April 25th, 2011
05:20 PM ET

What in the World? The military's secret plan...to shrink

An article written under the pseudonym Mr. Y. grabbed my attention this week. The article has a bold thesis, even more surprising given who the mysterious Mr. Y turns out to be.

It argues that the United States has embraced an entirely wrong set of priorities, particularly with regard to its federal budget. We have overreacted to Islamic extremism. We have pursued military solutions instead of political ones.

Y says we are underinvesting in the real sources of national power - our youth, our infrastructure and our economy. The United States sees the world through the lens of threats, while failing to understand that influence, competitiveness and innovation are the key to advancing American interests in the modern world. Y says that above all we must invest in our children.  Only by educating them properly will we ensure our ability to compete in the future.

Y also argues that we need to move from an emphasis on power and control to an emphasis on strength and influence.

Y goes on to say that we shouldn't even talk about national security as we have for the past 60 years; we should be talking about national prosperity and security.

Now, I think this is very smart stuff for the new world we're entering in, but it's important and influential in particular, given the source. This article arguing we need to rely less on our military comes, in fact, from the highest echelons of the Pentagon.

Mr. Y is actually two people, both top-ranking members of Admiral Mike Mullen's team, the Joint Chiefs of Staff. They are Captain Wayne Porter of the U.S. Navy and Colonel Mark Mykleby of the Marine Corps. It's likely that the essay had some official sanction, which means that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or perhaps even Secretary of Defense Robert Gates had seen it and did not stop its publication.

So why did the authors call themselves Mr. Y? It's a play on a seminal essay from Foreign Affairs magazine more than five decades ago. The title was "The Sources of Soviet Conduct," and it was signed simply X. The author turned out to be the American diplomat George Kennan, and the article turned out to have perhaps the greatest influence on American foreign policy in the second half of the 20th century.

It set out the policy of containment, that if we contain the Soviet Union, countering its influence, eventually the internal contradictions of the Soviet system would trigger its collapse, and it worked. But Porter and Mykleby say the basic approach, a massive military to deter the Soviets, a quasi-imperial policy to counter Soviet influence all over the world, is still in place and is outmoded and outdated. They call their policy proposal sustainment, and they hope it just might be the policy that will carry us forward for the next 50 years.

Mr. Y is hoping to be the next X - to set the new tone of Washington strategy. Will that happen?

Well, the term "sustainment" is silly, but the ideas behind it are not.

Washington needs to make sure that the United States does not fall into the imperial trap of every other superpower in history, spending greater and greater time and money and energy stabilizing disorderly parts of the world on the periphery, while at the core its own industrial and economic might is waning.

We have to recognize that fixing America's fiscal problems - paring back the budget busters like entitlements and also defense spending - making the economy competitive, dealing with immigration and outlining a serious plan for energy use are the best strategies to stay a superpower, not going around killing a few tribal leaders in the remote valleys and hills of Afghanistan.

Take a look a the report and then, if you feel so moved, write your congressperson about it here.

And let us know in the poll below whether you think the U.S. should substantially reduce its military expenditures to decrease the deficit and/or allocate money to other priorities.

As always, you can reach me through Facebook and Twitter.


soundoff (117 Responses)
  1. Michael McBride

    I think it is interesting that "elements" of the pentagon are suggesting, under a thin alias, how the country should be run. I thought that a choice was made for such leadership in the last election. Until our new president started doing business as usual. Granted "Y"'s new ideas and vision seem properly guided and placed. Hopefully such voices are genuine and as it appears at least here, they are being heard in the mass media. It will take alot more truth, focus and action to bring such an appropriate concept forward. As far a fixing "Americas fiscal problems", innovation is also called for. Cutting costs, like leaving Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Pakistan. How about a "haircut for the FED!" ? A real Bank of America, by and for the people. Vision, humanity & equality, not the illusion of the American dream. Real Change not spare change

    April 25, 2011 at 6:38 pm | Reply
    • Mark Hofmann

      Michael, "How about a "haircut for the FED!"??? Are you kidding me? The Federal Reserve is not a bank of the people, it is a private organization that profits immensely by making money out of thin air - just research it. Building up our arms and keeping wars going on is nothing more than corporate welfare, big companies getting rich by taxpayers flipping the bill. It comes down to the old guns and butter economics of the 60's. We've spent too much on guns and it's hurting the citizens at the table.

      April 26, 2011 at 9:07 am | Reply
      • jim

        For a great learning read on the creation and sustainment of the Ferederal Reserve Banking system get the book " The Creature From Jekyl Island". It is a account of how who why when the Fed was created and how it is basically a giant ponzei scheme.

        April 27, 2011 at 7:46 am |
      • jim

        For a great learning read on the creation and sustainment of the Federal Reserve Banking system get the book " The Creature From Jekyl Island". It is a account of how who why when the Fed was created and how it is basically a giant ponzei scheme.

        April 27, 2011 at 7:47 am |
    • greatjoke

      Am sure Y have a unique good character...unlike those RUTHLESS NATO,UN, AND HILARRY goons!!!

      April 27, 2011 at 2:35 pm | Reply
    • greatjoke

      If a person like Y have occupied the WHITE HOUSE a decades or long time ago, all these sufferings(that caused by the Bush father and son – ARROGANT and RUTHLESS GOVT.) around the world would not have happened or would have been eliminated.

      Just this time, just hoping the world shall witness too, that AMERICANS shall REVOLT!!! SOON!!

      April 27, 2011 at 2:47 pm | Reply
      • DAISHI

        Complex problems don't have the simple answers you're proposing here.

        April 28, 2011 at 10:05 pm |
  2. Onesmallvoice

    Mr.Y has the right idea. It's too bad that few are listening. Since 1950 this country has had the wrong priorities and now we're starting to pay for it,such the closing of our schools and libraries,the disrepair of our roads and bridges and now some right-wing politicians in Washington are seeking to do away with medicare. Unfortunate with Barack Obama and the Republicans,none of this will change soon. How revolting this is!!!

    April 25, 2011 at 7:30 pm | Reply
  3. RAJ

    Budgetting for military is one thing and using budgeted money is another issue. USA is in power because of its military strength and econmic strength. When any country have these two strength in place, all other countries respect that power out of its psychological effects. Now, country like China, some terrorist group and those countries who are not friendly with USA are looking for downfall of USA. Military power and economic power are standard of measurement of strength and USA is failing in that standard because of downfall in its economy. If we reduce military budget at this juncture then we will loose total respect in the world as Super Power and its consequences will not allow us to rise again economically. We must act intelligently as we have acted in case of Libya's crises where we have allowed UK and France to take initiative to solve problem with our support. Same way we should encourage other countries to take part in all international disputes in the future. This we can reduce military expenses but to cut budget for militarily now is risky. We got to have one military power intact till we rise again economically. We spent 900 billions in Iraq war which was unnecessary and loosing many soldiers. We should be careful and not to jump in to such hasty wrong decision.

    April 25, 2011 at 7:58 pm | Reply
    • GNARF

      This view is pretty short sighted. It may be true that other nations use the "measurements" of military and economic might to define what a "super power" is. But you should think about how military power is sustained? And the source of this is the economy. When America wont fix it´s economic problems but keeps on investing it´s remaining resources into the military, for how much longer do you think the military might can be sustained?

      And America is n´t the strongest military force on this planet anymore (Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_troops) still you don´t see the Chinese roving around the globe occupying "terroristic" countries (which happen to have oil reserves... oh what a coincidence), inprison it´s own citizens without charge (Poor little Bradley Manning) or harassing every visitor to their country ( Greetings to the molesters at the TSA)
      ... wait a second... China does most of this stuff too? Maybee a new definition of "super power" is born today 😉

      April 26, 2011 at 9:57 am | Reply
      • Lee

        Has there ever been another type of superpower? 🙂

        April 26, 2011 at 11:37 am |
      • Rey d`Tutto

        @GNARF, I find the wikipedia article you referenced very interesting, but the sheer numbers displayed in the list do not rate the combat effectiveness of the various shown militaries. Saying the US is 8th in the list as there are Seven countries that can field larger armies does repeat the presented facts, but leaves much of the reality of the situation out.
        The Worlds Second best army is the most expensive luxury a country can pay for. Smaller does not necessarily mean Weaker, especially when extrapolating the technological advances the various US Services are implementing, Funding, or researching. All it took to end the last World War were 2 atomic bombs, and our current Nuclear Arsenal is quite a bit more than that now.

        April 26, 2011 at 4:34 pm |
      • thisguy

        the number of troops each nation has compared to the other doesn't necessarily reflect it's over-all strength. i would say that America is the strongest military force in existence today, easily overpowering the Chinese military due to their naval fleets. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_warships_in_service_worldwide )

        that being stated, after taking into account USSOCOM and US Air Force, which more than doubles the size of the People's Liberation Army Air Force in China, please, we're soooo much more powerful.

        what a joke.

        April 26, 2011 at 5:39 pm |
      • Mr. Rob

        I can assure you the 2.5 mil US servicemembers are not intimidated of the 4.5 mil Chinese military members. As Rey stated, a soldiers ability to perfom is not impacted solely by number of personnel. Equipment and training are paramount. The US provides the cutting edge in military equipment, shown by NATO relying on the US. Additionally, US servicemembers are returning from fighting in two wars (three if you want to count Libya).

        There is no comparison between the US and China when it comes to the ability to engage and win on the battlefield. The only concern I have for China is the vision the Chinese military have about dominating the next phase of warfare, Cyber.

        April 27, 2011 at 5:28 pm |
    • Steve

      A group of well armed well financed 'rebels' STARTED fighting a civil with their Libyan government. They started the fighting and government responded like any other power crazy group would (government) they tried to protect their interests by crushing the oposition. In our countries if we do something illegal swat teams may come through our doors and shoot us take us or take us to prison. If we try to defend our selves we get shot... the rebels are actively choosing to go kill and blow things up, not just do something illegal (like say not pay taxes or grow 'illegal' plants)

      How is it intelligent that American or its allies start bombing a sovereign nation involved in a civil war. Especially to remove a government that takes care of its people unlike the US. Libya is not letting economic hit men and foreign banks take over its economy and resources. Qaddafi may be a nut or a mad man or a brutal war mongering person but the only evidence I have ever seen are statements made by our media here and there over the years.

      I have watched our governments rob people of their income / land / possessions, and give it away to banks and corporations that are also robbing us. We can get picked up and put in jail with out cause. If we don't agree with the way things are we become some crazy nothing of a human or compromise our values to the $tate. Our armies go around an blow up both, dangerous and extremely innocent people. This is causing more and more people to hate our system and lump the innocent of our counties with the people that are destroying their way of life.

      Read up about Libya the dinar and the system of society they have there before you support killing them and other nations young soldiers not to mention group the rest of the western worlds reputation. I don't see intelligence here.
      Evil mad man = wont do what he is told by the western banking establishment. (Dictator, ruler, homicidal maniac)

      April 26, 2011 at 12:01 pm | Reply
      • john

        hey steve what about the innocent people who died on sept 11 2001, what about their innocent lives and their families. do you even care, or maybe your just like all the other gullable americans who think the government was behind the whole thing.

        April 27, 2011 at 1:18 pm |
      • greatjoke

        All the sufferings in the world, caused by the arrogance of the US government. If a human being like Y can occupy the white house perhaps, this world shall be free from sufferings!!!

        April 27, 2011 at 2:55 pm |
      • greatjoke

        To: John, I am not an American but I can see and understand the gravity that you might have the smallest BRAIN of what caused 911 and who were responsible? and why those conspirators of evil(other countries nationals with US citizenship-close freinds to many Republicans) did that horrific deeds? GET A CLUE MORON!!

        April 27, 2011 at 3:18 pm |
    • Tanis

      You mean like how the world's weakest countries basically give the US the one finger salute every time we try to throw our weight at them? That's respect?

      A strong military can be had without spending as much as the rest of the world combined on it. The only reason we can even do that is because we spend a similar % of GDP on the military as others but our GDP is so big. Guess what happens if we don't invest in ourselves and waste money in stupid wars in stupid countries for stupid reasons? GDP goes down or stagnates and other countries catch up.

      It's time we stopped buying bombs and started investing more into science, medicine, energy, and infrastructure.

      April 26, 2011 at 2:57 pm | Reply
    • asdf

      You are retarded

      April 27, 2011 at 12:18 am | Reply
    • YesterdaysWine

      Our military spending is out of control. We spend about 6x as much as China, our nearest competitor, More than 10x as much as Russia, which is no longer a direct threat. Within the 20 other top spenders are France, UK, Japan, Germany Saudi Arabia, Italy, India, Brazil, South Korea, Canada, Australia, Spain, the Emirates, Turkey, Israel, Netherlands and Greece. PERHAPS among them we can count Saudi Arabia as dangerous to us. The rest are either our closest allies or friendly neutrals. We need to relax, lower spending to about 3% of GDP, and learn to share decisions with key friends. We spend about one third of all money worldwide allocated to defense. The EU and other allies spend another third and the rest of the world the final third.

      Keep in mind this does not cover the costs of the two wars we are currently fighting. Those require supplemental funds.

      Defense spending has been rising about 9% per year for the last decade.

      Defense accounts for about 20% of the Federal budget, about the same as ALL OTHER DISCRETIONARY SPENDING. Yet, as we attempt to lower our debt and deficits, military spending remains on the rise, while home programs are cut. There is something seriously wrong. We could easily scale back spending to $450 billion and still have the most formidable fighting force on Earth. It could probably be cut even more if we trusted our allies even more deeply.

      April 27, 2011 at 12:19 pm | Reply
    • skytag

      I'm 56 years old. All my life I've been told there are barbarians at the gate who will destroy our way of life if we don't have a war-ready military to protect us. It's bankrupted us. You missed Fareed's whole point and just parroted what you've been brainwashed to believe.

      August 27, 2011 at 10:03 am | Reply
  4. Mr XYZ

    FANTASTIC find, Mr Zakaria. Here is the smoking gun there IS hope after all. Thank you for posting this, I'll follow this up by listening to NPR's analysis tomorrow morning.

    BTW, you're doing a fantastic job overall. Loved your "Time" piece, "Are America's Best Days Behind Us?" Go man, GO!!!

    April 25, 2011 at 8:41 pm | Reply
  5. George Sabo

    An astonishingly profound and progressive way of looking at America's truly needed priorities in the new global economy and consciousness–it is amazing that two military are willing to admit that our arrogant, pugnacious approach to much of the rest of the world is becoming more and more irrelevant–and much of this irelevance is centered around our military posture. I hope the powers that be will seriously consider this paper.

    April 25, 2011 at 9:31 pm | Reply
  6. MR. v

    We must act intelligently as we have acted in case of Libya's crises where we have allowed UK and France to take initiative to solve problem with our support. Same way we should encourage other countries to take part in all international disputes in the future. This we can reduce military expenses but to cut budget for militarily now is risky. We got to have one military power intact till we rise again economically. I quite agree with this!!!!but United States should keep its leadership meanwhile.We should manitain our military power but its meaningless to develop some weapon projects bacause now major world powers' weapon stocks are enough to destroy this fragile globe.US should influence the world more through its tech and economic strenth,

    April 25, 2011 at 10:44 pm | Reply
  7. Hans

    Thanks for pointing out this article.
    If the military is stating this, the politicians will have no "security" excuses not to act in this direction.
    I wish "Europe" could get a vision like this together for its role in the world of the 21st century.
    If anybody knows where to find this vision for "Europe", please share it.
    But there is probably nobody with a recognized authority in Europe like the US Military in the US who could write an influential article like this.

    April 26, 2011 at 3:06 am | Reply
  8. j. von hettlingen

    George Kennan's Containment worked during the Cold War, as the world was a bipolar one. It worked because the U.S. had only the former USSR to focus one and the Sovjetregime fell at last. After 1991 it looked as if we had a unipolar world, with America leading. Due to the senselss wars in Iraq and Afghanistan the political influence of the U.S. is waning. With its rising soverign debts and the economic growth of emeriging countries like China and India, which are beginning to flexi their muscles, the U.S. will have a hard time to keep up militarily. So instead of concentrating on the outside world, the U.S. should focus on the resources it has – high technology and make the best out of it.

    April 26, 2011 at 4:33 am | Reply
  9. samuel yembra, nigeria-

    the article is timely. the time's come for america to live according to the true meaning of its creed- end of discussion

    April 26, 2011 at 7:18 am | Reply
  10. AnnonUSA

    There is but on driving force behind this military spending.

    Banks and Corporations do not make windfall profits from NON WAR spending. At least not the profits they desire.

    April 26, 2011 at 7:18 am | Reply
  11. qnbs7

    C'mon it's only cash... Spend it wisely :)))

    April 26, 2011 at 8:08 am | Reply
  12. Stephen J. Ardent

    What an incredibly stupid and dangerous path these people would put us on. Surely they want to see America destroyed just as surely as it enemies. A clear reminder that the house in Washington DC doesn't just need to be cleaned out, it needs to be fumigated.

    April 26, 2011 at 8:23 am | Reply
    • rizzo

      No, they actually care about America and aren't frightened by the slight threat that Islamic extremism represents.

      Sadly, I have a feeling that the 'nuke 'em all' attitude that Mr. Ardent represents will not go away quickly or quietly.

      April 26, 2011 at 9:01 am | Reply
  13. RAH

    @Stephen J. Ardent
    > A clear reminder that the house in Washington DC doesn't just need to be cleaned out, it needs to be fumigated.

    Which house do you want to fumigate? The Pentagon? Me and the authors of the essay are all for it!

    Isn't it great when we all agree?

    April 26, 2011 at 8:50 am | Reply
    • Nastymonday

      when I install veorsin 1.2.6 it gives me this when I activate it Fatal error: Cannot redeclare catablog_activate() (previously declared in /blog/wp-content/plugins/catablog/catablog.php:37) in /blog/wp-content/plugins/catablog/catablog.php on line 51

      April 23, 2012 at 8:47 pm | Reply
  14. Steve

    The author summarizes Y's essay: "Y says we are underinvesting in the real sources of national power – our youth, our infrastructure and our economy. The United States sees the world through the lens of threats, while failing to understand that influence, competitiveness and innovation are the key to advancing American interests in the modern world. Y says that above all we must invest in our children. Only by educating them properly will we ensure our ability to compete in the future."

    So Y emplores us to: 1) invest in our youth by educating them; 2) Invest in our infrastructure; 3) Those 2 things are necessary for revitalizing the economy.

    The author attempts to use Y to support his propositions: "We have to recognize that fixing America's fiscal problems – paring back the budget busters like entitlements and also defense spending – making the economy competitive, dealing with immigration and outlining a serious plan for energy use are the best strategies to stay a superpower."

    Note the author focuses on immigration, energy and what he calls entitlements - things Y did not advocate; and he ignores educating our youth and fixing our crumbling infrastructures.

    April 26, 2011 at 9:25 am | Reply
  15. Emperor Palpatine

    When the "say-do gap" is so big as with the report by these two Y-Men, credibility tends towards zero. This is nothing but the rant of two dewy-eyed wannabees divorced from reality.

    It is rather sobering to see military types literally drowning in the dense soup of bullshit and disinformation with which all Americans are fed daily again. One would expect at least some sense of reality from people in their position. But hey, thats the USA, where the corrupt, incompetent and lying beat the competent, honest and knowledgeable every step of the way.

    April 26, 2011 at 9:49 am | Reply
    • seraphim0

      And, precisely, what are you basing your opinion on? Maybe something to back up your statements is in order?

      April 27, 2011 at 2:13 pm | Reply
  16. Steve

    I have now read Mr. Y's "A National Strategic Narrative". I commend it to the reader. Under the heading, "Our Three Investment Priorities", Y states: "Our first investment priority, then, is intellectual capital and a sustainable infrastructure of education, health and social services to provide for the continuing development and growth of America’s youth." Y's report does not use the word, "entitlements". The word immigration appears 1 time in the report, and not in the context that it should be a focus of our energies. I am not arguing that Mr. Zakaria's opinions are wrongheaded. I am simply pointing out that Y's report contradicts Zakaria's propositions. Y advocates investing in, "a sustainable infrastructure of education, health and social services..."

    April 26, 2011 at 9:52 am | Reply
  17. Tina Louise

    Captain Porter and Colonel Mykleby are heroes and if this represents broader thinking by the senior military command then one of them should run for president in 2012.

    April 26, 2011 at 10:18 am | Reply
  18. Joe

    How is one supposed to remain optimistic about the future of this country? I understand that we need to impose our military might at times just as a reminder to the rest of the world but how many wars are we going to fight. I read many conspiracies over the years and opinions that stated America was on the decline and would eventually not be a superpower and I refused to believe it and came to this country under the premise that it was and would always be a center of opportunity. But just look at the chain of events over the last 8 years...can anyone tell me why I should believe that this country will prevail and return to its prime in the future? someone once told me that America's destruction would come from within itself...economic failure leads to military failure which leads to failure in everything else

    April 26, 2011 at 10:46 am | Reply
  19. Some DoD member

    The military's budget doesn't need to be decreased (maybe a little increase in r&d). We need to stop dumping money into black holes that won't ever be fixed. It's like cutting the military budget, but without cutting things they need

    April 26, 2011 at 10:53 am | Reply
    • CypherSpace

      This right here is a prime example of why this nation is decending into unmanageable debt. No body wants to loose their job, in fact, they want to make more money. Unfortunately, since the United States government is the worlds largest employer, paring it down is going to be a problem. Those in the government will almost NEVER cut government jobs, and those in these jobs have easy access to influencing government decisions, as they work within the super structure. There is a term for this, but I forget it. The point is, we do not need more freaking weapons, we do not need to kill more people. That is the entire purpose of millitary r&d, and it is an inherently bad one. It must be stopped you fool, these great men have stood up and offered to shrink the very departments which they work for, a noble and honorable gesture which could in the end be worse for them, but will undoubtedly be better for the nation. That is the deffinition of being a good person and doing what is right. Doing good and right even at personal detriment for the good of others. They are heroes, and you are a foolish greedy leech. You are exactly the type we must do away with. YOU ARE THE PROBLEM.

      April 26, 2011 at 12:15 pm | Reply
  20. Supply Side Jesus

    The Lord has spoken. We need to reduce military spending only as much as it reduces taxes on the wealthiest among us, so that they can spread their wealth to the lower classes through employment. We need to reduce education spending, because a lack of education is the fault of the uneducated, not the burden of the rich. Those who God has favored with wealth are the leaders of tomorrow and shall be taught with private tutelage, while the rest shall become their vassals.

    April 26, 2011 at 11:48 am | Reply
  21. World Radio

    Who wrote this? This article would carry a little more weight if the author had dared to put his name on this article. I doubt it is an official word from the pentagon.

    April 26, 2011 at 12:25 pm | Reply
    • McAfee

      Did you read the Report, Fareed Zakaria's article on it, or who the authors were? If you read the report, you will see the names of the authors at the end, and a disclaimer acknowledging that this is their opinion, not the Pentagon's official position.

      April 26, 2011 at 2:11 pm | Reply
  22. Azreal

    They know what we want, we have been saying it for over 20 years now, Reduce the military, the Money Spent on missiles. Use it to feed and educate people and you won't be in a depression. The only thing is the group of Families that have Always Ruled America Don't like that kind of talk. They make weapons for profit, if we don't use them the don't make money. They also Handle the Rebuilding of countries we destroy, and again rake in the cash.

    April 26, 2011 at 2:41 pm | Reply
  23. Azreal

    @Supply Side Jesus, God does not take favorites among his creations, Not the Israelites, and certainly not the Caucasians. Jesus said "I am not of this world" Money belongs to the world, it is the Physical representation of human labor. Do you think God approves of Slavery? You probably do. Do you think he approves of turning a Profit? Why did he knock over the Money changer's stands and the temple? That he is the granter of worldly Riches?; Gold and Jewels? Why didn't god charge for the Food in the Garden of Eden? Why doesn't he Charge us for the Food we grow now? Why didn't Jesus have slaves to do his every bidding? Why did he not take his sword and Conquer the Jews As KING. "You live by the sword you die by the sword". That's why, if you accumulate riches and seek to be a Master of men, you will find yourself slave to something else; maybe even your own desire. BTW God does not look out for the Wealthy, Saturn does. (SATAN)

    April 26, 2011 at 3:00 pm | Reply
    • seraphim0

      Sarcasm detection fail.

      April 27, 2011 at 2:15 pm | Reply
  24. irongamer

    Anyone not controlled by fear and not bought out by the military industrial complex already knows this is true. Relevant graph, war spending vs fixing the majority of global issues. http://irongamer.net/warvspeace.jpg

    April 26, 2011 at 4:17 pm | Reply
  25. Mr. Z

    I'm disappointed in you CNN. You used a paper by some very smart and sensible people to push your own agenda. The paper says nothing about cutting "entitlements" (which BTW is the right-wing spin machine's name for some of the most useful programmes the government has ever introduced: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, public school programmes). In fact, the only reason those programmes are "budget busters" is because corporations like GE and Time Warner don't pay taxes proportional to their profits, leaving the burden of keeping America and her corporate masters afloat on the disappearing middle class.

    The paper has some great ideas on how the military should be used in a changing world, while your article has the kind of right-wing talking points I would expect from talking heads on FOX news. You see, CNN, you are part of the problem. People will never be able to make informed decisions if the media feeds them nothing but lies.

    April 26, 2011 at 4:32 pm | Reply
1 2 3

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.