The real budget fights may not come from the House's version of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic -- stealing from readiness to pay for unneeded weapons systems. They are likely to come on two other fronts.
Contrary to the cries of McKeon and the president's other critics, restraint in Syria and Ukraine and diplomacy in Iran are signs of good judgment, not weakness. A foreign policy of all-military-all-the-time would be immensely costly and extremely counterproductive. We can and should do better.
Cutting the Pentagon budget is in the interests of the vast majority of Americans who would rather that our tax dollars be used for domestic needs -- including by lowering taxes on working people -- than for foreign wars, foreign military bases, and exotic science fiction weapons systems.
A new report from the Stimson Center -- shows how the Pentagon can make the roughly $50 billion in cuts required by current law. An important assumption underpinning the approach is that the era of large scale, boots-on-the-ground conflicts is over.
A handful of Democratic and Republican senators are considering a rewrite of 60 of the most consequential words to ever pass through Congress: The Authorization for Use of Military Force, which is enabling a system of eternal warfare.