Paul Isaacs

In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, many defense experts called for an increase in defense spending in order to prevent future attacks. Paul Isaacs argues in the following viewpoint that the United States already spends too much money on military weaponry. Arguing in opposition to President George W. Bush’s 2003 defense budget, which significantly increased military spending, Isaacs claims that much of the money will be spent on obsolete weapons such as the Crusader, a howitzer that may have been useful during the Cold War but is far too ponderous for use in contemporary warfare. Isaacs contends that overblown budgets continue to be approved by legislators because representatives act in the interests of defense contractors, who donate liberally to congressional campaigns. Bush’s defense budget was approved. Paul Isaacs writes for...