Body:
When it comes to the balance of power and military might in the United States, the names that immediately come to mind are former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris. Both have had unique interactions with the military forces and have demonstrated contrasting views of strengthening and maintaining the United States’ military supremacy.
On one side of the ring, there’s Donald Trump. A businessman-turned-politician, Trump has long linked his political identity with a strong military and bolstered his stance through the instillation of an aggressive and powerful military buildup during his tenure. His defense spending policies, including a significant increase in the defense budget, put military strength at the forefront of his political agenda.
Within this sphere, Trump’s approach aimed to increase the number of active personnel, fund wars in the Middle East, and reinvigorate the domestic arms industry. He often spoke boldly about upgrading the military arsenal, bringing forth plans of development of advanced weaponry such as hypersonic missiles, AI-powered drones, and a new generation of nuclear warheads.
On the other side of the ring is Vice President Kamala Harris, whose views on military strength are nuanced in comparison. Harris sees military strength not just as flexing military muscle, but as a combination of diplomacy and military prowess to maintain international stability.
Despite being one of the last people to join the discussions for U.S defense budget, Harris has shown a strategic bend towards re-balancing military strength and exploring non-military pathways to address security concerns. She champions legislation to improve the services provided to military families, tackling important issues such as housing, healthcare and schooling. Her stance on reducing the emphasis on armament and increasing the emphasis on welfare of military personnel offers a softer yet compelling perspective.
Tact and intelligence are aspects of military strength that both Trump and Harris endorse, albeit differently. While Harris advocates for a smarter way of security involving an emphasis on cybersecurity and diplomatic relationships, Trump’s perspective involves building up physical power and military arsenals.
Another significant difference can be noticed in their world views. Trump’s America First policy leans towards retreating from international duties, thus causing a significant impact on the world order and raising questions about the reliability of the United States as a military ally.
On the other hand, Harris has shown a strong inclination toward multilateral diplomacy and alliances, including NATO. Her approach entrusts faith in international law, cultural exchanges, and a more cooperative, collaborative framework to address global issues.
In conclusion, Trump and Harris, though representing the same nation, provide divergent paths to strengthening the US military. Trump’s approach calls for a return to hard power with increased defense spending and an aggressive international stance. Meanwhile, Harris aims for a balanced, more nuanced approach, by combining military strength with diplomatic strategies and welfare initiatives.
