Obama's Budget Proposes Big Increase In War Spending

by: David Sirota

Mon Feb 01, 2010 at 09:00


After Defense Secretary Robert Gates met with defense contractors to reiterate the Obama administration's commitment to "steady growth in the Pentagon's budgets," I can't say I am surprised by this - but I can say I am nauseated by it:

War spending surges in President Obama's budget

President Barack Obama's new budget, to be released Monday, forecasts two consecutive years of near $160 billion in war funding, far more than he hoped when elected and only modestly less than the last years of the Bush Administration...

The president's 2010 defense budget a year ago requested $130 billion for operations in Afghanistan and Iraq and just $50 billion in 2011. The new budget ramps up 2010 spending to $163 billion and for 2011 requests $159 billion in overseas contingency funds for the military.

The story - not surprisingly - attempts to sugarcoat this by noting that "core defense spending is feeling the strain (of) the president's $549 billion request (because it) reflects less than 2% real growth over inflation" - as if 2 percent plus inflation on already one of the largest defense budgets in history is somehow "straining."

But I guess that's the terms of our political debate these days: We should cry for the "strained" fat-cat defense contractors while offering up "tough love" admonishments to anyone hit by cuts to non-defense programs.

And really - how dare anyone criticize defense spending! President Obama is only "on track to spend more on defense, in real dollars, than any other president has in one term of office since World War II," as National Journal reports.

We've already been hearing the cat-calls from the Washington Establishment that this astronomical amount somehow isn't nearly enough - and I'm sure those cat-calls will only get louder in the coming weeks and months.

UPDATE: Brave New Films has a great video about this subject. Watch it here:

David Sirota :: Obama's Budget Proposes Big Increase In War Spending

Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Obama's Budget Proposes Big Increase In War Spending | 15 comments
public funds (0.00 / 0)
Back in the day, this debate was shortened to: Guns or Butter.

Now could accurately be called: Quadruple guns or bread.

Government by organized money is just as dangerous as government by organized mob..... FDR

This is why I'm done with Obama and the Democrats. (4.00 / 4)
My political activities now are focusing on the building of a viable third party as a tool of a reinvigorated and independent progressive movement.  No efforts to reform the Democratic Party from within can succeed so long as the upper-level of the party establishment is able to crush dissent from within, as is explained here.

"Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican all the time." -- Harry S. Truman
no doubt the current democratic crop sucks (4.00 / 2)
I think reforming it is easier that starting a 3rd party. are there any successful attempts at creating a national 3rd party? state-level yes. national no.

I'm so much disappointed and disgusted with the current dems. I think reforming them is difficult but easier than starting a new party.  

[ Parent ]
I've tried to do the "reform from within". Doesn't work. (4.00 / 2)
We elected what we thought was a liberal, Jon Tester, and got another Baucus.  He's thinking of voting againsta a Consumer Protection Agency in the banking committee.  He doesn't like taxes on banks.  He's a libertarian and told us all a bunch of lies to get our money, our votes, and our time.

I'm done with these dead donkeys.

[ Parent ]
Excellent name for a new blog aimed at decommissioning (4.00 / 1)
Right wing donkeys.  

"Oh. My. God. .... We're doomed." -- Paul Krugman
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...">http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...">http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...
[ Parent ]
A 10% difference between Bush and Obama .. (4.00 / 2)
"When compared to the peak war spending of the Bush years, Obama is only about 10% below Bush's annual average of $176 billion in fiscal years 2007 and 2008-the time of the Iraq war surge."
http://www.politico.com/news/s...

But I have to say say a 10% difference between the two overall is pretty accurate.  And a stunning kick to the gut..  

Thanks Dude for that link to Antemedius (great website)!  I agree wholeheartedly about the party core destroying all hope of progress.  But I'm wondering if we need to actually set up one universal third party or just elect/insert any other progressive candidate, be they Green, Independent or Other?
The country right now is more than ready to vote for someone without a D or an R by their name. Including D's and R's.

Nationalism is not the same thing as terrorism, and an adversary is not the same thing as an enemy.

[ Parent ]
well is that counting or not counting bush's expenditures in the budget (0.00 / 0)
 my understanding is that bush funded his wars through supplemental bills whiel obama puts them in the budget.  i'm not sure if this is accurate, but it would make the disparity greater.

speaks more to the bush administation's disingenuousness about the cost of war (in all forms) than obama's ability or willingness to rein in spending, but that 10% figure, in the interests of fairness, shoudl probably be larger - unless i'm mistaken about the shady accounting used during the bush administration.

[ Parent ]
Corruption vs. Politics (4.00 / 2)
This is clearly corruption. I get that it is difficult to CUT defense spending and open yourself up to flag-waving demagoguery.  But I see no evidence that if Obama declared a defense freeze at the rate of inflation average Americans would possibly object. Defense +2% is just wasting 2%.

At the very least, the government should delay new technologies in the pipeline.

The weird part is how little of this money seems earmarked for the troops (4.00 / 5)
There should be some rule that separates the budget into directly going to troops budget versus paying private contractors and others with whom we can obtain more cost containment than we are presently attempting to obtain.
[ Parent ]
all Obama can do is "propose" (4.00 / 2)
a "proposal" is not an accomplishment.

The Senate has ceased to function.

at what point did the senate ever function? (0.00 / 0)
it is built not to function.
[ Parent ]
Easy way for right-wing politics to triumph (4.00 / 2)
1) Spend lots of tax $ on things which people (who aren't getting their salaries paid) get no tangible benefit from.

2)  Watch people appetite for taxes & spending predictably drop.

3)  Rinse and repeat.

Sometimes I wonder if Obama's team looked at the 1990s and decided that his best prospect for reelection is to lose congress and thus make himself the one barrier between us and total free-market barbarism.

Given Congress' lack of ability to accomplish anything (4.00 / 1)
You have a very interesting thought.  I would put nothing past this administration when it comes to insuring it's own survival.  We already know this President will say anything to get elected.  

"Oh. My. God. .... We're doomed." -- Paul Krugman
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...">http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...">http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...
question (4.00 / 1)
at what point did the afghanistan and iraq wars start getting includedin thebudgets (if they are now?) and how does that impact the trends suggested?
Obama started it. (0.00 / 0)
[ Parent ]
Obama's Budget Proposes Big Increase In War Spending | 15 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox

Powered by: SoapBlox