Analysis of the Controversy Surrounding Military Spending

Should the government decrease military spending, or should it increase military spending? This is a question that many Americans wrestle with, and politically speaking, is a point of great contention since to many, military might evoke a sense of security. However, when considering this question from a foreign policy standpoint, does current military spending really match the current level of threats faced by the United States, or are too many dollars being allocated for an unnecessary level of military strength? There are certainly cons in making the decision to drastically lower military spending, but they are minimal when compared to the positive ramifications such a decision would have.

There are many cons, firstly, it is not balanced with foreign aid and diplomacy. If foreign aid and diplomacy budgets were more balanced with military spending, there would be a better chance to prevent conflict and avoid military involvement. Also, let us remember that national security means more than military power. So, to sustain a secure nation, federal spending must be balanced among military defense, economic security, healthcare, education and job training. Furthermore, it may support the rhetoric about readiness that may not reflect reality accurately. For example, the fact that the country is forces were overwhelmingly superior to its oppositions in the Iraq and Yugoslavia wars seems to contradict the idea that they might not be ready.

Secondly, its share to global military spending is already too big. Such as, though the US its military spending has declined since 1989, its share of total worldwide military spending has increased greatly. In fact, the country its military spending and its allies account for more than half of the total amount worldwide. Moreover, the US spends 18 times the combined military budgets of the rogue nations.

On the other hand, it makes military preparation efficient. It is critical to keep the military forces ready to fight and quickly win. The fund is used for this purpose, especially for major regional wars that could happen at the same time. Remember that readiness will decline if funds are not increased for training and equipment. Also, it is useful in deterring foreign threats. Even though the cold war is over and the threat from the Soviet Union already eliminated, the country is still facing threats from smaller rogue nations, such as Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya, Cuba, Sudan and Syria.

All in all, military budgets are only one of the many gauges of military power. Their spending adequacy depends on the capability and number of the country its adversaries, how well it invests its funds and its objectives, among other factors. Now, policymakers have been debating whether the level of military spending is appropriate, considering the increasingly constrained budgets and the winding down of wars in other countries.