The First Article Argues That We Should Not Increase Our

The United States government spends money on its military through Discretionary Spending which funds mandatory programs. According to the Discretionary Spending of 2015, the money goes towards the Department of Defense which devises military policies and sustains the American military forces. The spending on nuclear weapons consists of the preservation and modernization of nuclear forces. Overseas contingency operations are operations that involve conflict against a foe of the U.S or against rival military force.

While in some cases this is certainly true, such as the market, areas such as education should be, at least a larger portion than now, subsidized. The military itself has declared the lack of education a threat to national security because think about it, those drones are pretty complicated to build and fly. If its education system is to become completely privatized and unfunded by the government, it won't be able to manufacture or even control any advanced weaponry or defenses. While there are various other areas that could be cut, defense is easily the most logical one, at least during peacetime. As of 2015, the United States spent a bit more than $800 billion on defenses all together. The government's failure to fund education overall has led to local governments to do most of the spending. When you look at colleges, the government spends little to no money, comparatively, on them, forcing most students to take out student loans just to get through college. A lot of the time, students must deal with these loans for a large part of their life and often times, loan lenders will take them to court if they can't keep up with the payments, which is entirely possible. These loans can usually dictate what the graduates can do with their money throughout their lives and in order to have a prosperous and intelligent society, the United States must put more effort and money into

isis is infiltrating the U.S more and more and even as we speak someone is probably cooking up a plan of attack which is why we need to do something now. According to CNN news post there is yet another element to the process of shutting down Isis, and that is social media, television programs, and other information sources that anyone can access might be a huge problem because any time that Fox news or CNN announces something about Isis or a plan of attack, Isis will hear that and will be able to prepare ahead of time. Another way to eliminate isis from our country is to increase borderline security all around the U.S even by shore line to insure that nobody is sneaking into the country to cause trouble and commit

The third issue that was discussed in these articles is a strong disconnect between what is being planned vs reality. Following 9/11, Pentagon budget went up significantly to justify the ongoing fight against global terrorism. However, if we look carefully, it is obvious that a higher percentage of the defense budget is going to fund Cold war era programs and may reduce readiness for Asymmetric warfare we are currently experiencing or may experience more in future. Additionally, unreliable information coming from DOD’s accounting system makes it extremely difficult to generate future force projections and cost estimates based on past and present status of expenditures. Overall, it creates an unrealistic ballooning defense budget that is not economically sustainable.

Safety and security are my main concerns when it comes to the topic of defense spending. If America makes the choice to follow the democratic view and decrease defense spending, it will only set us further behind the technological curve in comparison to other countries. It is no surprise that China is one of the world’s leading technology manufacturers. While China is still considered an industrialization society, America has moved into the post industrialization classification when studied sociologically. Industrialization societies provide goods, while post industrialization societies provide services. This puts America in a disadvantage in this situation. In war, the best strategy is to exploit your opposition’s weakness in order to gain the advantage. In reference to America, Technology would be the weakness to exploit. This is where the democratic view shows extreme defects. The only way to ensure the safety of America and its citizens is to use this increase in defense spending to prevent future altercations and have the ability to properly defend America and our

America most rebuild its defense. Diplomacy and economic powers are more effective when supported by a military force. The U.S. military is being reduced while its technological advantage is being tested by adversaries. If we as a nation want to protect our interest, we need a military of adequate size, resources, and readiness to deal with not only threats that are known but also inevitable surprises. So we need to increase military readiness across the board. We need to reprioritize defense spending’s while pursuing reforms to the Pentagon and the Department of Defense to make it more efficient.

Born out of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, the group by the name ISIS has become incredibly unpopular with everyone, especially those in the West. ISIS stands for the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria; the name was made in the hopes to assert their dominance in Syria. Many Great Powers across the globe, the United States in particular, are focused on defeating the fast growing terrorist group, but unfortunately, have had very little success in the past due to the lack of ground troops. The United States has not done enough to fight ISIS because the country is afraid that getting too involved would take a great toll on their nation; however, the U.S. needs to directly and physically attack the terrorist group because nothing is going to change without U.S. military involvement. That said, I feel the only recommendations for further interactions are as follows:

. The budget increase for the DOD was 9 percent (52 billion dollars), in addition to a 7 percent (2.8 billion dollars) increase in funding to the Department of Homeland Security (Soffen and Lu). This budget increase is to help accomplish the goals President Trump outlined on the campaign trail as mentioned previously. However, this change did not come without costs to other departments such as a 31 percent decrease in budget for the EPA and a 29 percent decrease in the State Department’s budget. The action taken toward the budget and defense spending shows evidence that president Trump subscribes to the realist paradigm and believes that the self-interests and protection of the state is the most important thing compared to environmental protection and other liberal ideals.

foreign policy, new measures need to be considered in order to defeat ISIS. Current President Donald Trump has promised to develop “a new plan to defeat ISIS” that is “foolproof” and will “absolutely crush” ISIS, potentially including “bomb[ing] the shit out of them”, taking their oil, and “tak[ing] out their families” (Quest 2017). Trump has yet to release this promised plan but any new plan needs to consider the option of the use of stronger military force and a greater military presence in the region. The current U.S. foreign policy was a good start, but a successful policy needs to be more aggressive in order to achieve the end goal -- the ultimate defeat of ISIS. Militarily, more U.S. troops need to be deployed to fight on the ground with partner forces that they have been trained and armed (Brands, Feaver 2017). This will allow for greater U.S. control over the actions of partner forces and give greater direct control over future missions and attacks on groups and territories. Once ground forces are stronger, it will allow for greater communication between forces on the ground and forces conducting drone strikes and other attacks and create a way for special operations to conduct raids to collect intelligence, kill or capture leaders, and reduce the amount of territory ISIS holds (Brands, Feaver

One of the most prominent issues in the United States is the ongoing war against ISIS. It is an issue that has earned international attention and has affected an extremely wide range of countries and their policies. There is no easy answer To solving such a complicated issue but it should start by looking at the past.

Do to the overabundance of issues and difficulties involved in combating terrorism the United States will never completely end the threat of terrorist violence. For the last few decades, the U.S. has dealt with it fair share of terrorist incidents. These incidents have ranged from individuals with an axe to grind, small groups demanding social and political change, to attacks from transnational organizations with the intent to demoralize and destroy the United States. In order to protect its citizens and interests worldwide, the U.S. has committed to ending the terrorist threat. To accomplish this, the United States has utilized the military in various capacities, as well as all relevant political means. While these actions are normally effective

By working together with neighboring countries (Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia...etc) we can try and contain ISIS without using violence. If the United States spent as much effort working for diplomacy instead of war we would have peaceful containment in no time. After looking at the diagram “Untangling the Middle East” from theglobeandmail.com the Islamic State has hostile relationships with everyone. Meaning nobody is really for ISIS except ISIS. By cooperating with neighboring countries and working on relations with Syria and Russia the United States could get many different ideas on how to defeat ISIS with nonviolent tactics. Partnering with all these countries who have strong military will show ISIS what they are against. Having political ideas from several different countries will help to defeat ISIS.”Scientific surveys of Iraqi deaths resulting from the first four years of the Iraq War found that between 151,000 to over one million Iraqis died as a result of conflict during this time. A later study, published in 2011, found that approximately 500,000” (Wikipedia). This just goes to show how many people can be hurt by using military options. If countries worked together we could stop the military madness and bring peace without violence through the power of knowledge, and numbers of

In order to control and stop the terror group known as ISIS the United States needs to put boots in the ground in Syria, Iraq, and any other country that ISIS has control of. The United States also needs to make a battle plan with Russia, Israel, the Iraqi government, and some European countries in order to fully stop ISIS. “All the United States has been doing against ISIS is launching airstrikes against them, and the airstrikes have

First, we could use our advanced technology to get information about where top ISIS targets are located and investigate them further. Once we have higher priority targets we could send in scouts or drones to make sure no citizens are around and if there are then we will remove them for the time being. Then we will send in forces to put a stop to their operations and take into custody members of ISIS and bring them in for questioning.

The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is the newer and more intimidating version of the famous terrorist group Al Qaeda. The group makes an appearance in the news almost every day. Over the past couple of years, they have multiplied in numbers. Not limited only to the Middle East, there are people all over the world who have proclaimed allegiance to ISIS. The Islamic extremist group has set out to destroy anything or anyone that comes in their way or do not agree with what they stand for. In the earlier years before ISIS was a serious threat, President Barack Obama had said that no American boots would be on the ground, but due to recent attacks led by ISIS that will not be the case. The correct and vital way to take down ISIS is coming to understand what they are about and what they want. Choosing an effective way to respond to these people will mean the difference between life and death for many innocent civilians and US armed servicemen and women.