Save Our Nation: Reduce Pentagon Spending

Once again, the Peace Economy Project will be collecting signatures from folks who agree that military spending must be cut to save our domestic needs and safety net programs. We’ll be taking these signatures to Congress over the summer where we’ll also lobby for peace. Please read our appeal, and sign on if you agree. Donate if you can.

Dear <<We will enter your congressperson’s name here>>:

We are concerned that too much of the nation’s resources are devoted to the military, and not enough to domestic initiatives, especially the safety net needed by those in poverty.

We are pleased that after so much national partisan debate, a compromise budget has led to the partial lifting of the sequester, raising of the debt ceiling, and protection of most of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program in the compromise farm bill. We are also pleased that after so many years the US appears finally to be removing most of its troops from Afghanistan this year, and that Defense Security Chuck Hagel is planning to reduce our Army size to pre-World War II levels. Yet our concerns are many:

Weapons Procurement. We can’t have it all. We can’t replace the air craft carriers (the new Gerald Ford costs $13 billion), the submarines, and build all the additional ships that the Navy wants. Or the new $100 billion bomber fleet that the Air Force wants. Or the 2400 F-35s that are under-construction (despite an estimated $160 billion in cost overruns, remaining technical problems, and an estimated $1.5 trillion cost over the planes 40 year life span. The money challenge is further complicated when Congress precludes base closing and other savings that the Pentagon has sought.

Weapons Research. The array and sophistication of military research and development is also unsettling. The Navy is testing “laser and rail gun” technology; the Army is testing a “high energy laser mobile demonstrator”; The Defense Advanced Research Projects agency is exploring “pod-mounted lasers to protect airborne platforms.” Lockheed Martin is said to be designing an “affordable, hypersonic intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance (ISR) and strike platform” and Northrup Grumman is reported to have a new secrete high altitude reconnaissance drone, the RQ-180, perhaps with attack capabilities. All these activities not only contributes to an arms race, but risk war from one or more countries concerned that they not get too far behind.

Missile Defense. The 2013 Defense Authorization Law required the Defense Department to identify additional missile sites on the east coast of the country. Congratulations to Vermont Senator Pat Leahy who has indicated that he does want his state to be one of the sites for the two year environmental impact studies that will preclude any final decisions. The Congressional Budget Office has said that the cost of such a facility would be around $3.5 billion. There is no consensus that anti ICBM systems work, or that the sites in California or Alaska would not be sufficient.

We expect the United States to defend itself against threats, yet there are good reasons to think that our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and our aggressive behavior have increased, not diminished, terrorism. 

Thank you for considering these concerns. We would welcome the opportunity to share additional information with you.

Signed,
Members and Friends of the Peace Economy Project
<<list of signatures will be attached>>

SIGN ON TO THE 2014 PEP APPEAL TO CONGRESS

Please also consider donating to help us fund our trip!



This entry was posted in PEP News. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.