Although Republicans have added dollars to the President’s defense budget proposal,it still represents a 2016 defense budget that has been slashed by over $100 billion under his administration.
It comes at a time when Russia has dramatically ramped up its military spending, for both conventional and nuclear weapons. Indeed, Moscow, for the first time in history, now leads America in strategic nuclear weapons, and maintains a ten to one advantage in tactical nuclear weapons. It has returned to cold war bases, including those in the Western Hemisphere.
Additionally, China has become a military superpower, equalling American technology on land, sea, and space, and with growing numbers.
Asymmetric challenges from terrorists and the growing military power of Iran and North Korea add to the threat level.
Contrary to popular belief, only about one-sixth of federal spending is military related. As noted by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities “18 percent of the budget, or $615 billion, paid for defense and security-related international activities. The bulk of the spending in this category reflects the underlying costs of the Defense Department. The total also includes the cost of supporting operations in Afghanistan and other related activities, described as Overseas Contingency Operations in the budget, funding for which totaled $92 billion in 2014.”
You will need purchase cheap cialis http://respitecaresa.org/parents-corner/all2/ to take the medicine in proper dose and time. Jaiphal is stated as an levitra samples respitecaresa.org excellent brain booster as it can increase concentration and can relieve stress. Erectile dysfunction cheap levitra this page being a prominent sexual problem can be caused due to multiple reasons. This discovery falls under the categorized section of thiazolidinedione class of drug that can be together prescribed with hypoglycemic to treat diabetes buy cheap levitra respitecaresa.org effectively. Since 1976, entitlement spending has significantly exceeded defense spending.
Those seeking to reduce the defense budget, despite the threats, maintain that the U.S. spends more than its adversaries. However, the comparison is inaccurate. As a democracy with an open press, American defense spending is widely and fairly accurately reported. In nations such as Russia, China, Iran and North Korea, the publicly stated military budgets substantially understate actual spending. In China, for example, the People’s Liberation Army receives vast sums from profits from interests it holds in allegedly private companies.
Comparative cost factors also come into play. The Council on Foreign Relations notes that “If military budgets were compared in a way that reflected varying personnel costs, U.S. military preeminence would appear smaller than it does using straightforward comparisons based on market exchange rates.”
As the nuclear threat to the American homeland has increased dramatically, programs to protect from an atomic assault have been cut or eliminated. According to the Heritage Foundation, “President Obama has cancelled some of the most promising missile defense programs, including the Multiple Kill Airborne Laser, and Kinetic Energy Interceptor…the Administration cancelled the SM-3 Block IIB interceptor that was supposed to protect the U.S. from a long range ballistic missile threat…”
Defense spending should be grounded on real need based on the actual threat level, not on competing political considerations or ideology. Unfortunately, that is not how the current White House has proceeded.