House votes to put billions more in military spending on the credit card
What would happen if we tied a tax to each budget hike? Don’t ask, it won’t happen.
What would happen if we tied a tax to each budget hike? Don’t ask, it won’t happen.
There can’t be the slightest doubt: America worships its Pentagod and the weapons and wars that feed it.
But whether our leaders continue to succumb to the power of the arms lobby is an open question.
It seems like whenever these committees get together the bottom line goes up — but not far enough for the military hawks.
A $23.9 billion addition to the NDAA would have a greater longterm impact than Congress wants to acknowledge.
A shift in spending toward urgent priorities like addressing the possibility of future pandemics would be a far better investment in “national security.”
Democratic Rep. Anthony Brown is disingenuous when he says the military will be cut to offset costs for bold plans at home.
Applying phony solutions to real problems — it seems the armed forces, in league with Congress, has this down.
Beware of another year in which politics wins over strategy and the security budget is bloated in all the wrong places.
America’s military-industrial complex builds the fanciest, most expensive weaponry known to humanity but the end products are often ineffective and unsound.
Make no mistake: the addiction to Pentagon spending is a bipartisan problem in Washington.
If you need proof that the last superpower is indeed crumbling, consider the year we’ve just lived through, not to mention the first few weeks of 2021.
The best hope for reducing Pentagon spending is the collision between that department’s never-ending, ever-rising desires and the overriding economic and political realities of this difficult moment.