{"id":87307,"date":"2026-04-28T10:32:29","date_gmt":"2026-04-28T10:32:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/iran\/87307\/"},"modified":"2026-04-28T10:32:29","modified_gmt":"2026-04-28T10:32:29","slug":"i-served-in-iraq-an-arms-race-could-be-catastrophic-opinion","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/iran\/87307\/","title":{"rendered":"I served in Iraq. An arms race could be catastrophic. | Opinion"},"content":{"rendered":"

I enlisted in the Global War on Terror<\/a> believing we would do things differently than we had in Vietnam \u2013 make the world safer, defeat Islamic terrorism and avoid another quagmire.<\/p>\n

Instead, I watched Iraq\u00a0turn into a disaster\u00a0and Afghanistan become the longest war<\/a> in U.S. history,\u00a0costing trillions<\/a>\u00a0of dollars\u00a0with no clear path to victory. We measured progress<\/a> in kill counts and destroyed assets, but lost sight of the mission. Or maybe the mission changed. Maybe the goal wasn’t to win, but to sustain the fight.<\/p>\n

Either way, the question is unavoidable: Are we safer now?<\/p>\n

The US is sliding back into open-ended conflict<\/p>\n

“War is a racket.”<\/p>\n

Today,\u00a0that line\u00a0sounds like something from a progressive activist or a cynical fiscal hawk. It wasn’t. It came from a two-time Medal of Honor recipient<\/a>. Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler warned<\/a> nearly a century ago about how war had become a business \u2013 how military power and private profit had fused at the country’s expense.<\/p>\n

His point was simple: When war becomes good business, defense stops being the point.<\/p>\n

A century later, the racket endures. After years of promises of “no new wars<\/a>,” the United States is once again sliding into an open-ended conflict in Iran.<\/p>\n

Which raises the question: Is this level of military spending actually making us safer? Or is it merely sustaining a system that depends on constant expansion?<\/p>\n

\"Israeli<\/p>\n

Israeli soldiers use an artillery unit, amid escalation between Hezbollah and Israel, and amid the U.S.-Israeli conflict with Iran, on the Israeli side of the Israel-Lebanon border, March 15, 2026. REUTERS\/Shir Torem<\/p>\n

Defense\u00a0contractors take in billions<\/a>,\u00a0budgets keep climbing and Washington shows no appetite for restraint. Butler would recognize it.<\/p>\n

As a Marine, I lived in dilapidated barracks with undrinkable water while billions flowed to defense contractors for weapons and gear. Armored vehicles, tactical equipment, new rifles \u2013 purchased in bulk for wars that felt less about winning than sustaining themselves.<\/p>\n

After Osama bin Laden\u00a0was killed in 2011<\/a>, we had a clear off-ramp in Afghanistan. We didn’t take it. Instead, we stayed<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Your Turn: The US doesn’t care about its people. Why go to war for it? | Opinion Forum<\/a><\/p>\n

The Pentagon keeps failing its audit. Where’s the oversight?<\/p>\n

The United States still maintains troops in countries across the globe<\/a>. Some of that is legitimate: deterring China and Russia, containing rogue states like North Korea, maintaining stability.<\/p>\n

But all of it costs money. And once those commitments are in place, they only grow.<\/p>\n

Grief and destruction in the Middle East amid Iran War ceasefire<\/p>\n

1 of 14<\/p>\n

See the trail of devastation and grief left by the Iran War<\/a> that began on Feb. 28, 2026, when the United States and Israel launched joint airstrikes, known as Operation Epic Fury, targeting Iranian military and government sites.<\/p>\n

A U.S.-Iran ceasefire, which also included Israel, began on April 7-8, 2026. <\/p>\n

Pictured here, mourners attend the funeral of people, including Hezbollah members, who were killed during the conflict with Israel before a 10-day ceasefire between Lebanon and Israel went into effect, in Kfar Sir, Lebanon, April 21, 2026.<\/p>\n

The deeper problem is oversight, or the lack of it. The Pentagon has failed its audit<\/a>\u00a0eight years in a row.\u00a0Eight. If the\u00a0Department of Government Efficiency were serious about rooting out waste, this is where the chainsaw should have landed.<\/p>\n

Instead, civilian agencies got gutted<\/a> while the Pentagon\u00a0will get a proposed massive spending boost courtesy of the Trump administration.<\/p>\n

Now, President Donald Trump<\/a> wants to\u00a0push the defense budget to $1.5 trillion<\/a>. We’ve already spent billions on missile interceptors only to be told we’ll need billions more because the current systems may not hold up against Iranian drones and missiles<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Who profits? Defense contractors \u2013 and, in some cases,\u00a0people close to the administration itself<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Navy is hunting for a\u00a0new fleet of ships<\/a>\u00a0to replace its current new fleet of ships even as we\u00a0retire older vessels<\/a>\u00a0that could still serve in places like the Strait of Hormuz. Trump also wants to\u00a0spend billions<\/a>\u00a0on another fighter jet, despite the fortune already sunk into the F-35. And these are just some of the systems on the wish list<\/a>.<\/p>\n

I was a Navy commander. Trump’s approach to military deaths is concerning. | Opinion<\/a><\/p>\n

We’ll see what we saw in Gaza and Iran again<\/p>\n

Rapidly expanding an already massive military pushes us into dangerous territory, a space where defense contractors look for new ways to use weapons systems, if only to generate real-world data. We saw it in Gaza. We’re seeing it in Iran. We’ll see it again.<\/p>\n

Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don’t have the app? Download it for free from your app store<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The world is dangerous. There are real adversaries, and some want to harm the United States. The question isn’t whether we need a strong military. It’s whether the current level of spending, with no accountability attached, is actually making us safer.<\/p>\n

History offers a warning. The arms races before World War I were\u00a0driven by the same logic<\/a>\u00a0\u2013 more weapons, more preparedness, more deterrence. Instead, they built the tinderbox.\u00a0Today, in an age of artificial intelligence, Palantir<\/a> and drones, the stakes are higher still. The next conflict won’t just be costly. It could be catastrophic.<\/p>\n

Smedley Butler saw the danger nearly a century ago. When war becomes good business, defense stops being the point. We don’t need to weaken our military. We need to demand something simple: that it be built to protect the country, not sustain the system.<\/p>\n

Joslin\u00a0Joseph<\/a>\u00a0is a recipient of the Military Reporters and Editors’ award for Best Commentary\/Opinion<\/a>. A graduate of Harvard and Ohio State University, he is a Marine veteran who served in Iraq. He lives in Anaheim, California.<\/p>\n

You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists<\/a> and other writers on the Opinion front page<\/a>, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion<\/a> and in our Opinion newsletter<\/a>.<\/p>\n

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: What Trump’s defense budget increase is really about | Opinion<\/a><\/p>\n