Question: How would you address the subject of war?
Answer: First off, recognize that it’s rarely justified. There are indeed times when it is appropriate (Just War theory), most Presidential Candidates 2016 will admit, but they are rare, and are almost always defensive, like Cuba defending itself when the U.S. army facilitated an invasion during the Kennedy administration.
One brilliant technique I heard of from the Levant is having a gathering of Israelis and Palestinians where only people over ago 40 can partake. Most people this age have kids and therefore are more peace-oriented and reasonable than hyped up young men that are usually the warriors/soldiers. The more female and elder the decision makers, the more likely they will use diplomacy or role modeling, as opposed to sending in military. I propose to add an Elders Council as an officially recognized Cabinet-level advisory body.
The United States burns an enormous amount of money on military, under the carte blanche guise of “national security.” One statistic I have seen/heard twice recently is that we spend about $64b per year on just the nuclear arsenal alone. At the same time, far smaller social programs go unfunded because ‘there just isn’t the money.’ This is erroneous prioritization.
We have two options. One is to change the name back to the War Department and continue as is, admitting that our military goes far beyond territorial defense. The other is to live up to the name Department of Defense by deeply cutting our overseas military budget. This makes it untenable to keep bases in Turkey, Germany, Iraq, Japan, etc. The attendant softening of our grip on the Greater Middle East and the whole world will send the clear message that we are decreasing our level of threat to the human planet, respect the sovereignty of others more, are willing to trust, and have problems to solve at home with actual solutions rather than gunboat diplomacy abroad. This then takes much of the wind out of the sails of current and potential terrorists, as there is far less to complain about the United States once it takes its military back home.
I don’t propose any cuts to veterans’ services. Our government made a commitment and must stick to it; that is responsibility. If we have enormous costs for treating veterans of the American War in Southeast Asia or the American War in Iraq (for example), paying those costs is a hard lesson we need to learn, and in the future not repeat wide scale invasions unless absolutely necessary.
I propose a complete dismantling of all nuclear – both weapons and energy. It gives too much power to mere humans, and threatens the entire world, most of which is comprised of people who have done nothing wrong to deserve being potentially nuked as collateral damage. After some years of the nuclear budget being redirected toward dismantling rather than maintenance, we will save money every year thereafter.
I am the only 2016 Presidential candidate that proposes the money that is collected in taxes and no longer spent on military can go to two places: giving more teeth and educational strength to the Environmental Protection Agency (the nuclear/military problem leading to environmental solutions) and to paying down the deficit, which addresses another pressing issue – the fragility of our debt-burdened fiat currency.
[See more on the Nuclear Threat page here.]