Both Larry and Tom make good points about why the US Defense spending is so high.
Given the current missions of the military (for good or bad) I'm sure the military could do the job much cheaper, but will the sacrifice be blood for treasure? I think so. I prefer to see treasure spent before blood. Larry has brought up often enough in the past the thousands of wwII sorties it would take to just accomplish 1 bombing run by one of our technologically superior aircraft. Maybe that's not a fair enough comparison, but I bet it it still fits if you were to compare today's technology to that of a decade ago.
I don't see mass protests in the street about the amount of military spending. Could it be that the price paid is perfectly acceptable to Americans? If so, where's the beef?
-Steve G.
Current Events » in reply to US military spending
spending treasure versus blood