美军费开销太疯狂,川普发推称要和中俄一起停止军事竞赛 [美国媒体]


Donald Trump just called US military spending “Crazy” and it appears that he now wants to find ways to cut military spending


Specifically he tweeted:
I am certain that, at some time in the future, President Xi and I, together with President Putin of Russia, will start talking about a meaningful halt to what has become a major and uncontrollable Arms Race. The U.S. spent 716 Billion Dollars this year. Crazy!
Do you support finding ways to cut the military budget?


WinterTymeNimble Navigator • 17h
It's not a unilateral cut, it's mutual deescalation. That's a key difference from Obama.


The_J_is_4_JesusNonsupporter • 17h
The U.S. spent 716 Billion Dollars this year. Crazy!
But what about Trump calling his budget "Crazy!"? Is he now just realizing that? Did someone recently talk to him about it?


WinterTymeNimble Navigator • 17h
He opposed it during the last budget session, nothing has changed.


Shifter25Nonsupporter • 16h


Priest_DildosNimble Navigator • 15h
Actually quite the opposite


WinterTymeNimble Navigator • 13h
Ending the sequester - a unilateral cut - is consistent with supporting multilateral cuts.


Priest_DildosNimble Navigator • 10h
I like Trump. I want him to do well. I think he's a net positive for the country. I wish we spent less on the military, so I'm happy with what he is saying now. I was not a fan of the budget and everyone involved including Trump.


slagwaNon-Trump Supporter • 9h
Net positive? I'll have to think about that. I don't know if I can exactly disagree with you on that even though I absolutely despise the man. Maybe his influence will be a net positive in the end. Its a interesting question and I'm curious what other nonsupporters think?
But I will agree with you on two points, I don't want a weak military and I question how much we spend for what we get. But unfortunately any suggestion of cuts from Democrats immediately gets labeled as being weak on defense, and any Republican has to run on more, more, more.


former_DemocratNimble Navigator • 5h
any suggestion of cuts from Democrats immediately gets labeled as being weak on defense
If the other countries agree to stop the arms race, we can reduce the spending without being weak. That's why this is different


taupro777Nimble Navigator • 3h
To be fair, there is a running joke that every toilet in the military costs 10k. Trump called an audit on the Pentagon. He might not be the brightest, but it does seem like he listens to his advisers. I'm all for an audit on the Pentagon. Pay more attention to your damn quotes!


boyyouguysaredumbNon-Trump Supporter • 17h
What about these tweets where he brags about getting that much for the military? https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/977855968364171264?lang=en
Because of the $700 & $716 Billion Dollars gotten to rebuild our Military, many jobs are created and our Military is again rich. Building a great Border Wall, with drugs (poison) and enemy combatants pouring into our Country, is all about National Defense. Build WALL through M!
Got $1.6 Billion to start Wall on Southern Border, rest will be forthcoming. Most importantly, got $700 Billion to rebuild our Military, $716 Billion next year...most ever. Had to waste money on Dem giveaways in order to take care of military pay increase and new equipment.


WinterTymeNimble Navigator • 17h
There's a huge difference between unilateral cuts and mutual deescalation. If China and Russia aren't cutting, we need to be spending more - as Trump articulates in that video. Now, if they're willing to make cuts, it's better to spend less than more.


commi_nazisNonsupporter • 15h
Are China and Russia both cutting military spending?


WinterTymeNimble Navigator • 15h
That would be the condition for US cuts.


Quidfacis_Nonsupporter • 17h
It's not a unilateral cut, it's mutual deescalation.
Can the U.S. trust Russia and China to deescalate?
How would that differ from something like the Iran deal? We can't trust Iran but can trust Russia and China?


WinterTymeNimble Navigator • 17h
Can the U.S. trust Russia and China to deescalate?
Of course not, just like they can't trust us. Always verify.
How would that differ from something like the Iran deal?
The Iran deal did not include US verification, and Iran has shown a continued desire to nuclearize.


TellMeTrue22Nimble Navigator • 7h
It’s in both of those countries rational best interests to deescalate. I’m sure Russia has learned a thing or two about having an arms race with the US. Iran is a theocracy, and therefore won’t do what’s in its own rational best interest.


45magaNimble Navigator • 13h
Most people are saying something along the lines of 'its hypocritical to raise it then call for cuts.' My view is the increases were to address ISIS, Russia, and China, and any new 'cuts' would be subject to mirror cuts from Russia and China. Increases were a short term fix to a problem, proposed decreases are the opening bid of a multi-decadal slow negotiation.


AdvocateF0rTheDevilNonsupporter • 10h
My view is the increases were to address ISIS, Russia, and China
Could you expand on this? My view is that ISIS was largely defeated by the end of last year, China doesn't have any ambitions of challenging us militarily, and Russia is belligerent but poor (economy smaller than Texas) - our military budget is ~10x as large as theirs. Is spending 10x more than Russia vs 9x as much really that critical?


TheTardisPizzaNimble Navigator • 8h
China doesn't have any ambitions of challenging us militarily
Have you been paying attention to the islands they built and the ocean areas they are trying to claim?


dev_falseNonsupporter • 13h
Unlike Obama, who just halved cut the budget because.
... Because there was a war that ended? Should we just keep military spending at "currently at war" levels all the time?