|
War
efforts do not deserve more money
The
Bush administration has announced that it
plans to ask for $80 billion to fund the
continuous war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
This
$80 billion has not been calculated into
projected spending for the new fiscal year
and would make the total funding for war
efforts this year reach almost $105 billion.
This much money spent on war efforts is
unrealistic, but the Bush administration
may find a way to do it, pushing America’s
deficit through the roof and into the atmosphere.
Not
only does America spend more on military
operations and equipment, including “weapons
of mass destruction,” than any other
country in the world, we spend more than
the “Axis of Evil.” So what
justifies such lavish and unnecessary spending?
It is possible that a war with Iran is about
to unfold, in addition to the wars against
Iraq, Afghanistan (which we all presumed
was over) and the many domestic wars, such
as the ever-popular war on drugs.
If
so, then America will definitely need more
money to fuel all of these war expenses,
not to mention more manpower to replace
those who have died or been wounded. Participating
in all of these wars at once is not a bright
idea. We cannot be spending money on each
country that has been destroyed from our
war efforts and still be wasting money and
men on wars in other countries simultaneously.
Around $280 billion has been spent already
on the war on terror since September 11,
and that number is only growing.
Add
this to the amount that the United States
and private investors are donating to victims
of last month’s tsunami, and now imagine
the heights to which our country’s
deficit will soar.
President
Bush will officially announce his budget
for the coming year to Congress on Feb.
7. Congress has argued that keeping war
costs out of the budget would open the document
to criticism.
Keeping
those numbers out is also deceiving the
American people by showing them a false
projected spending. Last year, the war costs
were withheld from the overall budget documents.
Congress received much criticism and this
year is working to avoid that. Without the
full war costs included, the budget is entirely
theoretical and nonsensical.
According
to CBS news, three-fourths of the $80 billion
that Bush is asking of Congress should go
to the Army; the rest is for building a
U.S. embassy in Baghdad. The justification
is that the Army has done most of the fighting,
and lost more men than other groups. The
Army does deserve more funding in light
of the fact that soldiers do not have enough
protection against insurgents. Soldiers
are using whatever they can find for protection,
including having families send materials.
More funds are needed for this purpose,
but where is all of this money coming from?
Some
of the funds will be allocated to fighting
drug trafficking in Afghanistan and to help
new democracies find solid ground, according
to CBS News.
Bush
had promised during his first term that
he wanted to reduce the deficit by at least
half. With this kind of projected spending,
there is no way in hell he will be able
to do that. The U.S. government is simply
hemorrhaging money, with no end in sight.
With this kind of debt, the national levels
will be unable to help state levels in combating
state debt or in strengthening domestic
programs, such as fixing roads, or combating
poverty and homelessness in America.
The
Bush administration needs to realize that
having an endless war budget is completely
unrealistic. Combined with the amount of
money that is spent each year on domestic
issues, government payrolls, pensions, Social
Security, homeland security, our tax cuts
and other issues, the Bush administration
should be thinking about how to conserve
money and how not to spend more. That way
at least they can fool the citizens into
thinking that America can afford all of
these things without destroying our national
economy.
The
United States spends more than other countries
on defense, yet our offense seems to be
doing all the work. The last “fight”
that happened on American soil was the 9/11
attack, and that was not an all-out war,
it was a terrorist effort against the American
people. Since then, all wars have been fought
abroad, in the countries where the attacks
originated.
Defense
spending could be renamed war spending.
That name would be more truthful. Citizens
would probably be less inclined to support
war spending, while the name “defense”
brings to mind attacks on American soil
and immediate retribution.
Before
Bush makes his pitch to Congress, Americans
must let their representatives know how
important this issue is. The administration
should know that we will not stand for deceit
in the projected budget, or about the wars,
and make sure that Congress also knows how
we feel about the year’s budget. Congress
needs to be aware that citizens are paying
attention and disagree with how the non-existent
money is being spent.
|
