Rand Paul: Is Our Military Budget too Small, or Is Our Mission too Large?

Breitbart ^ | 15 Feb 2018 | Rand Paul

[morphing libertarian]

let the europeans defend themselves

[pierrem15]

Explanation: we still have bases in Germany because it’s cheaper than building new facilities in, say, Poland. And it also gives us some leverage with the Germans.

[Wuli]

“We still have troops in Germany because the other Europeans do not trust the Germans.”

The Europeans can resolve that and are more likely to if we don’t quit making resolving it unnecessary.

[CodeToad]

We waste more than we spend in the military right now.

Security clearances are now being held up because, as usual, there isn’t enough investigators to complete security applications.

The entire industry as “current clearances only” because they can’t get any approved.

This means paying contract agencies loads extra for delayed projects.

[Wuli]

me - “and move our Navy to ports in Israel from the Persian Gulf - telling the Gulf States and the Saudis to get Navies of their own to defend their oil shipping lanes.”

you - “That would maybe be putting too many eggs in too small a basket? IDK.”

1. In Qatar our every move and communication is under surveillance by the mullahs in Tehran and their spies all over Qatar. 2. We are only “defending” the Gulf States and the Saudis and there oil trade there - they have enough money to build the forces to defend themselves against Iran. 3. We NEED such a formal defense pack with Israel so the mullahs in Iran know their designs on attacking Israel will amount to an attack on us. 4. Russia will know being parked in Syria is directly, not just remotely, challenged.

me - “Move our 39,000 troops out of Japan to South Korea and the Philippines - more forward with the Norks and telling Japan to beef itself up.”

you - “SK might be on board with that, not sure about Dutuerte in the PI though. Is this a better strategy considering China’s island building? It would definitely make Rocket Boy crap his pants.”

Dutuerte in the Philippines is a question, but sentiment against the new imperial China, in foreign policy and in domestic policy crosses all the political spectrum in the Philippines other than the Communists, so there may be hope there. Philippines will be a better “aircraft carrier” in the Philippines than Japan - (a) further from China than Japan, (b) less expensive and better naval harbor than we have in Japan, (c) can cause Japan to serious re-arm. The changes in the Philippines and Japan would position the U.S. and Japan to more directly challenge imperial China’s “island building” as well as its bullying all the way down to Malaysia and across to Vietnam.

“One of the reasons none of the above will happen is money.
It would cost hundreds of billions of dollars to close bases and open new ones. Maybe trillions?”

There would be one-time costs and there would also be some operational savings. And yes I would finance the capital costs with debt. But I would do the debt as if at war, and float special ten-year bonds that would be pledged by the defense budget to actually get paid off, not rolled over every year just adding forever to the total debt. The operational cost savings leaving Japan and Germany would help pay for it but yes, there would still be an additional cost for it for ten years.

you - “Another consideration; any move from Japan would be celebrated as a victory by China. Even if we are just shuffling troops around their propaganda arm would make hay of it.”

me - So what, those attitudes from China would play negatively in Japan and add to the push for Japan to rearm. Which they should. They have prospered greatly under our defense umbrella and can well afford to be a strong ally with us, not depending on us so much for defense. The Japanese are also now better received in the Philippines than are the Chinese, in spite of similar WWII experiences with Japan.

[Vaduz]

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost over a trillion dollars and lasted for over 15 years.

And how much has been spent on welfare programs over the same time frame?.

[oldvirginian]

“1. In Qatar our every move and communication is under surveillance by the mullahs in Tehran and their spies all over Qatar. 2. We are only “defending” the Gulf States and the Saudis and there oil trade there - they have enough money to build the forces to defend themselves against Iran. 3. We NEED such a formal defense pack with Israel so the mullahs in Iran know their designs on attacking Israel will amount to an attack on us. 4. Russia will know being parked in Syria is directly, not just remotely, challenged.”

I didn’t know that about Qatar.
I imagine anywhere we go in the ME we would be under constant “supervision”.
I’m not enamored of our military being the merc’s of whatever sand rat that wants a navy.

We haven’t had a president with the backbone to sign a pact with Israel.
President Trump might be the exception.

I really need to get a good, big world map.

“Dutuerte in the Philippines is a question, but sentiment against the new imperial China, in foreign policy and in domestic policy crosses all the political spectrum in the Philippines other than the Communists, so there may be hope there.”

I don’t think Dutuerte likes anyone but himself.
I see him as a shifting sands kind of guy, not really a loyal ally.
Saying that, he does have his hands full with communists, muslims and drugs. Tough spot to be in.

“Philippines will be a better “aircraft carrier” in the Philippines than Japan - (a) further from China than Japan, (b) less expensive and better naval harbor than we have in Japan, (c) can cause Japan to serious re-arm. The changes in the Philippines and Japan would position the U.S. and Japan to more directly challenge imperial China’s “island building” as well as its bullying all the way down to Malaysia and across to Vietnam.”

With modern missiles, subs and in-flight refueling I can see the advantage of not being right on top of China.

I read there has been talk of Japan amending it’s constitution to allow for a standing military instead of the current Defense Forces.
I’m sure they could ramp up production and training at the drop of a hat. Surely they have the planning already drawn up.
I didn’t know that the PI would be friendly to any Japanese military in the area. I need to keep up with things.

IIRC Vietnam has a somewhat tangled history with China.
Even though the government is communist I understand they have backed off the hard top to bottom model practiced in China.

When thinking about China Taiwan must also be considered.
I’m sure they are very nervous about an insurgent China.

I do like your idea of how to pay for It all. Savings here and there and legitimate ten year bonds.

Thanks for the conversation and education.

[Wuli]

China and Vietnam have been at real war with each other more than once. Usually China has paid a price that caused it to abandon the effort. Maybe someday China will think it can overcome logistics issues - on land - and already I think that China thinks Vietnam is no match with it at sea. I think Vietnam is looking at us at helping out with its military deficit’s vis-a-vis defending itself at Sea.

[dfwgator]

Even Ho Chi Minh said that he’d rather smell French s___ than Chinese s___.

[sparklite2]

The motto should be:

“The US Military. Undermanned and Overmissioned.”

[oldvirginian]

China is being aggressive everywhere it seems.
Their island building is making every neighbor they have nervous and they have clashed on land with India and never really resolved that.
If this keeps up we are going to need that huge navy President Trump talks about.
Didn’t China recently launch it’s first aircraft carrier?

I have no problem with closer ties with Vietnam. If we could do economically what our politicians wouldn’t let us do militarily it would be good.

Between the US, Japan, the PI, S Korea, Vietnam and India China could be checked at sea and make them cautious about any land ventures.

It will have to be done sooner or later and I trust President Trump more than others to make a good deal for us.