[gozur88]

>If the Freedom Caucus is really committed to reducing the powers (and spending) of government they should be fervently resisting budget plans to expand the armed forces and pull us back from pointless non-productive conflict in the Middle East.

The reduction in commitments has to come first, or at least coincidentally. I would like to see a reduction in military spending, but we shouldn't be making overseas commitments without allocating the resources necessary to carry them out.

I would like to see the US out of Europe in the near-to-medium term and a disentanglement from our commitments in the East long term. If we're not willing to do that, if we refuse to step down from the role of the Heavy who keeps the peace, then we need to maintain a military up to the task. And that requires increases in spending.

[youngtaff]

It's funny that you describe the US as "the Heavy who keeps the peace"

I suspect much of the rest of the world would describe the US as a warmonger and has been for decades

[gozur88]

"Much of the rest of the world" is wrong. Be as that may, if they think that it bolsters my argument. The US should pull out of Europe and the Far East. And if the Europeans or the Asians go at each other again? We should stay on our side of the pond.

[youngtaff]

Is "much of the rest of the world" really wrong?

The US is a country that spends more on the military than the next seven (?) combined and since World War II has been heavily intervening using (both explicitly and covertly) in countries all over the world

Korean / Cuba / Dominica / Vietnam / Grenada / Libya / Panama / Gulf War I / Somalia / Haiti / Afghanistan / Gulf War II

Plus all the 'secret wars' in Central America, Africa, other parts of the Middle East, Indochina etc.

[gozur88]

>Is "much of the rest of the world" really wrong?

Yes.

>The US is a country that spends more on the military than the next seven (?) combined...

That's orthogonal to the discussion. So what?

>...and since World War II has been heavily intervening using (both explicitly and covertly) in countries all over the world.

Yes. Thus my description of the US as "the heavy".

>Korean / Cuba / Dominica / Vietnam / Grenada / Libya / Panama / Gulf War I / Somalia / Haiti / Afghanistan / Gulf War II

Right. And in almost every case it was a question of trying to put out a small fire before it got too big. We haven't had a major war between first world powers since 1945, and that's no coincidence. The wars that didn't fall into that category were misguided attempts at some kind of humanitarian project.

I'm all for stopping both. If China and Japan go at it, or maybe Germany and France... it's not our problem.