laitimes

Is it reasonable to justify the growing military threat to the United States, but the military spending is not enough?

author:Look at the clouds

In the impression of many people, the United States has the largest military spending in the world, but it exceeds the total military spending of the last nine top-ranked countries. However, a recent article on the website of Forbes lamented that the military threat facing the United States is increasing, but military spending is insufficient.

According to the author, the current security threats to the United States are steadily increasing. These include: helping Ukraine resist Russia's invasion but not enough military aid; supporting Israel to defeat Hamas terrorism; dozens of attacks by U.S. forces in the Middle East; difficulties in forming a task force to defeat attacks in the Red Sea; countering Chinese mainland's military pressure on Taiwan but unable to do so; and responding to North Korea's nuclear threat, which is under real threat to the U.S. homeland.

Is it reasonable to justify the growing military threat to the United States, but the military spending is not enough?

And on the most critical issue of increasing the amount of military spending, how much room does the US treasury have?

The United States, which currently allocates 3% of GDP to the military, faces four looming obstacles to further spending.

Over the past few years, military spending has received a huge increase in funding. When President Trump took office in 2017, the Department of Defense had a base budget of $523 billion. The request by fiscal year 2024 is $842 billion. That's a nominal increase of 61% in seven years. If inflation is deducted, there is a real increase of $167 billion, excluding supplementary funds for emergencies such as Ukraine.

Is it reasonable to justify the growing military threat to the United States, but the military spending is not enough?

Now that all branches of the armed forces are complaining about the lack of military spending, it has exposed a more serious problem facing the United States: the Department of Defense is not effectively allocating resources. The underlying causes of this are the decline of the defense industry due to the deindustrialization of the United States, the aging of a large number of weapons platforms, the supply chain crisis and labor shortages, the corruption of the procurement process, and so on.

The second factor is the structural deficit, with the US national debt already reaching $34 trillion. The federal debt held by the American public fell below $1 trillion in 2010 to $27 trillion today. The United States' military spending is essentially borrowing money to spend, and military spending is still the largest component of discretionary spending.

You can understand that compared with other projects, because it does not involve people's livelihood, military spending is more likely to be controlled and increased spending.

The third factor is that both the American public and the government are less interested in military operations overseas. The Biden administration is reluctant to involve the United States in another war, while the Americans, since the war in Afghanistan, have focused more on domestic issues than on overseas threats.

Is it reasonable to justify the growing military threat to the United States, but the military spending is not enough?

The fourth factor is the infighting between the two parties in the United States, which tends to use military spending to support the knife. For example, the U.S. defense budget for 2024 will cut $36 billion in project funding, which will wreak havoc on military modernization plans.

It can be seen that from the perspective of the United States, the ceiling for continuing to increase military spending has appeared. So why does the United States spend so much on military spending? Actually, this is an old topic.

First, the United States is a global military deployment, and in order to maintain the world's military hegemony, it must have 598 overseas military bases, which are all gold-swallowing beasts. The more security guarantees provided by America's allies, the heavier the burden on military spending.

Second, the de-industrialized United States has led to very expensive procurement costs for weapons and equipment. The United States purchases a warship, which is about four times older than China's, and this is not counting the cost of using and maintaining the platform.

Is it reasonable to justify the growing military threat to the United States, but the military spending is not enough?

3. Serious corruption, indiscriminate spending of money, and so on. An ashtray costs $650, a wrench costs $400, and mineral water is flown in from Europe for bathing. The US media pointed out that the Pentagon currently has $3.8 trillion in assets and $4 trillion in liabilities, and half of its assets cannot be accounted for. Behind the irregularities and over-reimbursements are fraud, waste and abuse.

Fourth, there are too many old weapons platforms in stock, which consume a large amount of military spending. You look at the rusty Burke-class destroyers, the aging F15C/D, F-16CD, A-10, F22 and E3, and think of the Minuteman III intercontinental missiles that have been deployed for 60 years, and the supercarriers waiting in line for maintenance.

Is it reasonable to justify the growing military threat to the United States, but the military spending is not enough?

It can be said that how majestic the US military was in the past, how much money it will have to spend to support it now. Do you want to replace it with new equipment? Sorry, you can't make it.

Because of the lack of money, the current good military and diplomatic strategy of the United States is nothing more than deterrence and forbearance, or being an ostrich and negotiating. You should understand by now: Why didn't the United States dare to launch a surgical attack on the Houthis in the Red Sea?

Read on