Given the statistics on death by disease, auto, and accidents: military threats would seem to be the least of security concerns in America. And yet, our government spends more on the military than all other nations combined. As so many asked themselves in the wake of 9-11, we should take a closer look at the military itself and ask ourselves “how did this happen?” How did we come to spend the bulk of our tax dollars on not just the current military, but on past war debts, research and development, military recruitment and the like, For it is not altogether clear that a large and powerful military constitutes the best policy of national defense.

Of course, life on earth is secure for nothing and no one. All things must sooner or later come to an end. And yet, it is the human tendency to seek security, a security which can ironically come at great risk. We seek security in nations only to become targeted for our nationality. We build bigger bombs only to be outdone by our neighbors, conquer nature only to deplete and pollute our resources. If we truly want security, it is imperative that we explore the fallout - to take a term from the cold war lexicon of fear - of our efforts to secure ourselves. Or to use another military metaphor, we should ask ourselves what will give us the biggest bang for the buck? It is not clear the answer lies in bigger bombs.

In a world of terrorism, global warming, overpopulation, genetically mutating viruses, and unchecked technological development, national security risks are emerging in ever widening spheres. There are simply more things at risk in our lives and more venues through which to threaten our well being. There is an opportunity in these dangers. Just as the cold war challenged the United States to win a global moral war against an empire of purportedly evil communists, the current world order challenges us to demonstrate why we deserve to lead. Terrorists have presented Americans with an opportunity to rise to greatness. To fail in this regard could do more to harm American power than any military threat imaginable.

And still, given the multitude not only of threats to our being but of venues for self-expression, one wonders how we have become so obsessed with national security to the exclusion of so many other groups with which to identify: family, community, religious, and even humanity itself. Why spend so much effort protecting Americans, when there are arguably far greater threats to the human race? And yet, we should be wary of becoming like the person who having learned of a number of sightings of unidentified flying objects, assumes they are from outer space, that they contains “grays,” and that the “grays” have been conducting experiments on humans through traumatizing alien anal probes. To recognize that military threats have been distorted and exaggerated is neither necessarily an argument for non-violence nor for global unity. For the time being, we must grapple with the arbitrary nature of the nation states with which we at least partially identify and look to for security.

So, what does constitute a “balanced” relationship to national defense? How important is it to protect the nation? How can we best do this? And how should we prioritize such a commitment in relation to other security concerns?