How much is too much? How much is too little? What is really necessary for the common defense? When you start to look at the real numbers of Federal spending, it is apparent what has priority and what does not with the current administration and with Congress. Social programs buy votes. Military programs should be the Federal governments top, number one priority. It is not when you look at the numbers. Read more in this article.
As Written By Allen B. West for Townhall:
The preeminent responsibility of the federal government is to provide for the common defense, to protect the American people and our interests. It appears that when you listen to certain individuals debating, they believe the primary role of the federal government is to provide free stuff. This reflects those who have confused providing for the common defense and promoting the general welfare. The former is an active verb, the latter a passive verb, but some have juxtaposed the meaning. The resulting new raison d’etre of the federal government is to provide the general welfare.
Is there any wonder why we have an exploding national debt at $19 trillion, expanding poverty and food stamp rolls, and our sailors kneeling in surrender?
Let me be very clear: I do not support the military mission of nation-building. But I also do not believe America should abdicate its role as a global leader that is capable of building strong alliances and coalitions to deter state and non-state actors, along with their aggressive and belligerent actions.
Many people are talking about the New Hampshire presidential primary contests where individuals are vying to be President of these great United States. And consistent with the primary duty of the federal government is the primary title and responsibility of the President, Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces. However, if you have been paying attention to these debates, little more than cursory soundbites and talking points have been dedicated to this vital topic. When considering the challenges facing our nation’s military, we need dedication to this responsibility.
Last week, during testimony before the House Armed Services Committee, Commanding General of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, General John Campbell, was asked by Rep. Jim Brindenstine (R-Ok) if he had authority to engage the Taliban because they are the Taliban. Gen. Campbell responded, no. In plain language, our men and women on the ground in Afghanistan are not allowed to engage the enemy – they are sitting ducks. Don’t forget that in January, we lost Army Special Forces SSG Matthew McClintock during the siege in Marjah where the Taliban surrounded our forces.