Taking Sides: The U.S. Military DOES NOT Recieve Too Much Money From the Government

Henry Melcher, Columnist

  The United States for 80 years has been the dominant power in the world. Being the most powerful nation in the world comes with its own set of responsibilities that must be met to maintain this status. These responsibilities come with an emphasis on power projection via military means to keep our world view of freedom and free trade alive.

  After the United States took over as the international leader from Britain, the US ramped up her economic and military involvement across the world. With this involvement, the US has been able to establish the “Pax Americana” which promotes free trade across international waters and airspace which helps drive economies across the globe. But to keep this in place, the United States must maintain their power projection and presence across the world by investing in her military. 

  As Americans it is very easy to attribute the downfalls of our country to the ‘over expenditure’ on our military, and point to the European nations which allocate huge amounts of funds to infrastructure and social security. The only reason why they are able to spend that much money on those luxuries is because their defense is outsourced to the United States. According to NATO and USA Today, NATO members are required to spend at least two percent of their GDP on their defense. In 2018, the average for NATO members was 1.47 percent, way below the requirement. Only the UK, Greece, Estonia, and Latvia met their pledged goal. The United States is then met with the short end of the stick with picking up the slack. If we want to free up more funds we must pressure other NATO governments to meet their pledged goal.

  With being the SuperPower of the world, the United States is always looked upon during situations in the world. The United States is the biggest supporter during UN or NATO conflicts via manpower or funds. The United States sent a large number of troops to Serbia and Bosnia during the Bosnian war, then a majority of the troops to Somalia during the ‘90s and to Libya in 2011. The list goes on for a long time. But with that comes the Pax Americana and the promotion of free trade and freedom across the globe.

Having the world lead by the US keeps markets open and people free which in all honesty overshadows our massive defense spending

— H. Melcher

  Admittedly, this is a huge undertaking for any nation including the US. It would be really nice to let someone else ‘take the reins.’ Personally I would love for the United States to step back and work on her own problems. But the only other nations capable of stepping up to the task would be China under the Chinese Communist party who have set up concentration camps, or the Russians under Vladimir Putin who are threatening Ukrainian sovereignty with their military. Both are less than desirable.

  In the end, the United States is the only democratic, free, and moral country to be the world’s leader. Having the world lead by the US keeps markets open and people free which in all honesty overshadows our massive defense spending. I personally would not want the Middle East to be decided by an authoritarian dictatorship. Would you?