Author Topic: Restrained Strategy, Lower Military Budgets  (Read 262 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

rangerrebew

  • Guest
Restrained Strategy, Lower Military Budgets
« on: September 07, 2016, 11:22:11 am »
Restrained Strategy, Lower Military Budgets
Benjamin H. Friedman
September 7, 2016

Editor’s Note: Welcome to the eighth installment in our new series, “Course Correction,” which features adapted articles from the Cato Institute’s recently released book, Our Foreign Policy Choices: Rethinking America’s Global Role. The articles in this series challenge the existing bipartisan foreign policy consensus and offer a different path.

 

Despite five years of official complaints about “sequestration” budgets, U.S. military spending remains historically high. In 2016, U.S. military spending will be $607 billion, including $59 billion for Overseas Contingency Operations, the fund that ostensibly finances wars but also funds non-war (or base) accounts. Barring a new budget deal, the fiscal year 2017 budget, now stuck in Congress, will be virtually the same size.

In real (inflation-adjusted) dollars, Americans spend more on the military today than at any point in the Cold War, except the brief peaks during the Korean War and the 1980s. Current military spending is 36 percent higher in real terms than in 2000, with two-thirds of the growth in base spending. The United States spends more than double what Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea collectively spend on their militaries.

http://warontherocks.com/2016/09/restrained-strategy-lower-military-budgets/
« Last Edit: September 07, 2016, 11:23:00 am by rangerrebew »