Just One More Hit and I’m Done . . . I Mean It This Time
President Barack “Frankie Machine” Obama asked congress on April 9th for “quick approval” of an $83.4 billion appropriation to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and other military needs, through September 30th this year. Obama, who had pledged to end the Bush administration’s strategy of underfunding the war in the budget only to go back repeatedly for supplementals, is, in other words, asking for a supplemental. But, he and his liberal supporters swear this is a one-time thing . . .(it just happens a lot). [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/10/us/politics/10military.html?scp=2&sq=more%20money%20for%20overseas%20operations&st=cse]
Ironically Obama’s political enemies-Dick Cheney, Newt Gingrich, Karl Rove and the other usual suspects-are sounding the alarms that Obama is cutting the military to the bone and we are now vulnerable to attack from all over. Republican Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma lamented,
While President Obama’s short changing of America’s Armed Forces is deeply disappointing, it is – unfortunately – not a surprise. Throughout his campaign and during his short tenure as President, he has made it clear that he believes his charm and eloquence are adequate substitutes for a strong military. That will not work. Whether President Obama knows it or not, President Bush’s foreign enemies were also America’s enemies. He cannot charm them out of their opposition to our country. The cuts announced today, however, take that naivete to a dangerous new level. I intend to do everything I can to make sure they do not actually occur. [http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/04/gop-rep-obama-cutting-pentagon-budget-trying-to-charm-enemies-instead.php].
If only what Cheney and the rest of the Huns thought were true. Obama, far from the man of peace the liberals invented during the election, is, like Democratic icons FDR, JFK, LBJ and Bill Clinton, a good “defense liberal” [I still prefer "cold war liberal" but I don't want to get into a dispute over whether the cold war is actually over]. Obama’s increases in defense spending, like a junkie seeking one more hit, are signs of an already deep and worsening addiction.
In a speech Obama gave two years ago, in April 2007, he spoke of his vision for national defense. He wanted more humanitarian aid and diplomacy, of course [Bush and Condi Rice always called for that too], but also called for an additional 65,000 troops for the army and 27,000 more marines to use in the so-called GWOT. The military, Obama urged, should “stay on the offense, from Djibouti to Kandahar” and be able to “put boots on the ground” to defeat the “shadowy terrorist networks” plaguing the civilized world. An Obama administration, he assured, would have “the strongest, best-equipped military in the world.” [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/27/AR2007042702027.html].
Not surprisingly, many of his supporters wrote this off as campaign rhetoric to avoid being called an appeaser. But during the general election campaign, on their official website, the Obama-Biden ticket continued this theme, again calling for the 65 and 27 thousand more troops; restoring the national guard and reserves; and engaging allies to assist the U.S. in its military goals. [http://www.barackobama.com/issues/defense/].
The most recent data show that the United States accounts for half the world’s official military spending. Europe, full of reasonably reliable allies, accounts for about 20 percent, which means that the Americans and their friends have two-thirds of the world’s weapons. The United States spent $711 billion on the military in 2008, while the People’s Republic of China, the country which various American politicians and commentators warn us is a grave peril to our security, spent $122 billion, or 8 percent of the world total [http://schema-root.org/military/budget/military_spending_us_vs_world.gif]. Yet, this all takes place virtually under the radar. While “populist” media make plans for “teabagging” the White House, and President Obama refuses to help out auto workers, and the unions who supported him, with a relatively mere $30 billion aid package, the pentagon gets a buffet of cash and then, when it’s overfed itself, back to the trough for supplemental appropriations.
But, the liberals assure us, this is just an emergency, a stopgap measure, and Obama will fix up this defense budget mess when he gets the chance. Right . . . with widening wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan already underway, who can really believe defense cuts are coming? Really, is this “just one more hit,” or the self-lying behavior of a weapons junkie?
Tags: military budget, obama
Bob Buzzanco
Professor, Department of History, University of Houston; Ph.D. from The Ohio State University; Author and editor of numerous books and articles on U.S. foreign policy; recipient of Bernath Book Prize [1996] and Bernath Lecture Prize [1999]. buzz@uh.edu; http://vi.uh.edu/pages/buzzmat/buzzanco.htm