[jMyles]

> No one serious is seriously saying that the military shouldn't be funded.

Sure they are - at least some elements of it. And they have been for 200 years.

The constitutional specifically prohibits a standing army; one of the biggest jokes in the contemporary political condition is that the USA doesn't have one.

I want the military defunded in its entirety, save the divisions of navy which protect coastal states from attack.

[twoodfin]

The constitutional specifically prohibits a standing army

No, it doesn't:

The Congress shall have Power ... To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

As long as Congress keeps appropriating money for it, we can have a standing army.

[jMyles]

That's not a "standing" army - that's the whole point. The debate raged back and forth at the CC on this point with everyone ultimately agreeing that this two-year limitation was something short of a "standing" army.

[afarrell]

I think that a conventionally-dominant global superpower suddenly becoming drastically less powerful would make for a fascinating novel or TV series. The conflicts that arise as nations rush in to fill the power vacuum and adjust to a dramatically different security situation would, in the hands of a skilled writer/director be far more interesting than Game of Thrones.

[politician]

> I want the military defunded in its entirety, save the divisions of navy which protect coastal states from attack.

Do you consider space-based threats in the realm of the Navy?

[jMyles]

I guess so, right?