|
Have
you been trying to find a tactful way to tell the federal budget that
its military has gotten way too big? We've all seen it swelling
up, year after year, but we've been afraid to say anything. We're worried
that if we lose some weight down there, we'll lose some of our defense
capabilities. Bigger is better, right?
But
that's not really true. Instead,
it's just gotten bloated and uncomfortable. It can't move around
very well, its systems are aging much too fast, and it's ignoring things
that would really make it fit in today's world. (Homeland security and
non-military international engagement -- including diplomacy, nonproliferation,
foreign aid, peacekeeping.)
So
it's time to shape up! We need to change the way we slice our
budget pie: give more to other pieces that will build UP our communities
and our economy; and LESS to the lumbering war machine. We'll be safer
and stronger when we do.
If we don't,
we'll just get older and slower. Our military machine is heavily invested
in things that were intended to keep us safe from the threat posed by
the Soviet Union. Communists. Remember them? We're still researching,
building, and buying weapons systems meant to fight an enemy that no longer
exists.
Help
the federal budget trim down! Vote for YOUR biggest loser weapon system.
We can lose some of that ugly winter weight that's been building up; and
start getting out in the world again!
|

More
information here. |
F/A-22
Raptor Aircraft
"At a total of $354 million per plane this
new information shows the F-22 is not only the most expensive but
also the most difficult fighter aircraft to maintain--and it isn't
even experiencing combat stress," said Danielle Brian, Executive
Director of POGO.
It was designed to combat advanced aircraft from the former Soviet
Union -- which were never built. |
|

Time
magazine cover story on the Osprey,
"A
Flying Shame" |
V-22
Osprey
Has been "25 years in development, more than twice as long
as the Apollo program that put men on the moon. V-22 crashes have
claimed the lives of 30 men -- 10 times the lunar program's toll
-- all before the plane has seen combat. The Pentagon has put $20
billion into the Osprey and expects to spend an additional $35 billion
before the program is finished." --Time
magazine
|
|

More
information here. |
Missile
Defense
It doesn't work. But we keep spending billions on it ($10.5 billion
last fiscal year). Why? Perhaps because it makes some people very
rich. Er, fat.
"Boeing gave out trinkets bearing the logo of its missile defense
programs, including a box of mints, a bag of blue and white jelly
beans and a magnetic dart board that reads "Right on Target"
with a fireball explosion in the background." --Washington
Post
|
| 
More
information here. |
DDX
Destroyer
"Just one thing is missing: an enemy. 'The DD(X) is the most
revolutionary surface warship in decades,' says John Pike, director
of defense think tank GlobalSecurity.org. 'But I have yet to have
anybody explain to me--point to a place on the map--and say what
they propose to do with it.'" --Popular
Mechanics
|
|

More
information here. |
Excessive
nuclear weapons
Of the 25,000 nuclear weapons worldwide, the U.S. maintains several
thousand warheads on alert, able to be launched within a matter
of minutes. Does that make you feel safer?
We could easily reduce the number of nukes; and with the money freed
up, we could work to prevent the spread of nukes to other nations
or terrorists. We could even fund programs that would help to make
the world a better place... (There is a bill
to this effect.)
|
And
other things you can do to help!
- Sign
our petition to urge Congress to fund people, not Cold War weapons
-
Donate
to WAND, so we can spread the word through trainings,
action guides, conferences, and more!
-
- If
you're on Facebook,
please become a friend of WAND/WiLL, and share with us! (Search for
Wand WiLL.)
- Visit
our blog,
and add your comments.
"We'll...
reform our defense budget so that we're not paying for Cold War-era
weapons systems we don't use."
(President Obama, 2/24/09) |
 |
|