|
Cheers.
I believe that if the US were to reduce their spending (to sane levels) the slack would get picked up by other nations so that the total amount was spread a little more evenly.
I don't see the US taking the position where they will reduce their spending to this level.
Sure we could spend more on the military BUT or people do not seem to want this (and historically, the US has not wanted this and have done their damnedest to squash our military in the post WW2 world -- I guess we make them nervous) and seeing as we are a democracy we tend to go the way of the mandates of our elected officials.
In the end, our defence spending mirrors our DEFENSIVE needs and as I've pointed out, there are very few who could or even would attack us here. On a Global sense we rely in part on the size of the US (this does not mean that we do not contribute) but on a domestic front (the important part of Defensive spending) we are spend all that is neccessary.
Here's a thought. If there was an aggressive neighbour on our border (such as France and Germany have had historically) I am sure we would amass an army and spend the funds to defend ourselves.
Interestingly, the point I made about the North was echoed by our political leader in the election campaign today.
__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke
|