Defense/War Spending

[MajorRewrite]

Trump wants to increase defense/war spending by 50% in the next budget, to $1.5 trillion.

Trump proposes massive increase in 2027 defense spending to $1.5T, citing ‘dangerous times’

And he’s pretending that his tariffs will pay for the $500 billion increase. They won’t, and he’s promised to use tariff tax revenue to pay for about 10 other things anyway.

“This will allow us to build the ‘Dream Military’ that we have long been entitled to and, more importantly, that will keep us SAFE and SECURE, regardless of foe,” Trump said in a posting on Truth Social announcing his proposal. He added that he feels comfortable surging spending on the military because of increased revenue created by his administration through tariffs imposed on friends and foes around the globe since his return to office.

dReAm MiLiTArY … Donnie is clearly infatuated with the boom booms and pew pews now.

Deficit Donnie is going to spend America into bankruptcy or die trying.

 

[ll74]

And that doesn't include the Venezuelan occupation.

 

[Lazaran]

Trump wants to increase defense/war spending by 50% in the next budget, to $1.5 trillion.

Trump proposes massive increase in 2027 defense spending to $1.5T, citing ‘dangerous times’

And he’s pretending that his tariffs will pay for the $500 billion increase. They won’t, and he’s promised to use tariff tax revenue to pay for about 10 other things anyway.



dReAm MiLiTArY … Donnie is clearly infatuated with the boom booms and pew pews now.

Deficit Donnie is going to spend America into bankruptcy or die trying.

I’ve been making that point for some time now:

The common MAGAts seem to "think" that DonOld’s military "adventurism" and massive increase in the number of ICE agents / facilities doesn’t come with a yuuuuuge price tag.

And now we’re going to buy Greenland??!



We. Told. Them. So.

 

[Wilson23]

Of course he did. He's been rattling sabers at Venezuela, Colombia, Cuba, Iran and even DENMARK. How would he not ask for a bigger defense budget? (I should day "war budget," since he renamed the department.)

 

[Holy_Seduction]

The seizure of oil, mining and other strategic raw materials is no incidental development. It is driven by a primary economic motive. This is about re‑securing markets, energy supplies and the wealth without which capitalism cannot sustain US corporate profits and military readiness under conditions of intensifying inter‑imperialist rivalry.

The assault on Venezuela derives from global capitalist crisis as rival powers [mainly China but also Russia] have penetrated Latin American markets and secured critical supplies. Washington must resort to open militarism because otherwise capitalism will be unable to defend its fading hegemony. Venezuela’s oil reserves are the largest on earth and, control of those energy resources is central to US aims both to undercut competitors and to attempt to shore up the dollar‑based financial order under strain from escalating debt and capital flight.

Regionally, the operation seeks to reverse Chinese investment, trade ties and infrastructure projects which erode US dominance in Latin America. The Trump administration statements and National Security Strategy explicitly frame the campaign as a “reassertion” of hemispheric control, designed to deny ‘non‑Hemispheric competitors’ access to key geographies and resources. Venezuela’s gold, bauxite, copper, potential uranium deposits and above all—oil are strategic assets in a world bent on intense resource competition. US policy aims to extract these rents for US capital, depriving China and Russia of leverage, and to create conditions favorable to US multinationals—who will be offered guarantees and reconstruction contracts once control is secured.

Domestically, the war serves US ruling class needs: billionaire owners of oil, finance and the military‑industrial complex seek profits, geopolitical advantage and a diversion from acute social and political crises at home. Media and political elites present the invasion as a ‘bold’ strategic success and suppress legal/moral questions in reflection of media/corporate/state integration. The enormous fiscal costs and domestic austerity that accompany such militarism are socialized onto the working class even as private actors—oil majors, hedge funds and contractors—are positioned to capture the spoils [profit]. In sum, the ruling oligarchy uses imperial war as a mechanism to protect and expand their material interests when peaceful economic levers fail and capitalism cannot thrive otherwise.

For workers globally, these dynamics mean intensified militarization, higher living costs, revoking of democratic rights, and a threat of general escalation toward inter‑imperialist war. The only effective barrier to imperialist conquest is the independent political mobilization of the working class across borders. That is, the fight against war must be tied to the struggle to overthrow the capitalist system that requires it. The way ahead is to build a revolutionary, international movement of the working class, reject bourgeois nationalism and petty‑bourgeois ‘left’ accommodations. The path ahead is the formation of rank‑and‑file organizations and socialist parties that unite workers internationally in opposition to imperialism.

 

[Wilson23]

Washington must resort to open militarism because otherwise capitalism will be unable to defend its fading hegemony.

How can capitalism be fading when there is no competing alternative any more?

 

[Holy_Seduction]

there is no competing alternative

Even if China and Russia are named specifically . . .

 

[Wilson23]

Even if China and Russia are named specifically . . .

The Communists in Russia are a tolerated powerless opposition. China has given no support to Communist movements in other countries since the Vietnam War ended. As an INTERNATIONAL movement, Communism is dead.

 

[MajorRewrite]

No comments from the MAGA sheep? I guess they support another $500 billion of deficit spending annually.

Remember when Trump pretended he wanted to cut defense/war spending in half? There was a thread about it. That didn’t age well.

 

[MajorRewrite]

Some comments from the “Trump want to halve military spending” thread are amusing now that Trump wants to increase military spending to $1.5 trillion:

It's going to be fun watching the lefties here out themselves as war mongers and wanting to enrich defense contractors.

If a Democrat President had proposed this, anti Trumpers would be talking Nobel Peace prize and carving a new face on Mount Rushmore.

But because Trump is in favour of it, now they have to pretend it's a bad thing.

Hopefully it gets streamlined and as efficient as possible. US doesn't need such massive spending it does now, just enough to ensure secure borders and sovereignty. After all, got a couple huge moats around our continent already.

And any decent human being should be horrified at the idea of using a foreign country's war and people to 'test' new weaponry.

Fuck em. Trump is about ending war and anyone who wants to continue war for 'battlefield testing new tech' can volunteer themselves for such things.

Poor TastySuckToy.

 

[Wilson23]

 

[Wilson23]

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."

-- Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1953

 

[SissyBrandi19]

Trump wants to increase defense/war spending by 50% in the next budget, to $1.5 trillion.

Trump proposes massive increase in 2027 defense spending to $1.5T, citing ‘dangerous times’

And he’s pretending that his tariffs will pay for the $500 billion increase. They won’t, and he’s promised to use tariff tax revenue to pay for about 10 other things anyway.



dReAm MiLiTArY … Donnie is clearly infatuated with the boom booms and pew pews now.

Deficit Donnie is going to spend America into bankruptcy or die trying.

Yes, the U.S. military buildup started with Trump. Um...do you hear yourselves? Do you know anything about the military? The budget as it exists? I'm cynical about ALL govt because surprise, the boys in D.C. are not the govt! But I sound like some always-Trumper because I have to react to the idiocy that apparently TDS invokes...it's not just any neurological condition, it somehow directly affects the frontal cortex and ability to reason! As a neuro psych guy, this is fascinating! You might want to critically analyze the Biden years and their contribution to the national debt - you'll be shocked! Newsflash - the Inflation Reduction Act - did the opposite!

 

[MajorRewrite]

Yes, the U.S. military buildup started with Trump. Um...do you hear yourselves? Do you know anything about the military? The budget as it exists? I'm cynical about ALL govt because surprise, the boys in D.C. are not the govt! But I sound like some always-Trumper because I have to react to the idiocy that apparently TDS invokes...it's not just any neurological condition, it somehow directly affects the frontal cortex and ability to reason! As a neuro psych guy, this is fascinating! You might want to critically analyze the Biden years and their contribution to the national debt - you'll be shocked! Newsflash - the Inflation Reduction Act - did the opposite!

• Trump said he wanted to increase military spending by 50%.
• Prior to that, MAGA sheep said Trump was going to cut military spending.
• Neither of those things has anything to do with Biden or inflation.

“tHe bOYs iN dC aRe NoT tHe gOVt!” Did Q tell you that?

 

[Rightguide]

• Trump said he wanted to increase military spending by 50%.
• Prior to that, MAGA sheep said Trump was going to cut military spending.
• Neither of those things has anything to do with Biden or inflation.

“tHe bOYs iN dC aRe NoT tHe gOVt!” Did Q tell you that?

National security and maintaining a strong military to safeguard the nation are the government’s foremost responsibilities. All other priorities are secondary.

 

[MajorRewrite]

National security and maintaining a strong military to safeguard the nation are the government’s foremost responsibilities. All other priorities are secondary.

Trump has said he wants to halve military spending, and he’s said he wants to increase it 50%.

Maybe next he’ll announce he’s cutting it 800%!

 

[Bray123]

His views flip-flop daily on many subjects. Taxes good or bad? Firearms for the masses good or bad? Drug dealers good or bad? UK possession of the Chagos Islands good or bad?


It all depends on how alert he is today. Doze-Old J. Trump.

 

[Bray123]

 

[Wilson23]

National security and maintaining a strong military to safeguard the nation are the government’s foremost responsibilities. All other priorities are secondary.

But we don't need a global force-projection capacity. We don't need a global network of military bases. We don't need the biggest military establishment in human history.

 

[Rightguide]

But we don't need a global force-projection capacity. We don't need a global network of military bases. We don't need the biggest military establishment in human history.

Yes, we do. What’s missing from your analysis is strategic thinking. Too often, the debate is reduced to short-term optics and tactical gestures. Professionals understand that tactics are transient, but logistics and positioning determine outcomes. The United States faces nuclear-armed adversaries capable of reaching our homeland in minutes. Deterrence is not rhetorical; it is geographic, technological, and logistical. It requires forward posture, early warning systems, rapid response capability, and sustained presence. Global trade is not an abstraction. It moves through specific maritime corridors and geographic choke points, from the Strait of Hormuz to the straits of Malacca that connect the Andaman Sea (Indian Ocean) and the South China Sea (Pacific Ocean), which must remain open for economic stability and national security. If those arteries are compromised, the consequences are immediate and measurable. All of which requires a powerful and far-reaching Navy

Strategic proximity is therefore not some imperial vanity; it is a structural necessity. Forward-deployed forces, alliance networks, and overseas bases exist to shorten response times, reinforce deterrence, and secure trade routes before crises can metastasize. You can debate scale, cost, or configuration. But pretending geography and logistics don’t govern power projection is not serious analysis. It’s another commentary of yours that's detached from reality.

 

[MajorRewrite]

But pretending geography and logistics don’t govern power projection is not serious analysis. It’s another commentary of yours that's detached from reality.

Pretending there’s a need for a 50% increase in military spending is detached from reality.

 

[Wilson23]

All of which requires a powerful and far-reaching Navy

Why OURS?

 

[Rightguide]

Pretending there’s a need for a 50% increase in military spending is detached from reality.

How would you know?

 

[Rightguide]

Why OURS?

Because we have our own national interests to protect.

 

[ll74]

Because we have our own national interests to protect.

Free trade agreements with Canada aren't security interests