It is impossible to discuss defence cuts without getting into politics. I try my
best to present both sides of the argument. Additionally, it is surprisingly difficult to find data on how much money the US could save by closing many foreign bases such as Germany for example. If anyone has any clue why we have troops there 67 years after D-day, please feel free to contact me directly with an answer. Also if anyone has more concrete numbers please contact me.
I will admit that I like Jon Huntsman’s approach to foreign policy. Huntsman opposes the war in Afghanistan, which I see the Afghanistan war as a total waste of money and lives. Ron Paul is too extreme on both the domestic and foreign policy fronts; he seems to be an ideologue and not a realist.
A Look Back At Warren Buffett’s Best and Worst Oil & Gas Investments
Warren Buffett is perhaps best known for his large investments in some of the world's most recognizable brands, companies like Coca-Cola, American Express and Apple. Q1 2020 hedge fund letters, conferences and more Companies that fit into this bracket seem to fall squarely within his circle of competence. They sell a product that's easy to Read More
But anyway back to the economics of the debate:
Many Americans acknowledge that it is important for the USA to provide aid to poorer countries in terms of education i.e. meaning lesser un-employment in the future and aiding sensitive countries like Afghanistan, Iraq and Yemen with forces. The theory goes that this will lead to less terrorism and more peace in the world, but that is not how many see it. The Republican Study Committee with a total strength of 165 members, proposed a plan to cut the US Budget $1.6 billion off of the USAID (United States agency for international development), which means that out of a total yearly budget of $3.8 trillion, a tiny fraction will be slashed off.
Contrary to surveys, the US is still by far the biggest global power (excluding the EU). The USA is all over the world, whether it be the subject of aiding another country through means of income in kind ,or stopping terrorism of any sort through its own military forces combined with the coalition forces of NATO, or even letting the whole world know what she can do to protect its national interest.
But recently, all this involvement took a bend and went to a side where no economy would want to be. With the recent financial crisis which engulfed America more than any other country, being one of the strongest and the most powerful economy in the world, had to re plan her budgets to fight for the recovery of deficit that she had gone into.
Some statistics are that the Republicans, opposing party, would like to cut off a great amount of the proposed budget by the Barack Obama. The argument is now attentive on struggles by the Pro-republican governed House and the Senate to amend President Barack Obama’s calculated budget. The method and figures are dense, but the Community of Representatives is emphatic for deep slices in foreign aid. Associated with preceding levels, it needs advancement support slashed by $746 million and global disaster aid by $415 million. At risk are platforms for child subsistence nourishment and schooling, as well as UN procedures. The U.S. Global Leadership Coalition approximates that the proposals would also slash charitable aid by 41%.
Many claim that this cutting off would do is weaken the stand of the US in other markets of the world such as East Asia, which has been a dynamic interest for America for many years now. It also plays the part of an important economic market partner in the face of China, India and Japan and Taiwan.
This would jangle the very grounds of the USA economy, military and technological strengths. Why do we say this? It is because the United States plays the part of a “regional balancer” Thus, the United States is the centre of a “wagon wheel” of joint coalitions that maintains global security.
What would happen if the budget is cut?
Given the serious part of the U.S. military, both in upholding Asian regional permanence and answering to on-going pressures and worries in the western Pacific, major defence spending cuts would fade the American situation in the expanse. Secretary of Defence Leon Panetta stated that the United States would sustain and even expand its military services in Asia. While comforting to U.S. associates, Panetta’s initiate is idealistic if the undecided cuts in the American defence budget are not inverted.
The Bowles-Simpson commission projected that a one-third deduction in U.S. bases in Asia and Europe would save $8.5 billion by 2015. The Centre for American Progress, and the traditional Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, state that a lessening of 50,000 troops from Europe and Asia, would result in an accumulation of reserves worth $70 billion in the next decade. The culmination of the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq can and should guide them to a principal drop, if not abolition, of U.S. bases in those nations. Iraq presently acts as host to 39 bases, lessening from a highest of 505, and billions, of dollars in gear and maintenance charges. In Afghanistan, the United States is still distributing countless billions of dollars to construct, enlarge, and preserve a system of 700 U.S., alliance, and Afghan strongholds. The total cost of the war is currently $100b a year. Barrack Obama will not be president by then, but he has suggested keeping troops in Afghanistan until 2024.
These cuts would certainly bring a few challenges to the US and some necessary steps can be suggested at this point:
To provide complete funds to the US Defense
USA would not be able to commit fully to the military position it holds in various countries and needs to fund its military with a complete budget and cannot look to slash it out.
Providing with proper information to the media and the public
If the budget is really slashed and the military are provided with cuts; it would be wise for the Defence to let the media and the people of America, of the consequences of such an act and the position it will be with the coalition forces in the occupant countries.
Outlining a Strategy for Asia
When if the budget is cut, it would be impossible for the US defence to support its coalition forces and reduces the ability to fully perform.
Solidify the relations with its allies
Asia provides many challenges and these cannot alone be met by America and needs the support from its alliances. Countries that share common democratic value and norms must be urged by the US to augment their contributions to their aid by addressing the international security encounters.
The present war on terror in Afghanistan has already cost the US above $ 4,000,000,000 according online resource “Costofwar”. Other publications also elaborate that Between FY2009 and FY2010, average monthly DOD expenditure for Afghanistan grew from $4.4billion to $6.7 billion a month. Furthermore in 2011 the assembly has appropriated a total of $1.283 trillion for military actions, base safekeeping & rebuilding for the US concerns in Iraq and Afghanistan.
It is hard to get concrete numbers, but by ending the war in Afghanistan, closing down unnecessary bases, we could save hundreds of billions of dollars.