# How big a military does the USA really need? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 26, 2017, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101 "2017-03-26T21:51:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![PoppaSan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/poppasan/32/189_2.png) [@PoppaSan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PoppaSan)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2017, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/61 "2017-04-02T01:35:20Z")
> [@Beren\_Erchamion](#): > > Yes. > That’s what Jesus would do. > Jesus wasn’t kidding when he said “offer the other cheek” and “love your enemies” and “bless those who curse you” and “do good to those who harm you.” > Responding to violence with violence only begets more violence–it doesn’t solve the problem. > In addition to being the morally superior approach, love is also the practically more effective solution. Is this the same Jesus that threw a tantrum in the temple? Make a cord whip to chase out the merchants that had set up business inside it? Also the same one prophesied to return some day leading a huge army to fight what is to be the final ‘good vs evil’ battle? ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2017, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/62 "2017-04-02T02:50:14Z")
Or, he could mean [this Jesus](http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/thanks-jesus-for-this-food-de-nada.jpg). ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2017, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/63 "2017-04-02T03:06:39Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > You know what? This Jesus guy was like a philosopher or guru or something. He offered platitudes and allegories pertaining to how individuals ought to behave. He did not offer _any_ wisdom regarding how to manage states. He was _not_ a politician or a diplomat. Whatever he might of said that might vaguely have pertained to such matters is of no consequence. Heh. That’s actually kind of hilarious: the idea that Jesus said (a) hey, if somebody hits you, you absolutely shouldn’t hit back – but if you say, _okay, but can I ask others to hit back for me,_ he would’ve said (b) oh, it’s fine to ask people to rough folks up for you; they can even put folks in the _grave_, if they’re retaliating on your behalf; the key is that you, personally, stand back and turn the other cheek while trained killers earn their pay by ending the lives of your assailants. (I mean, for all I know, that _is_ what he would’ve said, word-for-word.) ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2017, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/64 "2017-04-02T03:16:00Z")
Holy crap, I just noticed that I wrote “might of”. Excuse me while I go cry. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2017, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/65 "2017-04-02T16:12:59Z")
The Inquisition, we are assured, never killed anyone. The condemned were “released to the secular arm” who did the burning. Why, the inquisitors actually begged the secular authorities not to harm the condemned, out of true Christian love. (Of course, the Pope had decreed that if the secular authorities didn’t kill the condemned, they were to be excommunicated…) So, alas, historically, exactly this kind of double-think was employed by Christians, to grisly effect. **eschereal** : I still get “its” and “it’s” wrong now and then. I’ll join you in a good cry. ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2017, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/66 "2017-04-02T17:08:16Z")
> [@Beren\_Erchamion](#): > > Yes. > > That’s what Jesus would do. > > Jesus wasn’t kidding when he said “offer the other cheek” and “love your enemies” and “bless those who curse you” and “do good to those who harm you.” > > Responding to violence with violence only begets more violence–it doesn’t solve the problem. > > In addition to being the morally superior approach, love is also the practically more effective solution. … \*\*“The result of this is that so-called peace propaganda is just as dishonest and intellectually disgusting as war propaganda. Like war propaganda, it concentrates on putting forward a ‘case’, obscuring the opponent’s point of view and avoiding awkward questions.” ― George Orwell \*\* ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2017, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/67 "2017-04-02T17:10:43Z")
> [@Beren\_Erchamion](#): > > Yes. > > That’s what Jesus would do. > > Jesus wasn’t kidding when he said “offer the other cheek” and “love your enemies” and “bless those who curse you” and “do good to those who harm you.” > > Responding to violence with violence only begets more violence–it doesn’t solve the problem. > > In addition to being the morally superior approach, love is also the practically more effective solution. **“As a Nobel Peace laureate, I, like most people, agonize over the use of force. But when it comes to rescuing an innocent people from tyranny or genocide, I’ve never questioned the justification for resorting to force. That’s why I supported Vietnam’s 1978 invasion of Cambodia, which ended Pol Pot’s regime, and Tanzania’s invasion of Uganda in 1979, to oust Idi Amin. In both cases, those countries acted without U.N. or international approval—and in both cases they were right to do so.” ― José Ramos-Horta,** ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2017, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/68 "2017-04-02T17:36:12Z")
> [@spifflog](#): > > So it’s easy to bitch about the U.S. Military. **But it’s a relativity small percentage of the budget** and I don’t think we’d like to world if it wasn’t there keeping the bad guys at bay. (bolding mine) Googling shows that 16% of the federal budget is for the military, making it the third largest category of expenditures, behind only Health & Human Services and Social Security. 16%, for those that enjoy fractions, is nearly 1/6 of all federal money spent. I don’t think your characterization of this as “a relatively small percentage of the budget” is in any way accurate. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2017, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/69 "2017-04-03T01:59:16Z")
> [@XT](#): > > Just walk me through this one part. What do you envision that, let’s say the Navy, would do if its budget was cut in half? What do you think they would spend the money they have remaining on, exactly? What would it mean for fleet readiness, for instance? What about maintenance? Do you envision that the Navy would be able to support much of the fleet? What about the crews, since they make up a large percentage of the budget? > > Just as a hint, cutting the Navy’s budget in half would probably mean we’d have to mothball most of the carriers and most of the support ships. We wouldn’t have the crews or the ability to maintain the whole fleet or even most of it. Which would mean we’d be operating with a few carriers in VERY limited ways. You seem to have the idea that cutting the budget in half would naturally simply mean half the combat power, but it doesn’t work that way. Less crews and less hulls means we don’t have any slack for downtime or maintenance…which means we have to scale back operations across the board. It’s actually more complicated even than that, but a cut of half the budget would probably mean 1/4 or less of the current force projection…at a time when we’ve already been drawing down on this for years, and already the fleet is under strain because there aren’t enough hulls and crews to give enough downtime for everything needed. The same is true, more or less, for the other services. Like I said, it’s nothing but a WAG. I think that carriers would play very little, if any role, in a war against Russia or China; carriers might be used only for lower-intensity conflicts against the likes of small countries, or countries having little to no antiship capability (such as North Korea.) Against Russia or China, I think wars would depend heavily on 1) Stealth bombers (the B-2 and B-21 will be immensely important to a downsized American military,) 2) Submarines, 3) Nuclear deterrence and 4) US allies greatly bulking up their own defenses. If the F-35 and F-22 are really as good as their 50-to-1 or 100-to-1 kill ratios or whatever advertise (assuming a certain critical mass of fleet size deployed to a region hotspot,) then they might be able to get a lot more air superiority work done with less. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2017, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/70 "2017-04-03T02:00:06Z")
> [@spifflog](#): > > Saying that the military is over bloated is an over simplification as well. There have been budget reductions over the last few years that have forced the military to choose carefully. But any organization with one million plus employees will have issues and waste. > … > So it’s easy to bitch about the U.S. Military. But it’s a relativity small percentage of the budget … I agree that the U.S. military is good for America and for the world. But it still suffers from extreme bloat — unnecessary bases and unnecessary expensive weapons programs. And your figures are way off. The U.S. has over 1.4 million uniformed personnel (NOT including National Guard etc.), 800,000 civilian employees, and 776,000 contract employees. (That’s THREE million total, not “one million plus.”) Equivalent salary for the three groups are respectively $150 billion, $108 billion and a whopping $254 billion. That’s Billion with a B. “Relativity small percentage” of the budget? Assuming that’s a typo, it’s very misleading. **The military budget comprises _over half_ of the the entire “discretionary” portion of the federal budget.** That doesn’t even include veteran’s budgets, paramilitary operations, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Weisshund](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ba8739/32.png) [@Weisshund](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weisshund)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2017, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/71 "2017-04-03T20:32:22Z")
> [@Beren\_Erchamion](#): > > Yes. > > That’s what Jesus would do. > > Jesus wasn’t kidding when he said “offer the other cheek” and “love your enemies” and “bless those who curse you” and “do good to those who harm you.” > > Responding to violence with violence only begets more violence–it doesn’t solve the problem. > > _ **In addition to being the morally superior approach, love is also the practically more effective solution** _. Yes, we see how well that worked for the Jews in Nazi germany, or the Poles, or the Roma, etc… I have a feeling Jesus was not saying it was ok and to just go along with it, and i dont think he would just sit there while someone feeds children into an oven ---
**Author:** ![SmartAlecCat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SmartAlecCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmartAlecCat)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2017, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/72 "2017-04-03T22:00:20Z")
> [@Weisshund](#): > > i dont think he would just sit there while someone feeds children into an oven Isn’t that exactly what the Jesus mythology claims? He watches everything, everywhere, all the time, while possessing the power to remedy it? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2017, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/73 "2017-04-03T22:03:08Z")
> [@SmartAlecCat](#): > > Isn’t that exactly what the Jesus mythology claims? He watches everything, everywhere, all the time, while possessing the power to remedy it? And forgives, IIRC. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2017, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/74 "2017-04-03T22:06:52Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > And forgives, IIRC. Leg Of Lamb, Takes Away the Sins and GRANTS PEACE! Er, paraphrased of course. ---
**Author:** ![spifflog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@spifflog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spifflog)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2017, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/75 "2017-04-03T22:59:28Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > “Relativity small percentage” of the budget? Assuming that’s a typo, it’s very misleading. **The military budget comprises _over half_ of the the entire “discretionary” portion of the federal budget.** That doesn’t even include veteran’s budgets, paramilitary operations, etc. I’d argue if you have to artificially subdivide the budget to prove your point, it probably isn’t all that valid. Who care what percentage DoD is of the discretionary budget? That says more about runaway entitlements than it says about the DoD budget. Since you brought it up, what is the huge percentage of that "paramilitary operations of yours? 5%? 10%? In almost any other discussion, 16% of something would be relatively small. Unless you have an ax to grind. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2017, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/76 "2017-04-04T00:13:53Z")
Social Security and Medicare are not “entitlements”, they are things _we pay for_ and thus receive something in return. SS, in particular, was not in the Federal Budget at all until saint Ronnie pull his little shuck-and-jive routine so that he could borrow against it for his ill-conceived missile defense toyshop. ---
**Author:** ![spifflog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@spifflog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spifflog)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2017, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/77 "2017-04-04T00:53:30Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > Social Security and Medicare are not “entitlements”, they are things _we pay for_ and thus receive something in return. SS, in particular, was not in the Federal Budget at all until saint Ronnie pull his little shuck-and-jive routine so that he could borrow against it for his ill-conceived missile defense toyshop. There is so much wrong here I don’t know where to start. Sure they’re entitlements! Not sure why this sticks up your ass, but they’re called mandatory spending and entitlements. By your (I presume you just made this up) definition things we pay for and thus receive something in return, how is that different from the national parks or DoD? You pay for the parks and can go. You pay to get defense, and for the world to be shaped a certain way and you receive security and a steady flow of resources. You might want to check what president and party added social security into the unified budget calculations. Hint: Its probably not the party that you want it to be. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2017, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/78 "2017-04-04T01:13:08Z")
> [@spifflog](#): > > Sure they’re entitlements! Not sure why this sticks up your ass, but they’re called mandatory spending and entitlements. It bothers me because I hear “entitlement” used in a sort of derogatory way. Yes, we are _entitled_ to those things, because _we paid for them_. But rarely is “entitlement” used these days but by someone who is trying to imply that we do not deserve them. Like they are some kind of freebie. ---
**Author:** ![spifflog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@spifflog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spifflog)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2017, 11:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/79 "2017-04-04T11:22:22Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > It bothers me because I hear “entitlement” used in a sort of derogatory way. Yes, we are _entitled_ to those things, because _we paid for them_. But rarely is “entitlement” used these days but by someone who is trying to imply that we do not deserve them. Like they are some kind of freebie. I can understand that. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2017, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101/80 "2017-04-04T12:25:29Z")
> [@spifflog](#): > > I’d argue if you have to artificially subdivide the budget to prove your point, it probably isn’t all that valid. > > Who care what percentage DoD is of the discretionary budget? That says more about runaway entitlements than it says about the DoD budget. Artificially? :smack: You do understand Congress doesn’t vote on how much the Treasury will pay as interest on its debt, right? It’s almost $200 Billion annually now. And it happens that the Federal Government operates a big pension scheme presently making payments to over 60 million Americans. That this is included as part of the federal budget can be considered happenstance. Anyway, what exactly do you mean when you call this “runaway”? Death squads are needed to shorten retirees’ lives?? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-a-military-does-the-usa-really-need/783101.md?page=5)