headermask image

header image

John Derbyshire tries to be clever and misses the point!

John Derbyshire going on about Military spending on the Corner.

Stanley:  You write that: “We have been shown in no uncertain terms that our military is far too small to handle the demands of the war on terror.”

Couple of weeks ago I wanted to write a sentence saying: “The U.S. spends more on its military establishment than the next N highest-spending nations.”  Of course, I needed to find a value for N.

I went to the CIA factbook, always a good stop for this sort of thing.  Sure enough, they have a neat table of nations ranked by military expenditure.  Starting with number two on the table, I worked my way down, intending to just keep adding up the numbers until the total surpassed the U.S. figure.  From that I could deduce N.

After about twenty additions, I gave up.  The sentence never got written.

Link to The Corner on National Review Online

What we spend on the military in comparison to other nations is irrelevant. Furthermore to imagine that the CIA actually has some idea of what China spends is laughable. These guys don’t have any idea what China spends on their military. The CIA should have been fired a long long time ago.

But beyond that it is simply a fact that comparing us to France and Japan, the next couple of nations on the list, misses the point. France and Japan are not expected to defend the entire planet, we are. We stand as the last wall between madness and civilization and I for one do not want to be frugal in that defense. At least if we must cut the budget let us cut Welfare, Prescription Drug benefit, Social Security, No Child Left Behind and any of the other millions of programs we simply cannot seem to end.

Furthermore it entirely misses the point that we have had Presidents not afraid to spend dollars on the military. Perhaps this is not to be admitted in polite company but Clinton spent more as % of GDP than Bush has by a long shot. At times we reached as high as 5% of GDP. We have not yet broken 4% with Bush.

Now if John wants to argue that we should be careful spending money fine. But even then he should be realistic and understand that its the Government and waste is endemic to the operation of any Government. We accept waste when the Government is fulfilling its primary duty of defending us.

Beyond all of this though, where we have completely gone astray is our willpower to fight wars. We simply don’t have the will to win. No weapon system in the world can help a people who don’t know how to win, to win. We are too genteel it seems to defend ourselves. And so we will exit the world stage much like the Dodo bird soon enough. So maybe all this worry about spending on the military is merely a waste of breath.

Someone who gets it Andy McCarthy.

 

If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds

Stumble It!

9 Comments so far (Add 1 more)

  1. Joe having been a fan of yours for a long time now I gratified to see you commenting. Thanks.

    You have a terrific point. But if Rumsfeld was trying to fix that problem by simply not giving the Pentagon money that was a poor way to go about it.

    From my point of view Bush should have come out after 9/11 and said we will need to up our defense spending to 6-8% to support the 15 divisions of troops we will need to fight with. Instead we were told that no one needed to sacrifice, we didn’t even have to give up our social programs because we weren’t going to increase our defense spending as a % of GDP.

    He should have stated this country is going to war footing and I expect all department of the Government to respond to this crisis. Instead he gave us pap. Our enemies laugh at us and our allies wonder what it takes to get us to drop them as allies.

    At one time I thought he might go down in history as one of the greatest Presidents. I say this just to prove I haven’t arrived at my present disdain for his administration lightly.

    Just look at this Baker abomination…sorry. Thanks again for reading…it is a treat to know you have visited.

    2. Pierre Legrand on December 6th, 2006 at
  2. The willpower point is valid. Do is the GDP point.

    Having said that, when weapons system costs have been rising past the rate of inflation for decades, and each successive generation of weapons is fielded in smaller numbers despite spending increases, we have a systemic problem. When we look around and note that US weapons competing on even ground are starting to have issues in export competitions due to price:performance, that’s an issue too.

    Many of these issues are intrinsic to the Pentagon bureaucracy, which is apt to make choices based on what benefits them rather than what benefits the military. It’s the same “public choice economics” issue that underlies the existence of a “poverty industry” whose main goal is providing cushy employment to members of the Left’s “New Class.”

    The problem is reaching critical mass with fiascoes like 183 F-22s as the sole basis for future American air superiority. Or just 2-8 DDG-1000 destroyers being built. That’s pretty relevant if, as you note, the USA has world-wide responsibilities. The reductio ad absurdum endpoint is a military consisting on 1 Imperial Star Destroyer that has to remain parked over Washington.

    Derbyshire would understand what a Haldane Board is – and probably why America needs one.

    3. Joe Katzman on December 6th, 2006 at
  3. “What we spend on the military in comparison to other nations is irrelevant. Furthermore to imagine that the CIA actually has some idea of what China spends is laughable. These guys don’t have any idea what China spends on their military. The CIA should have been fired a long long time ago.”

    Apparently, the CIA doesn’t think Russia spends anything on their military since it doesn’t show up in the table (which, by the way, per a quick yahoo lookup, Russia looks to be spending about $18B). But I am glad the CIA had the guts to point out that Svalbard is spending $5B per annum on military defense in spite of it having been demilitarized by treaty in 1920. That’s something we all should be watching carefully.

    On a serious note, the table to which Derbyshire refers, does not reflect purchasing power parity of military spending in different countries but is solely based on converting amounts spent to US dollars by using the appropriate exchange rate for the time period noted.

    But aside from those problems with Derbyshire’s reference, I tend to agree with your observation that the spending comparison is irrelevant to the point he was arguing against. How much one nation spends militarily in relation to others is not a good reference in arguing against a proposal for increasing overall troop strength in connection with a war (on terror) which requires men with rifles more than planes, ships, tanks and artillery and that has required rotating deployment of the these same troops the last five years.

    Now I may reconsider his argument against increasing national troops levels for the long haul of the war on terror both in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere when the essence of the debate is that we don’t need more troops in Iraq because we are researching missile defense or that we don’t need more troops in Iraq because we are building a new aircraft carrier, or that we don’t need more troops in Iraq because we have an abundance of humvees.

    4. Dusty on December 3rd, 2006 at
  4. It’s pretty much for certain that (s)he’s a homo and what’s needed, if we had the balls, and as clearly demonstrated by his nonsense, is state-mandated chemical intervention at the earliest indications of deviancy.

    Couldn’t agree more except not for the “homos” but for misguided leftists who think that they are so clever no one can see through their bullshit.

    5. Pierre Legrand on December 2nd, 2006 at
  5. I couldn’t agree more! But I think you are being too easy on the misguided fool. It’s pretty much for certain that (s)he’s a homo and what’s needed, if we had the balls, and as clearly demonstrated by his nonsense, is state-mandated chemical intervention at the earliest indications of deviancy.
    You are so correct about the emotionality of the left. This is somewhat frustrating when our own position by contrast is entirely rational and methodically thought through on the facts. Unlike them, we owe nothing to environmental influences. We are as likely to disagree as to agree with our parents’ and communities’ views. In fact I rarely agree wholeheartedly with anyone at all.
    The left have to be made to understand that emotion is no basis on which to decide whether someone needs killing or not. Emotion simply cannot be allowed to interfere in the business of war.
    I seriously wonder whether it isn’t time to draft Ann Coulter, with Pelosi so close to the throne. Coulter (strangely enough) has the balls and the brains. What do you think?

    Anyway, well done you guys! Keep up the good fight!

    6. Pierce Kramer on December 2nd, 2006 at
  6. hehe…Well lets not be too hard on the poor dear because soon enough if my terrible predictions are borne out he may find out how well he does under new management.

    7. Pierre Legrand on December 1st, 2006 at
  7. Force projection is always an ugly thing to the emotional. No level of protection is necessary to those that want us to have a cake sale in order to buy bombers. Remember that bumper sticker? They have no idea of why we have to lock up violent criminals much less defend America outside of America. They would be the first killed in a Jihadist government. They are indeed useful idiots. Case in point: Spetznatz units supplied by Putin ushered out WMD to Syria on the eve of out invasion. We found thousands of chemical warheads, any of which would have killed a third of Des Moines, but the greatest WMD, Saddam Hussein was never even considered a weapon. Murderer of over a million of his own countrymen, the emotional left figured he was just a casualty of war, not the focus.

    The left hates our proping up dictators…yet loves Chavez
    The left believes the US is the cause of the pain in the world…yet it wants us to intervene everywhere: Bosnia, Haiti, but won’t lift a finger for Darfur
    The left thinks gays should be allowed to adopt and marry when any scientist will tell you homosexuality is totally abnormal in the evolutionary theory. If it is not a natural – survival of the species (can’t survive if you can’t procreate) methodology, then why do they think it is a defendable social construct? Their own position on Evolution contradicts it? What is it going to be? gay marraige or decended from an ape? Can’t have both.
    Need I go on…we really don’t have the time to illustrate the indefendable positions of the leftist – emotional response to everything crowd.

    8. Michael on December 1st, 2006 at
  8. Dear Tool,

    It is telling that you aren’t even willing to declare unequivocally that the battle of Afghanistan was fought in our defense. To people like you we should simply sit around the campfire and sing kumbaya with the enemy admit to our sins and the bad guys won’t:
    Murder gays
    Murder women for being raped
    Murder Christians for being Christian
    Murder Jews for being Jewish
    Slaughter the Hindu for not worshipping one god
    Slaughter animalists
    Engage in slavery
    Attempt to spread their pestilence around the globe.

    Silly boy go back and sit in the corner.

    9. Pierre Legrand on December 1st, 2006 at
  9. I find this amusing:

    We are too genteel it seems to defend ourselves.

    The war in Iraq is not and never was truly in defence of the US. Afghanistan maybe; Iraq, no.

    And to say that what the US has done in Iraq displays “gentility” borders on obscenity. Take a look at this video (or many others). It’s just like Ken Adelman’s claimn that what the US has done in Iraq is “a beautiful thing”.

    10. Graham on December 1st, 2006 at

One Trackback

  1. [...] RT, Angel, RW, GCP, Layla, Coz, Pierre, Jihaddujoir, Blue Star ,RightTruth, Hang [...]

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

  • levitra versus cialis
  • ingredient in phentermine
  • lipitor drug
  • generic trileptal
  • januvia 100 mg
  • gabapentin 100 mg
  • new anxiety drugs
  • keppra
  • reglan 10 mg
  • order prednisolone
  • fluticasone propionate
  • rogaine coupons
  • yasmin prescription
  • singulair 5 mg
  • sexual stamina tips
  • alavert drug
  • revatio 20 mg
  • lexapro drugs
  • european pharmacy anxiety
  • attacking anxiety and depression
  • cheap retin a
  • drugs for depression
  • cialis table
  • singulair 10 mg
  • penis enlargement exercises
  • cephalexin sinus
  • phentermine no prescription
  • order nolvadex
  • green tea pill
  • cialis advertisement
  • supplement hoodia
  • cheap viamax
  • valium without prescription
  • fosamax generic
  • cialis name brand cheap
  • ambien dosage
  • viagra and blood pressure
  • xanax rx
  • order viagra without prescription
  • atacand
  • buy prandin
  • cheap yohimbe
  • half life of valium
  • order capoten
  • alprazolam cheap
  • buy cialis by check
  • vitamins for erectile dysfunction
  • klonopin medication
  • drugs used to treat depression
  • online claritin
  • buy cialis online uk
  • benadryl loratadine
  • anxiety meds online
  • asthma in elderly
  • propecia 1mg
  • levitra vardenafil generic
  • cialis online discount
  • order cialis professional
  • clomid treatment
  • medicine xanax
  • methylsulfonylmethane
  • xanax mechanism of action
  • pharmacy online australia
  • cialis vs viagra
  • order lisinopril
  • viagra online best price
  • increase penis size with herbs
  • oxybutynin
  • bayer levitra online pharmacy
  • phentermine consultation
  • free levitra samples
  • acticin cream
  • ventolin inhalador
  • natural viagra substitute
  • glipizide side effects
  • benadryl dosing
  • new treatments for lung diseases
  • viagra jelly
  • types of antidepressants
  • perennial allergic rhinitis
  • mebendazole
  • levitra ad
  • cheap hangover helper
  • interaction zocor
  • cheapest cialis generic
  • cialis cost low
  • clonazepam .5mg
  • kamagra oral jelly
  • ativan no prescription
  • gerd in children
  • prozac social anxiety
  • antidepressant pill high
  • how to cure depression
  • use imitrex
  • cheap robaxin
  • what are the effects of klonopin
  • how to buy viagra online
  • coral calcium
  • canada in levitra
  • cheap viagra pill
  • discount levitra purchase
  • buy levothroid
  • purchase vardenafil
  • online tramadol
  • cialis dosage 20mg
  • viagra soft tab
  • norvasc 10
  • sample ambien
  • lamictal drug
  • herb echinacea
  • effects side ultram
  • endep
  • bayer levitra professional pro
  • addiction ultram
  • giant eagle pharmacy
  • benfotiamine
  • green tea capsule
  • cheap male enhancement
  • order caffeine
  • how much is viagra
  • drug ceftin
  • sumatriptan
  • cialis tablet
  • danazol
  • soma the drug
  • medication for bipolar disorder
  • cozaar medication
  • recreational use of xanax
  • cheap avandia
  • zithromax medication
  • buy lorazepam without prescription
  • reglan side effects
  • drug skelaxin
  • canada pharmacy viagra
  • buy zelnorm
  • phentermine no prescription overnight
  • impotence depression
  • buy ampicillin
  • levitra for sale
  • viagra patent lawsuit levitra
  • cialis vs viagra vs levitra
  • metformin hcl 500mg
  • ways to relieve anxiety
  • order rimonabant
  • natural prednisone
  • generic orlistat
  • nitroglycerin sublingual
  • wellbutrin paxil
  • schizophrenia drugs new zealand
  • lasix furosemide
  • unisom online
  • viagra half price pharmacy
  • manufacturer of revatio
  • clomiphene tablets
  • valium low cost
  • vpxl uk
  • ibuprofen
  • buy probenecid
  • buy etodolac
  • cialis canadian generic
  • stop smoking gum
  • order topamax
  • celebrex pharmacy
  • stop smoking zyban
  • purchase cheap cialis online
  • children aspirin
  • treatment for impotence
  • cialis line order
  • what prednisone
  • buy cialis by the pill
  • buying ultram no prescription
  • venlafaxin
  • buy generic tramadol no prescription
  • allegra side effects
  • prescription nexium
  • order starlix
  • serevent
  • soft tab viagra
  • effects of premarin
  • cheap lovastatin
  • order amantadine
  • viagra and cialis
  • discount levitra online
  • meds for erectile dysfunction
  • sale carisoprodol
  • effects propecia
  • on rx legal diazepam
  • effects of viagra on women
  • buy generic allergy medication
  • ciallis or viagra
  • cheap imitrex
  • order amoxicillin
  • ativan normal doses
  • generic cialis soft
  • purchase phentermine mexico
  • saw palmetto products
  • buy ativan online
  • discount soma online
  • allegra order
  • genric viagra