During the the last Presidential Debate for the 2012 election year between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama Bob Schieffer asked about Military Spending. For those with a short attention span let me get to the crux. (I have gone more in depth below.)

Obama thinks that producing more Chevy Volts will make America stronger and more secure than producing more Naval ships. In short, a presence of Chevy Volts will bring more security for Americans domestically and internationally than the presence of more Naval Ships.

Any police officer will tell you that the best deterrent of crime is a police presence. One of the purposes of the American Military is to deter “crime” against American interests around the world. If our military is perceived small and slow then that will just give terrorists a reason to test our capabilities.

It is important the American Military strike fear in anyone who thinks about committing a violent act against the United States. This fear should be so great that a terrorist will get beat up by other terrorists if they even mention the words, “Attack America.”

So how does Chevy Volts come to play? Simple. Obama is more interested in creating jobs that produce Volts than he is creating jobs that produce the strongest power in the world. Every time a Volt is created the American economy and security gets weaker. This is because there isn’t enough people who want to purchase the Volt for GM to make a profit.  The American economy is tied to this black hole because the American tax payer was forced to be an investor in GM.

A strong military creates a strong American economy because contractors like Lockheed don’t have to fire employees.  Businesses don’t have to worry about being attacked and thus they can focus on making a profit to expand their business and hire more employees. Thus resulting in more profit. The American dollar becomes stronger. Americans feel more confident in international travel because they have less worries about being kidnapped and killed.

Below is Romeny’s and Obama’s response to the question of Military spending. What do you think about my assessment?

ROMNEYOur Navy is old — excuse me, our Navy is smaller now than at any time since 1917. The Navy said they needed 313 ships to carry out their mission. We’re now at under 285. We’re headed down to the low 200s if we go through a sequestration. That’s unacceptable to me.

I want to make sure that we have the ships that are required by our Navy. Our Air Force is older and smaller than at any time since it was founded in 1947.

OBAMA: You mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military’s changed. We have these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines.

During the second presidential debateObama said concerning even though the military’s not asking for additional military programs.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/30/business/global/30ships.html?_r=3&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha24&