Calls for end to fund for military operations

COURTESY TO THE BELLINGHAM HERALDMarch 7, 2014 

By the end of this year, the U.S. will have fewer than 10,000 troops left in Afghanistan. The U.S. won't technically be at war with any country. So why does President Obama want to increase the amount of money our country allocates to war funding?

I was disturbed to learn that, in his budget request of March 4, the Obama administration asked Congress for $80 billion for Overseas Contingency Operations that is in addition to core Pentagon spending of about $500 billion. This Overseas Contingency Operations account was created to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. With those wars over, the account should disappear. Instead, it seems to be becoming a permanent slush fund that could help the Pentagon get around the effect of budget cuts -- a luxury that no other parts of the government have.

I want to encourage people to find out more about the Overseas Contingency Operations fund at fcnl.org/budget and to contact our senators to ask them not to fund this part of the budget. Let's re-invest the money we've been spending on war on other priorities, not provide extra padding for the Pentagon's already well-endowed budget.

Seth Snapp

Bellingham

Bellingham Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service