one of these things is not like the other

I am a believer in the Teddy Roosevelt maxim "walk softly and carry a big stick." Having a strong military that can defend our country from any conceivable threat is important.

But what we have right now is a bloated military which is structured for things like invasions, long-term occupations, and nation-building operations on the other side of the planet. While invasions and (short-term) occupations may conceivably be needed as part of a defense-oriented operation (as in Europe during WWII), as a practical matter this capability has, over the last several decades, tended to manifest itself in ill-advised (and ill-conceived) adventures in imperialism, generally in contexts (e.g., Iraq, Vietnam) where we have no legitimate business projecting our military power.

And, now that we as a country are much less wealthy than we used to be, it seems that we might want to at least consider cutting back on some of the more extravagant programs in this area. Will this happen? Well, considering that Obama's proposed military budget is higher than last year's budget, and further considering that this budget is still being met with howls of protest from both parties because it is somewhat less than what was proposed last year by Bush's defense department... I'd say this is highly unlikely. Maybe it will only happen once our checks start bouncing.