Cutting military spending
A while back, I asked, "If you accepted the government did have to cut spending a lot, what would you cut." Several people made the obvious suggestion of cutting military. http://cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com/784255.htmlRead more... )
Oh, that's really interesting, thank you. I'm glad to see my guesses weren't completely off base.
I wouldn't put the aircraft carriers in a special category, they're a big ticket item, particularly if you combine them with the F35B aircraft to equip them, but not entirely different to the rest of the military in the way Trident is.
Hm. I think they're somewhat qualitatively different, but I agree not as qualitatively different as Trident. But I mainly broke them out because they're very expensive, something a lot of people would like to cut, but there's specific reasons why we can't. Specifically, they're something we invest in that many countries don't.
Trident is a political tool, not a weapon (pace Clausewitz).
:) Yeah. Although you could put it the other way round, and say that a weapon that prevents wars but is never used is the best sort of weapon. (Eek, that sounds like I'm endorsing MAD. I certainly don't want to endorse the sort of arsenal US and USSR had. But now I'm considering actually decommissioning the remaining nuclear weapons, I'm suddenly unsure, and wondering if there would have been more or less conventional warfare if several countries didn't have an ultimate answer?)
Reply
Leave a comment