U.S. Military Pay Tables

Between 2001 and 2009, per capita spending on three major components (basic pay and allowances for housing and subsistence) of cash compensation for active military personnel rose by 37 percent in inflation-adjusted dollars.

U.S. Military Pay

Military-Money-Matters.com

The Military Pay Chart for 2012 reflects a 1.6% pay raise.

Military pay raises are generally linked to civilian pay raises. Until 2006, military pay raises were at least one-half percent higher than the civilian pay raise each year, measured by the Employment Cost Index (ECI).

Starting with 2007, military pay raises were made equal to the increase in the ECI, unless Congress authorizes military pay raises to exceed the automatic level. For January 2012, the US military pay raise is 1.6%.

An individual service member's military pay will be affected by the various allowances and special pays that s/he is eligible to receive, so we have included links below for various elements that make up your complete military compensation package.

All branches of the U.S. military receive the same amount of base pay. The amount is based upon pay grade and time in service. This military pay chart can be used to determine Air Force pay, Army pay, Coast Guard pay, Marine pay and/or Navy pay.

Initial pay delay: Be aware that if you are just entering boot camp, it may take 4-8 weeks before your pay "kicks in," so you need to make sure you have enough saved to cover expenses for up to three months so you or your family can pay bills until your direct deposit starts.

Basic Pay is the main component of your military salary package. All members receive Base Pay, which is typically the largest portion of your paycheck.

Your military pay grade (reflecting your military rank) and number of years of service determine the amount of military base pay you will receive.

2012 Military Pay Tables - Basic Pay. (1.6% pay raise)

2011 Military Pay Tables - Basic Pay. (1.4% pay raise)

BAH rates vary based on duty station location, pay grade, and dependents status. It is designed to provide service members stationed in the U.S. with equitable housing compensation based on housing costs in their local civilian housing market when government quarters are not provided.

Overseas Housing Allowance.
COLA - CONUS.
COLA - Overseas.
Per diem rates - CONUS, OCONUS, Overseas & Foreign.
Dislocation Allowance - DLA.
Mileage rates - POV.

Military Pay Calculators

MilitaryConnection.com

Military Connection is pleased to provide the Military Compensation Calculator, the Retirement Calculator, and Military Pay Charts to our audience of active military including Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard and Reserves and National Guard (including Army Reserves, Navy Reserves, Air Force Reserves, Marine Reserves and Air National Guard), all Veterans and Retirees and military spouses and dependents.

Please click on the links below and they will take you directly to the Department of Defense (DoD) Regular Military Compensation Calculator and the Retirement Calculator. We want to thank and acknowledge the generosity of the DoD for allowing us to make these wonderful resources available to our audience.

Check out some of our other compensation resources including Military Pay Charts, the Salary Calculator and the Cost of Living Calculator. For your convenience, we also feature a database of Tax Boards for every state.

Military Connection wishes to extend our thanks to the hardworking active duty military Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Coast Guard, Reserves, Veterans and DoD civilian employees. We especially want to acknowledge the wonderful military spouses and the families who support you.

2012 Military Pay Raise or Pay Freeze?

Military.com
February 15, 2011

The president’s 2012 budget request includes a proposal for a 1.6% military pay raise for 2012. While larger than last year’s military pay increase, the 2012 proposed military pay increase is the second smallest since 1962 and given the current budget environment many suspect that congress is considering a freeze.

As reported here, a recent Congressional Budget Office report says that military pay is higher than most federal employees, and Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) has signaled a desire to freeze military salaries at the 2011 rate.

Check out the 2012 proposed military pay charts to see what a 1.6% raise would mean to your military paycheck.

Government Would Save Billions by Capping Pay, CBO Says

GovExec.com
March 15, 2011

Reducing annual pay increases for federal civilian workers and military personnel would save the government billions of dollars during the next decade, according to the latest figures from the Congressional Budget Office in a report on trimming the burgeoning deficit.

CBO estimates the deficit will rise to $7 trillion during the next 10 years if mandatory and discretionary spending is not reined in across government. Capping military pay increases and reducing the annual across-the-board adjustment for civilian raises are two available areas, among several others, for cuts, the March 2011 report said.

The nonpartisan CBO said if the government capped the basic pay increase for service members from 2012 to 2015 and set raises at a rate 0.5 percentage points below the increase in the employment cost index, it would save about $6 billion between 2012 and 2016, and $17 billion between 2012 and 2021. Since 2001, lawmakers have approved military pay raises for the average service member that exceeded the ECI by 0.5 percentage point.

President Obama's fiscal 2012 budget request proposes a 1.6 percent pay raise for military personnel and allocates an overall $8.3 billion for education, housing and other quality of life programs for service members.

"Between 2001 and 2009, per capita spending on three major components of cash compensation for active military personnel rose by 37 percent in inflation-adjusted dollars," the report said, citing basic pay, and allowances for housing and subsistence, as the primary compensation categories.

Overall, the Defense Department accounts for more than half of all annual discretionary funding, and any significant deficit reduction needs to take into account Defense appropriations, CBO said.

Nearly 40 percent of all spending is discretionary, totaling more than $1.3 trillion in 2010.

As for civilian compensation, CBO says the government could save about $10 billion during five years and $50 billion during 10 years by reducing by 0.5 percent the annual across-the-board pay raise expected under the 1990 Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act from 2013 to 2021. Obama has called for a federal civilian pay freeze in 2011 and 2012. Compensation costs for civilian personnel make up about 15 percent of federal discretionary spending, according to CBO.

But the report said the bigger savings would come from capping military pay.

According to CBO's analysis, "median cash compensation for military personnel -- including the tax-free cash allowances for food and housing -- exceeds the salaries of most civilians who have comparable education and work experience."

CBO acknowledged that reducing pay for service members and civilians could hinder recruitment and retention.

"That effect might be more pronounced for federal agencies that require workers with advanced degrees and professional skills."

To offset some of the pain associated with lowered base pay for service members in particular, CBO suggested expanding reenlistment bonuses.

The report highlighted other areas for spending savings that would affect the health care benefits of Defense personnel, among them:

• An increase in cost-sharing in TRICARE for military retirees who are not yet eligible for Medicare;


• A limit on the TRICARE benefit for military retirees and their dependents (many enrollees who already have employer-sponsored insurance through a civilian job opt for enrollment in TRICARE Prime, which has the lowest out-of-pocket costs within the TRICARE system);


• An increase in cost-sharing for prescription drugs under TRICARE.

NSPS Employees Can Expect 2.26 Percent Pay Boost

GovExec.com
January 11, 2011

Defense Department employees still under the National Security Personnel System will see a pay boost this month, according to Pentagon leadership.

A Dec. 27, 2010, memo from Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Clifford Stanley clarifies the funding available for performance-based pay increases for more than 54,000 workers and creates a salary "control point," designed to match pay limits with those that will apply when employees transition out of NSPS.

According to a Defense spokeswoman, 2.26 percent of salaries within a given pay pool are available for performance-based pay increases. Employees will be eligible for performance-based bonuses that individual agencies will determine, but those awards are neither automatic nor guaranteed. According to the spokeswoman, agencies are still compiling the pay pool data for the 2010 payout, but employees must have received a rating of "3" or higher to be eligible for a performance award.

The 2.26 percent is used for calculating and budgeting the available funds for NSPS annual performance awards. Performance-based increases and raises under Accelerated Compensation for Developmental Positions, which recognizes improvement of employees in training programs and other developmental capacities, might be included in pay raise calculations, according to the memo.

A mandatory control point, however, prevents employees from receiving a performance-based raise if the increase will push their salary above Level IV of the Executive Schedule, or $155,500. The control point does not apply to physicians or dentists, who will be eligible for higher salaries matching those paid by the Veterans Affairs Department and the private sector, Stanley wrote.

Defense transferred nearly 172,000 employees, or 76 percent, back to the General Schedule in fiscal 2010, in keeping with department estimates. The remaining NSPS workers will move into alternative pay systems this spring, and all employees must transition by the end of 2011.

Congress repealed NSPS in the fiscal 2010 Defense authorization law, giving the department until Jan. 1, 2012, to roll back the controversial pay-for-performance system completely.

CLARIFICATION: This story was updated to reflect that some, but not all, NSPS employees could receive performance-based pay increases.

Concerns Over Pay Loom as Pentagon Returns to General Schedule

GovExec.com
May 17, 2010

The Federal Managers Association is asking lawmakers to ensure Pentagon employees do not lose salary as a result of the transition from the department's defunct pay-for-performance system.

"While the [2010] law explicitly states no employee shall lose or see a decrease in pay as they transition, I am concerned that this language will allow DoD officials to freeze future pay of top performers due to current [General Schedule] rules on pay retention," FMA National President Patricia Niehaus said in a May 14 letter to the leadership of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees.

According to Nieuhaus, since the average pay raise under the National Security Personnel System exceeded raises under the General Schedule, many NSPS employees are now, in terms of salary, a GS level above where they were when they entered NSPS. When these employees return to the GS grade they occupied prior to their conversion into NSPS, it is likely their salary will exceed the GS Step 10 level, Niehaus said. Under pay retention rules, these employees would receive only half the annual pay raise until the GS system catches up with them.

"We are increasingly concerned with the rush of DoD officials to transition employees out of NSPS without taking a close look at the number of employees likely to be subject to pay retention rules," Niehaus said.

An FMA survey of its members showed an average of 20 percent to 25 percent of employees are subject to pay retention rules. If FMA's members are representative of NSPS employees as a whole, then about 40,000 employees could face a decrease in pay.

"Many of these dedicated employees have crunched the numbers and determined that the General Schedule will not catch up with them by the time they retire over the next decade," Niehaus wrote. "This is unacceptable."

FMA is most concerned that pay retention would have the greatest effect on employees who were top performers under NSPS, which Niehaus said would send the message that above-average performance is not rewarded in the federal workplace.

"As members of the Federal Managers Association prepare to transition out of NSPS, I respectfully request that you take action to ensure high-performing DoD civil servants receive the compensation they have rightfully earned before they are forced to endure the effects of this unjust policy," the letter said.

The House Armed Services Committee will mark up the 2011 Defense authorization bill on Wednesday. Spokespeople from both the majority and the minority sides said they were unable to discuss the legislation heading into the markup. But it's likely the bill will address the NSPS transition, given the requirement that all Defense employees leave the system by Jan. 1, 2012.

America's Perpetual, Multi-generational Global War on Terror is Profitable for the Ruling Elite

A World Made by War

How old will you be when the American war state goes down? The other day, at the invitation of economics professor Marty Melkonian, I took a rare jaunt out of my hometown to Hofstra University on Long Island and gave a talk in that college’s lecture series, The International Scene, to a group of lively young students. It was filmed and will soon appear on CSPAN’s Book TV. In the meantime, here it is in print. I wrote it, as you’ll see, with 18-to-21-year-olds in mind.

By Tom Engelhardt, TomDispatch.com
October 17, 2010

When you look at me, you can’t mistake the fact that I’m of a certain age. But just for a moment, think of me as nine years old. You could even say that I celebrated my ninth birthday last week, without cake, candles, presents, or certainly joy.

I’ve had two mobilized moments in my life. The first was in the Vietnam War years; the second, the one that leaves me as a nine-year-old, began on the morning of September 11, 2001. I turned on the TV while doing my morning exercises, saw a smoking hole in a World Trade Center tower, and thought that, as in 1945 when a B-25 slammed into the Empire State Building, a terrible accident had happened.

Later, after the drums of war had begun to beat, after the first headlines had screamed their World-War-II-style messages (“the Pearl Harbor of the 21st century”), I had another thought. And for a reasonably politically sophisticated guy, my second response was not only as off-base as the first, but also remarkably dumb. I thought that this horrific event taking place in my hometown might open Americans up to the pain of the world. No such luck, of course.

If you had told me then that:

• We would henceforth be in a state of eternal war as well as living in a permanent war state,


• To face a ragtag enemy of a few thousand stateless terrorists, the national security establishment in Washington would pump itself up to levels not faintly reached when facing the Soviet Union, a major power with thousands of nuclear weapons and an enormous military,


• “Homeland” -- a distinctly un-American word -- would land in our vocabulary never to leave, and that a second Defense Department dubbed the Department of Homeland Security would be set up not to be dismantled in my lifetime,


• Torture (excuse me, “enhanced interrogation techniques”) would become as American as apple pie and that some of those “techniques” would actually be demonstrated to leading Bush administration officials inside the White House,


• We would pour money into the Pentagon at ever escalating levels even after the economy crashed in 2008,


• We would be fighting two potentially trillion-dollar-plus wars without end in two distant lands,


• We would spend untold billions constructing hundreds of military bases in those same lands,


• The CIA would be conducting the first drone air war in history over a country we were officially not at war with,


• Most of us would live in a remarkable state of detachment from all of this,


• And finally -- only, by the way, because I’m cutting this list arbitrarily short -- that I would spend my time writing incessantly about “the American way of war” and produce a book with that title,

I would have thought you were nuts.

But every bit of that happened, even if unpredicted by me because, like human beings everywhere, I have no special knack for peering into the future. If it were otherwise, I would undoubtedly now be zipping through fabulous spired cities with a jetpack on my back (as I was assured would happen in my distant youth). But if prediction isn’t our forte, then adaptability to changing circumstances may be -- and it certainly helps account for my being here today.

I’m here because, in response to the bizarre spectacle of this nation going to war while living at peace, even if in a spasmodic state of collective national fear, I did something I hardly understood at the time. I launched a nameless listserv of collected articles and my own expanding commentary that ran against the common wisdom of that October moment when the bombing runs for our second Afghan war began.

A little more than a year later, thanks to the Nation Institute, it became a website with the name TomDispatch.com, and because our leaders swore we were “a nation at war,” because we were indeed killing people in quantity in distant lands, because the power of the state at home was being strengthened in startling ways, while everything still open about our society seemed to be getting screwed shut, and the military was being pumped up to Schwarzeneggerian dimensions, I started writing about war.

At some level, I can’t tell you how ridiculous that was. After all, I’m the most civilian and peaceable of guys. I’ve never even been in the military. I was, however, upset with the Bush administration, the connect-no-dots media coverage of that moment, and the repeated 9/11 rites which proclaimed us the planet’s greatest victim, survivor, and dominator — leaving only one role, greatest Evil Doer, open for the rest of the planet (and you know who auditioned for, and won, that part hands down)!

Things That Go Boom in the Night

I won’t say, however, that I had no expertise whatsoever with a permanent state of war and a permanent war state, only that the expertise I had was available to anyone who had lived through the post-World War II era. I was reminded of this on a recent glorious Sunday when, from the foot of Manhattan, I set out, for the first time in more than half a century, on a brief ferry ride that proved, for me, as effective a time machine as anything H.G. Wells had ever imagined. That ferry was not, of course, taking me to a future civilization at the edge of time, but to Governor’s Island, now a park and National Monument in the eddying waters of New York harbor and to the rubble of a gas station my father, a World War II vet, ran there in the early 1950s when that island was still a major U.S. Army base.

On many mornings in those years, I accompanied him on that short ride across the East River and found myself amid buzzing jeeps and drilling soldiers in a world of Army kids with, among other wonders, access to giant swimming pools and kiddy-matinee Westerns. As a dyed-in-the-wool city boy, it was my only real exposure to the burbs, and it proved an edenic one that also caught something of the exotically militarized mood of that Korean War moment.

As on that island, so for most Americans then, the worlds of the warrior and of abundance were no more antithetical than they were to the corporate executives, university research scientists, and military officers who were using a rising military budget and the fear of communism to create a new national security economy.

An alliance between big industry, big science, and the military had been forged during World War II that blurred the boundaries between the military and the civilian by fusing together a double set of desires: for technological breakthroughs leading to ever more efficient weapons of destruction and to ever easier living.

The arms race -- the race, that is, for future good wars -- and the race for the good life were then, as on that island, being put on the same “war” footing.

In the 1950s, a military Keynesianism was already driving the U.S. economy toward a consumerism in which desire for the ever larger car and missile, electric range and tank, television console and submarine was wedded in single corporate entities.

The companies -- General Electric, General Motors, and Westinghouse, among others -- producing the large objects for the American home were also major contractors developing the big ticket weapons systems ushering the Pentagon into its own age of abundance.

More than half a century later, the Pentagon is still living a life of abundance -- despite one less-than-victorious, less-then-good war after another -- while we, increasingly, are not. In the years in-between, the developing national security state of my childhood just kept growing, and in the process the country militarized in the strangest of ways.

Only once in that period did a sense of actual war seem to hover over the nation. That was, of course, in the Vietnam years of the 1960s and early 1970s, when the draft brought a dirty war up close and personal, driving it into American homes and out into the streets, when a kind of intermittent warfare seemed to break out in this country’s cities and ghettos, and when impending defeat drove the military itself to the edge of revolt and collapse.

From the 1970s until 2001, as that military rebuilt itself as an all-volunteer force and finally went back to war in distant lands, the military itself seemed to disappear from everyday life. There were no soldiers in sight, nothing we would consider commonplace today -- from uniforms and guns in train stations to military flyovers at football games, or the repeated rites of praise for American troops that are now everyday fare in our world where, otherwise, we largely ignore American wars.

In 1989, for instance, I wrote in the Progressive magazine about a country that seemed to me to be undergoing further militarization, even if in a particularly strange way.

Ours was, I said, an “America that conforms to no notions we hold of militarism… Militarization is, of course, commonly associated with uniformed, usually exalted troops in evidence and a dictatorship, possibly military, in power.

“The United States, by such standards, still has the look of a civilian society. Our military is, if anything, less visible in our lives than it was a decade ago: no uniforms in the streets, seldom even for our traditional parades; a civilian-elected government; weaponry out of sight… the draft and the idea of a civilian army a thing of the past.

“In the Reagan-Bush era, the military has gone undercover in the world that we see, though not in the world that sees us. For if it is absent from our everyday culture, its influence is omnipresent in corporate America, that world beyond our politics and out of our control -- the world which, nonetheless, plans our high-tech future of work and consumption. There, the militarization of the economy and the corporatization of the military is a process so far gone that it seems reasonable to ask whether the United States can even be said to have a civilian economy.”

Of course, that was then, this is now. Little did I know. Today, it seems, our country is triumphant in producing only things that go boom in the night: we have a near monopoly on the global weapons market and on the global movie market, where in the dark we’re experts in explosions of every sort.

When I wrote in 1989 that the process was “so far gone,” I had no idea how far we still had to go. I had no idea, for instance, how far a single administration could push us when it came to war. Still, one thing that does remain reasonably constant about America’s now perpetual state of war is how little we -- the 99% of us who don’t belong to the military or fight -- actually see of it, even though it is, in a sense, all around us.

Warscapes

From a remarkable array of possibilities, here are just a few warscapes -- think of them as like landscapes, only deadlier -- that might help make more visible an American world of, and way of, war that we normally spend little time discussing, questioning, debating, or doing anything about.

As a start, let me try to conjure up a map of what “defense,” as imagined by the Pentagon and the U.S. military, actually looks like. You can find such a map at Wikipedia, but for a second just imagine a world map laid flat before you. Now divide it, the whole globe, like so many ill-shaped pieces of cobbler, into six servings -- you can be as messy as you want, it’s not an exact science -- and label them:

1. The U.S. European Command or EUCOM (for Europe and Russia),
2. The U.S. Pacific Command or PACOM (Asia),
3. CENTCOM (the Greater Middle East and a touch of North Africa),
4. NORTHCOM (North America),
5. SOUTHCOM (South America and most of the Caribbean), and
   
6. AFRICOM (almost all of Africa).

Those are the “areas of responsibility” of six U.S. military commands.

In case you hadn’t noticed, our map takes care of just about every inch of the planet, but — I hasten to add — not every bit of imaginable space. For that, if you were a clever cartographer, you would somehow need to include STRATCOM, the U.S. Strategic Command charged with, among other things, ensuring that we dominate the heavens; and the newest of all the “geographic” commands, CYBERCOM, expected to be fully operational later this fall with “1,000 elite military hackers and spies under one four-star general” prepared to engage in preemptive war in cyberspace.

Some of these commands have crept up on us over the years. CENTCOM, which now oversees our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, was formed in 1983, a result of the Carter Doctrine — that is, of President Jimmy Carter’s decision to make the protection of Persian Gulf oil a military necessity — while both NORTHCOM (2002) and AFRICOM (2007) were creations of the Global War on Terror.

From a mapping perspective, however, the salient point is simple enough: at the moment, there is no imaginable space on or off the planet that is not an “area of responsibility” for the U.S. military. That, not the protection of our shores and borders, is what is now meant by that word “defense” in the Department of Defense. And if you were to stare at that map for a while, I can’t help but think it would come to strike you as abidingly strange. No place at all of no military interest to us? What does that say about our country — and ourselves?

In case you’re imagining that the map I’ve just described is simply a case of cartographic hyperbole, consider this: we now have what is, in essence, a secret military inside the U.S. military. I’m talking about our Special Operations forces. These elite and largely covert forces were rapidly expanded in the Bush years as part of the Global War on Terror, but also thanks to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s urge to bring covert activities that were once the province of the CIA under the Pentagon’s wing.

By the end of George W. Bush’s second term in office — think of that map again — Special Operations forces were fighting in, training in, or stationed in approximately 60 countries under the aegis of the Global War on Terror. Less than two years later, according to the Washington Post, 13,000 Special Operations troops are deployed abroad in approximately 75 countries as part of an expanding Global War on Terror (even if the Obama administration has ditched that name); in other words, Special Ops troops alone are now operating in close to 40% of the 192 countries that make up the United Nations!

And talking about what the Pentagon has taken under its wing, I’m reminded of a low-budget sci-fi film of my childhood, The Blob. In it, a gelatinous alien grows ever more humongous by eating every living thing in its path, with the exception of Steve McQueen in his debut screen role. By analogy, take what’s officially called the “IC” or U.S. Intelligence Community, that Rumsfeld was so eager to militarize. It’s made up of 17 major agencies and outfits, including the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). Created in 2004 in response to the intelligence dysfunction of 9/11, ODNI is already its own small bureaucracy with 1,500 employees and next to no power to do the only thing it was really ever meant to do, coordinate the generally dysfunctional labyrinth of the IC itself.

You might wonder what kind of “intelligence” a country could possibly get from 17 competing, bickering outfits — and that’s not even the half of it. According to a Washington Post series, Top Secret America, by Dana Priest and William Arkin:

“In all, at least 263 organizations have been created or reorganized as a response to 9/11… Some 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies work on programs related to counterterrorism, homeland security and intelligence in about 10,000 locations across the United States… In Washington and the surrounding area, 33 building complexes for top-secret intelligence work are under construction or have been built since September 2001. Together they occupy the equivalent of almost three Pentagons or 22 U.S. Capitol buildings — about 17 million square feet of space.”

Oh, and keep in mind that more than two-thirds of the IC’s intelligence programs are controlled by the Pentagon, which also means control over a major chunk of the combined intelligence budget, announced at $75 billion (“2 1/2 times the size it was on Sept. 10, 2001,” according to Priest and Arkin), but undoubtedly far larger.

And when it comes to the Pentagon, that’s just a start. Massive expansion in all directions has been its m.o. since 9/11. Its soaring budget hit about $700 billion for fiscal year 2010 (when you include a war-fighting supplemental bill of $33 billion) — an increase of only 4.7% in otherwise budget-slashing times — and is now projected to hit $726 billion in fiscal year 2011. Some experts claim, however, that the real figure may come closer to the trillion-dollar mark when all aspects of national security are factored in. Not surprisingly, it has taken over a spectrum of State Department-controlled civilian activities, ranging from humanitarian relief and development (aka “nation-building”) to actual diplomacy. And don’t forget its growing roles as a domestic-disaster manager and a global arms dealer, or even as a Green Revolution energy innovator.

You could certainly think of the Pentagon as the Blob on the American horizon, and yet, looking around, you might hardly be aware of the ways your country continues to be militarized.

With that in mind, let’s consider another warscape, one particularly appropriate to a moment when numerous commentators are pointing out that the U.S. seems to be morphing from a can-do into a can’t-do nation, when the headlines are filled with exploding gas lines and grim reports on the country’s aging infrastructure, when a major commuter tunnel from New Jersey to Manhattan, the sort of project that once would have been tattoo-ably American, has just been canceled by New Jersey’s governor.

Still, don’t imagine that the old can-do American spirit I remember from my childhood is dead. Quite the contrary: we still have our great building projects, our pyramid- and ziggurat-equivalents. It’s just that these days they tend to get built nearer to the ruins of actual ziggurats and pyramids. I’m talking about our military bases, especially those being constructed in our war zones.

I mean, no sooner had U.S. troops taken Baghdad in April 2003 than the Pentagon, and the crony corporations it now can’t go to war without, began to pour billions of taxpayer dollars into the construction of well fortified American towns in Iraq that included multiple bus routes, PXes, fast-food joints, massage parlors, Internet cafés, power plants, water-treatment plants, sewage plants, fire stations, you name it.

Hundreds of military bases, micro to mega, were built in Iraq alone, including the ill-named but ginormous Victory Base Complex at the edge of Baghdad International Airport, with at least nine significant sub-bases nestled inside it, and Balad Air Base, which — sooner than you could say “Saddam Hussein’s in captivity” — was handling air traffic on the scale of O'Hare International in Chicago, and bedding down 40,000 inhabitants including hire-a-gun African cops, civilian defense employees, Special Ops forces, the employees of private contractors, and of course tons of troops.

And all of this was nothing compared to the feat the Pentagon accomplished in Afghanistan, where the U.S. military now claims to have built something like 400 bases of every sort from the smallest combat outposts to monster installations like Bagram Air Base in a country without normal resources, fuel, building materials, or much of anything else. Just about all construction materials for those bases and the fuel to go with them had to be delivered over treacherous supply lines thousands of miles long, so treacherous and difficult in fact that, by the time a gallon of fuel reaches Afghanistan to keep those Humvees and MRAPs rolling along, it’s estimated to cost $400.

At some level, of course, all of this represents a remarkable can-do achievement and tells you a great deal about American priorities today, about where our national treasure and can-do efforts are focused.

Ziggurats or Tunnels?

And I could go on. The Pentagon and the military make going on easy. After all, the list is unending, the militarization of our American world ongoing, and it’s all happening in your time, on your watch. This is the world you are going to walk out into. I may be nine years old in TomDispatch terms, but I’ve been around for 66 years, and this won’t be my world for so long.

So let me ask you: Are you sure that you want the U.S. military to be concerned with every inch of the planet? Are you sure that you want your tax dollars to go, above all, into building pyramid-equivalents in Iraq or Afghanistan instead of tunnels at home, or into fighting a multi-generational war on terror planet-wide, instead of putting the unemployed to work here?

If you can’t imagine reducing the American military mission and “footprint” on this planet significantly, then, of course, it’s probably best to ignore this talk. But rest assured: you won’t save our country that way; you’ll destroy it.

A decade ago, when I was born as TomDispatch.com, many of you were only ten or eleven years old, as were many of our soldiers now in Afghanistan and Iraq. A decade from now, if the war in Afghanistan (and increasingly Pakistan) is still being fought, most of you will be entering your fourth decade on this planet, and you may even have a 10 year-old of your own. A decade from then, if — as some top Washington officials insist — the global war on terror is “multigenerational,” that child may be fighting in Pakistan or Yemen or Somalia or some other military “area of responsibility” somewhere on the planet. A decade from then…

Of course, whatever skills we may lack when it comes to predicting the future, all things must end, including the American war state and our strange state of war. The question is: Can our over-armed global mission be radically downsized before it downsizes us? It will happen anyway, and it won’t take forever either, not the way things are going. But it will happen in an easier and less harmful way, if you’re involved, in whatever fashion you choose, in making it so. Had I had a birthday cake with candles on it for that ninth birthday of mine and blown them out, that, I think, would have been my wish.

[Note for TomDispatch Readers: Don’t miss Frederick Deknatel’s review in the latest Nation magazine of my new book, The American Way of War: How Bush’s Wars Became Obama’s, which he terms a “damning” account of just how war became the American way. Here are two lines:

“Engelhardt excels at extracting lurid details from the annals of America's ongoing state of war. He has an editor's eye for the most revealing line buried at the bottom of a war correspondent's dispatch or an intelligence report filed in Washington.”

But read the full review yourself by clicking here and then consider clicking on the title link above, going to Amazon.com, and buying my book (or anything else your heart desires). And, since my website gets a small cut of your purchase, TomDispatch receives a modest contribution at no extra cost to you. It’s one way we keep going. If you’re in an even more giving mood, click here and check out the super offer we made last week for a personalized signed copy of Nick Turse’s new book in return for a $75 contribution. Tom]