'U.S. taxpayer is subsidizing the security of our allies and even some countries that otherwise don't like or barely tolerate us'

from minn post....

"The basic point of Preble's dissent (accentuated with charts and graphs) is that the U.S. taxpayer is subsidizing the security of our allies and even some countries that otherwise don't like or barely tolerate us. The U.S. accounts for nearly 48 percent of military spending in the entire world. The rest of the NATO alliance, including Britain, France and Germany, combine for 17 percent. China, the most cited potential national threat to America's world number one standing, is at nine and a half percent, while our Cold War opponent Russia is now way behind at less than four percent of global military spending.

"Cato scholars have been out in front for years making the case for a principled, constitutional view of “defense” that does not include defending others who can and should defend themselves. If we adopted a strategy of restraint, we could responsibly make significant cuts in military spending, deliver the savings to American taxpayers, and remain the safest and most secure country on the planet. Yesterday, Tim Pawlenty took the opposite tack. He argued that the U.S. military should continue to serve as the world’s policeman/armed social worker, allow other countries to free ride, and require U.S. taxpayers to foot the bill"..........LINK