The report notes that the United States now faces five rising challenges—China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and transnational terrorism—yet has fewer military forces than at any time since the end of World War II. “Simply put,” it observes, “the United States needs a larger force than it has today if it is to meet the objectives of the strategy.”...Message: The US needs to spend more on military — a lot more.
The National Interest
Why the U.S. Military Is In Serious Trouble
Army Lt. Gen. Thomas Spoehr (ret.) iDdirector of The Heritage Foundation’s Center for National Defense
9 comments:
“Mesopotamian societies were not interested in equality,” he told me, “but they were civilized. And they possessed the financial sophistication to understand that, since interest on loans increases exponentially, while economic growth at best follows an S-curve. This means that debtors will, if not protected by a central authority, end up becoming permanent bondservants to their creditors. So Mesopotamian kings regularly rescued debtors who were getting crushed by their debts. They knew that they needed to do this. Again and again, century after century, they proclaimed Clean Slate Amnesties.”
Hudson also writes: “By liberating distressed individuals who had fallen into debt bondage, and returning to cultivators the lands they had forfeited for debt or sold under economic duress, these royal acts maintained a free peasantry willing to fight for its land and work on public building projects and canals…. By clearing away the buildup of personal debts, rulers saved society from the social chaos that would have resulted from personal insolvency, debt bondage, and military defection” (p. 3). from https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2018/11/145003.html [bold added]
I can't see many too many people willing to fight for their guaranteed jobs though. As has been pointed out before, slave armies are not optimum.
“Message: The US needs to spend more on military — a lot more.”
In 2003 the military and the weapons makers started demanding more and more money for the “war of terror.” Now they are demanding more and more money for the “Korean threat,” the “Iranian threat,” and so on.
The more billions the U.S. government throws at the military, the louder the military and its toadies scream that they are "in serious trouble."
And no one ever asks, “How will you pay for it?”
A protection racket!
"You guys are biased against war."
"None of you are qualified."
"I'm a trained electrician."
"Art major!"
"Art major!"
Hey, the military is only growth industry left.
Debt is also a growth industry.
The question is which growth industry will destroy us first: debt or war.
“And no one ever asks, “How will you pay for it?”
Warriors and technical people as a cohort have less of this cognitive deficiency...
Finally, Franko talks about something he is materially competent in - cognitive deficiency.
Warriors and technical people as a cohort have less of this cognitive deficiency...
Oh really.? And you know this how?
I’d bet the same percentage of them when discussing this subject would maintain that other things “need” to be cut in order for their pet projects to go forward. They wouldnt advocate waiting first for the cuts to be made to fund their project but they would still claim this other spending is inflationary and excessive/unsustainable in face of the spending they are advocating
Which means they are as wrong as the rest.
Post a Comment