The United States military security is at risk because it is downsizing into a smaller force. The United States spent 40-50% of the federal budget on defense and that budget was 8-10% of our national income, where now the national military spending is 4% (Samuelson). In result, the military is declining and social programs must be cut and taxes raised which will stabilize the military because the military is the most important priority. The military is at an adequate level with no sign of weakness and the amount the U.S. spends on military exceeds all countries which justifies a small cut, that will improve the U.S. infrastructure without harming the strength of the military even with the downsizing.
In the past, the United States had more expendable units, however, more does not mean better. “In 1990, the Army had 172 combat battalions, the Navy 546 ships and the Air Force 4,355 fighters; today, those numbers are 100 battalions, 288 ships and 1,990 fighters” (Samuelson). It appears to be a significant loss, however, quality over quantity is more important in military equipment. Every fighter jet, ship, and troop battalions are vastly more capable and advanced due to improved radars and the quick modern computers. In addition, everything is becoming more expensive than previous issues of military equipment and technology which, is why we don’t have the same number of vehicles as before.
Military defense is important however, it can be cut for improvement in other areas. “Defense spending is unlike other spending, because protecting the nation is a government’s first job. It’s in the Constitution, as highways, school lunches and Social Security are not” (Samuelson). I agree with protecting the nation as the first job, however, the United States is not in a life or death situation at the moment, and even with North Korea posing a threat cutting the military budget slightly will not hurt our defense capabilities.
Cutting military funding slightly will not harm military readiness and furthermore, funds could be redistributed to education that will drastically improve the lacking education system. Which results in a smarter nation, and in return makes for a potential smarter pool of leaders and improved military logistics. “The need to maintain an adequate military is another reason why spending on social programs needs to be cut and taxes need to be raised” (Samuelson). Cutting the military budget three hundred million dollars will not weaken our military. Currently, the U.S. military has more presence than any other nation around the world with over 800 bases in various countries and has access to the most advanced technology in the world, none of that would be affected by a slight budget cut. Samuelson says, The United States is slowly heading into a dangerous disarmament phase that will happen with any military cut (Samuelson). Disarmament is exaggerated, the United States would have no intentions of a slow disarmament and a small cut would make the government become smarter and more aware of what they spend the military budget on.
Samuelson compares military power with other countries. “China’s military manpower is about 50 percent greater than ours, and it has a fighter fleet four-fifths as large. This doesn’t mean that China’s military technology yet equals ours, but differences in reported spending are wildly misleading” (Samuelson). The problem with that claim is that China has almost five times the amount people than the U.S. so, it makes sense that they would have 50% more manpower also, the aircraft is irrelevant because our technology is far superior and we have the means to continue the technological progression.
The military can sustain a small cut in the budget and maintain superiority and effectiveness without diminishing into disarmament. The cut funds would be utilized in the lacking education system which in return develops a foundation for a smarter nation and potential for better military leaders. Downsizing is a misleading number that mistakes quantity over quality.