I have my first publication in a major magazine today over at National Review Online. Thanks to the good folks over there for publishing it, especially given the subject matter. And thanks to Reihan Salam!
Let’s cut defense spending
E.D. Kain is a blogger and freelance writer. Currently he serves as Editor-in-Chief of The League of Ordinary Gentlemen and writes a tech blog at Forbes. Visit his politics blog here. He can be found occasionally composing 140 character cultural analysis on Twitter. His writing has appeared in The Atlantic, The National Review, The Washington Examiner, and the now-defunct True/Slant. You can also contact him via email.
Will Truman 
Patrick Cahalan 
Cornelius 
wardsmith 
Tod Kelly 
Tom Van Dyke 
Murali 
James Hanley 
Borat: “I do a picture, only small, of the Tishnik Masacre. Where many Uzbeks…crushed!”
Kindly Gray Hippie: “How did you feel when you drew this?”
Borat: “Very proud!”.
KGH: “I’m just listening with sadness…a little sadness for your people…?”
Borat: “Yes…no, it is not sad. It is us who do the kill!”
When in doubt,
{ 23 comments }
Dude! You’re in the big leagues!
Now to disclose whether you’re on the Conservative version of the JournoList…
Congratulations!
Congrats. I have a couple of comments on your article:
There’s also Taiwan to consider. They’re rather peaceful now, but all it would take would be a nationalist president pushing it too far, and we’d have a conflict with China.
That’s a waste of time. For one thing, “defending” Europe is cheap right now, with our force numbers drastically down from the Cold War Era. Focusing more on the Middle East and Africa won’t save you much money, particularly since, if anything, you’ll need to spend more money on maintaining force projection in that area.
The Military-Industrial Complex is the reason why we have such a capable military, period. People like to throw that little tidbit from Eisenhower around, but they always neglect to mention that Eisenhower said in the same speech that the MIC as necessary due to the changes in how warfare was being fought. He was just worried about it having undue influence.
By the way, I read the Grayson bill. It didn’t sound like he was cutting pork – it read more like he was blocking the government from using a certain pool of discretionary funds for Iraq, Afghanistan, and the like.
“We’d have a conflict in China.”
Why “we?” Do you seriously think we can win a war against China battling over an island that’s only about 100 miles from the Chinese coast?
If China really wants to go to war for Taiwan, they can get it back anytime they want. Thankfully, Chinese leadership is sane.
@Travis,
Yes. For one thing, the Chinese military doesn’t have the capability to actually take the island – their sea power projection is pathetic. And the US has a far superior Navy and Air Force that would chew up the Chinese fleet.
However, the Chinese could make it annoying, by doing things to try and cut off the island from outside (read: US) support.
@Brett, sending carrier battle groups into the Straits of Taiwan would be inviting suicide via cruise missile. They don’t need a giant navy to dominate their littoral waters when they have a zillion anti-ship guided missiles waiting on the shore.
In 1960, U.S. defense spending was over 50% of the total federal budget and around 10% of total GDP. Today, U.S. defense spending is around 20% of the federal budget and around 3.5% of total GDP. How is defense spending the problem?
@Frank,
Wherever there is waste, it should be cut. Perhaps it’s not THE problem, but waste anywhere is A problem. THE problem is increased spending all the way around, so cutting waste out of military spening is a part of an overall effort to cut the deficit. There are many parts of government spending which are small compared to the whole, and if each part is defended based on its smallness compared to the whole, then nothing ever gets cut.
@Mike Farmer,
Having said that, though, a cynical person could accuse the author of testing the sincerity of NR types regarding spending cuts by throwing the sacred cow on the block to be trimmed. This could create a reaction which could go viral as an example of conservative hypocrsiy and enhance the author’s street cred with moderate-types. But only a cynical person would think this way, and it appears the article is accepted as written, to the author’s apparent surprise (“especially given the subject mater”), and mostly agreed with, or, at least no attacked so far.
@Mike Farmer,
My point is that defense spending, which is one of the few things the government does today that it is actually supposed to do, is much less of a burden on our economy today than in the past, yet we have these huge deficits. They are not due to growth in defense spending, they are due to uncontrollable growth in entitlement spending, so you could cut 159 billion or whatever from defense spending and it would quickly be subsumed by the real drivers of the deficit.
@Frank,
I agree. It’s an odd place to place too much focus on spending cuts.
@Mike Farmer, Waste is waste. If it’s wasted in defence spending then it should be on the chopping block. If the GOP and conservatives actually propose or endorse reviewing one of their sacred cows for cutting it’d help towards dispelling their current very justly earned reputation for caring about fiscal sanity only when they’re not in power.
@North,
Did you read my comments?
@North, Sure did Mike, agreed with most of it except the cynicism parts.
Congratulations, both for the article and for achieving the well-nigh impossible task of finding good folks at NRO.
Mazel tov!
Seriously congrats.
As I said on Twitter – Congrats man. Good job, and good piece.
Though I’m still surprised they published it even if Reihan was involved.
Congrats, Erik. It’s been fun watching your resume expand. You deserve all the success you’ve attained.
Interesting article and it is an idea worth pursuing, provided that it doesn’t impact training and readiness. I was in the Army during Gramm-Rudman, (Slightly different type of legislation I know, but it did impact the Armed Forces) and it had a huge effect on training. I was in West Germany, 45 km from the border in a combat arms MOS, and I shot my rifle once a year. We were told it was because of budget reductions from Gramm-Rudman. If we trim the pork, we must be cautious that we don’t trim muscle as well.
Congratulations Mr. Kain! Your tireless efforts are proving most bountiful. Excellent article. Would that Congress turn such a prudent eye toward entitlement spending as well. National defense is, afterall, a Constitutional imperative. Social Security et al are progressive fabrications.
Cheers,
Charlie
Late to the party, but congratulations, E.D.
I am glad to see some tiny semblance of progress in getting conservatives to come to their senses about defense spending.
Thanks to everyone for the kind words and smart criticism! Sorry it took me so long to get here and say that…
Comments on this entry are closed.