sell / invent.

release all prisoners, and give their victims one rifle shot at them with a gun. if they die, tough. if not, they go free (extensive firearms training to be given beorehand..)

recall UK toops from Iraq etc, give everyone left 1 weeks notice to give up or else..then nuke the m'fers..

lastly, buy off Lewes, nah, Sussex- aw feck it, the whole UK and declare February a national holiday- free public tranport for everyone, with double pay for the drivers.

all done in time for tea at wetherspoons- i hear they do a nice meal deal on Tuesdays..