Refocusing National Security Priorities

Among the greater American populace, our heads are screwed on backwards in terms of risk perceptions. Our prioritization of threats is out of whack, and this endangers our collective survival.

Approximately 3,000 people were tragically killed on 9/11, which caused widespread panic. The ensuing fear firestorm, stoked by mainstream media, permitted manipulative politicians to engage in exorbitantly costly wars, dismantle critical Constitutional provisions, and flagrantly disregard international law.

Admittedly, 9/11 was atrocious; however, around 3,000 people die every year from choking on objects or falling down stairs. More importantly, many Americans are indifferent toward the gravest threat, which is heart disease that annually kills over 650,000 Americans.

Because 3,000 died on 9/11, we started an unrelated war that Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz estimated will ultimately cost $3-5 trillion, including welfare costs for wounded troops, increased national debt interest and other hidden expenses. So, we must spend trillions for 3,000 deaths, but heart disease kills millions and we refuse to declare war on fast, junk food, which could also save billions in healthcare costs?

Overall, we now spend over $1 trillion annually on the “security” complex. This includes vast sums for occupations, private war profiteers, superfluous weapons systems, interest on past military debt, and maintenance of over 700 foreign military bases, which some consider a neocolonialist imperium. In fact, our military spending is about as much as the rest of the world combined.

With the economy in a death spiral, is it wise to waste this kind of money on something not vital to economic recovery, especially considering the non-military nature of terrorism? Certain politicians hypocritically complained recently about the stimulus for costing too much, but have they criticized massive military expenditures? These folks also complained about the corresponding increase to our national debt, but these “fiscally responsible” fellows wholeheartedly supported the multi-trillion dollar war and tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy, and were silent as this helped double our debt from $5.7 to $11 trillion over the last eight years.

Interestingly, these guys eschew New Deal policies and declare WWII alone ended the Great Depression, but they fail to recognize the war was a massive public spending project that stimulated industrial manufacturing and job creation. Logically, it follows that massive non-war public spending to stimulate strategic economic sectors, such as clean energy and evolved transportation infrastructure, would likewise create millions of jobs. Arguably, non-war spending would create a longer-lived stimulative effect due to creating goods not built for destruction.

For individual Americans, heart disease is the gravest threat, but what is our greatest national threat? According to National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair, "The primary near-term security concern…is the global economic crisis." Economic national security is priority one.

In addition to threats relating to our economic crisis, we have been seriously neglecting the security threat posed by climate change. The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change, conducted by the British government, estimates that if we fail to address this threat sufficiently, we potentially risk a 20 percent decline in global GDP.

In order to avoid a fiery crash, we must quickly refocus fiscal priorities by calculating the economic tradeoffs of gargantuan war and military spending. By reducing trillions of dollars in waste on Cold War-era military spending, we could become clean energy independent. Refocusing these priorities would vastly stimulate the economy, address the economic threat of climate change, and increase security by ending costly dependence on oil dictatorships in the most volatile region of the world. Additionally, it would destroy the incentive to start costly oil resource wars.

The issue of healthcare is another critical issue in terms of waste and security. We annually spend about $2.4 trillion or 17 percent of GDP on healthcare, and fail to cover around 50 million Americans with insurance. Other advanced nations with a national public insurance plan spend around 10 percent of GDP and cover everyone. This disparity is due to one-third of American costs going toward various forms of waste and profit for superfluous private insurance corporations.

Revolutionizing healthcare would deeply stimulate businesses that face skyrocketing insurance costs. In addition to Congressional incompetence in forcing automakers to invest in fuel efficient autos, healthcare costs are considerably responsible for failure of this sector. Other advance nations with cost efficient public healthcare systems provide businesses with a significant competitive advantage over America. This must change.

Healthcare, education, energy, and evolved transportation systems are fundamental economic infrastructure. Thus, improving these economic subsystems would serve as t deepest long-term economic stimulus, which is why public healthcare and clean energy independence are particularly essential for preventing economic collapse.

Notwithstanding further catastrophic debt accumulation, we cannot afford these critical security investments without drastic cuts to wasteful military occupations and global hegemony.