Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : 2000:The Make-or-Break Election -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: c.horn who wrote (704)	8/25/2000 9:47:08 PM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1013

From the thread header: the next President is going to have to preside over a Reaganesque rebuilding of our defenses, after eight years of military misadventure and neglect. Why? Are you at all familiar with the realities of military spending? Do you know that at current levels, the US accounts for one third of all military spending worldwide? That we spend four times what the Russians spend, eight times what the Chinese spend, more than twice the spending of Britain, Germany, France, and Japan combined? Our potential adversaries are outspent by our regional allies alone: Western European defense spending is far above that of the Russians; Japan spends as much as China. And now you want more? Where is the threat to justify the expense? Who are we going to fight, aliens? If we reduce involvement in "peacekeeping" missions - which I agree is a good idea, though I think we should support them - there is even less need to add to that budget. He is also going to have to face a China that now has the stolen design of our most advanced W-88 warhead, and the nuclear devices for it to carry and the rockets which can reach our shores. The China threat is being vastly overblown by defense lobbyists. China has had a small deterrent force capable of reaching the US since the 1950s. If you compare the US nuclear force to the Chinese, you will see that the margin of power in our favor is staggering. The Chinese are neither stupid nor suicidal, and they have no reason to fight us. I don't see how China could possibly be interpreted as enough of a threat to justify an increase in military spending. If we aren't getting an adequate defense for $200+ billion, what would be a reasonable, fiscally conservative response? Throw more money at them, or ask some serious questions about where the money is going?