Evening star., 1950-08-02
Question in Congress-:
How Was $50 Billion
For Cold War Spent!
Only 81 in ST Wos Used
For Arms, Survey Finds;
'Overheod,' 81 Out of s.
By David Lawyence

VI TlutSI SNiVCy uioSE
'Overheod,' 81 Out of s.
By David Lavrence
Members of Congress are ask
ing what happened to the $50
billion spent for the cold war
in the last four years and why
more of it wasn't spent for weap-
ons and combat troops.
Senator johnson, Democrat, OF
Colorado, and members of the
House have placed in the Con-
gressional Record" an explana-
ton which was made by the staff
of "U. S. News & World Report
in a lengthy article in a recent
issue. The Defense Department
since has issued a table of eX-
penditures, but it is based on
obligations" rather than cash
payments. This means that a
backlog Of many millions more
was available for aircraft procure
ment but the money wasn't used
In brief, the magazines survey
based on cash outlays for the foul
fiscal years, shows that "over-
head"-often referred to as mill
tary housekeeping"-took 50 out
of every SO spent. To quote from
the analysis:
1.-TWO thirds of all military
spending has gone for services
performed, not for expensive
weapons or supplies bought. That
includes pay, travel, telephone
bills. transportation costs, rents,
81 In 81 For Arms.
"Only 81 in 81 since the war
has been spent on arms of any
kind. One in 18 has gone for
equipment other than aircraft.
Out of $50 billion, about 81 bill
lion was invested in aircraft. So
billion for all other equipment
guns. ships, trucks, radar, new
weapons, machinery. and non
combat equipment such as furni-
ture, typewriters and passenger
automobiles.
Spending of combat equipment
has been less than enough to re-
place worn-out items. No new
tanks have been bought; only a few
World War II left-overs have been
remodeled. Buying of new weap-
ons has scarcely begun-most
are in the planning or testing
stage. No big artillery guns.
rifles, machine guns or new naval
guns have been purchased. Deadly
new 'skysweeper' anti-aircraft
guns have been developed, but
none bought. No new Navy ships
have been ordered, only a few COM
pleted and remodeled. Even the
81 billion spent on big bombers
and fighter planes has not re-
placed the number Of planes worn
out during postwar years.
''On weapons alone, spending
over four postwar years totaled
only $500 million. That's less
than the amount spent on military
travel, half the cost of shipping
military freight, and barely twice
the amount spent for rent and
utilities at military installations.
Construction, largely of housing
on defense posts. cost half again
as much as the total spent on new
weapons"
But what did the $50 billion buy
In terms of war strength? The
answer is that the number Of
fighting divisions has dropped
from II when the "cold war" be-
gan In 1946 to 10 divisions now.
The amount of combat equipment
has grown smaller. Manpower
had been cut from 1891 900 to l.
O03,00 men in the Army and the
Air Force before the Korean out
break.
Air Groups Drop to 48.
The number Of air groups has
dropped from 50 to 48. The Air
Force and the Navy have bought
1854 new planes, which is less
than the number that wore out
In the same four years, cutting the
number of planes on hand and in
storage from Al, 500 to 10000. Most
of the new combat air equipment
money has gone into big, long
range bombers and fast jet fight
ers. But output is only at the
rate of 215 aircraft month, COM
pared to 1850 a month before
Pearl Harbor in 1941.
AS for the Navy, it has "a:
combat ships in operation COM
pared to 291 four years ago. Man
power has been cut from 985, ,28s
to $4,000.
It was military housekeeping
that took most Of the money
About $18 billion Of the $50 billion
went to pay non-combat service
men and civilians, with only sc
billion for the men in the combat
units
Also, of the So billion spent or
supplies, only about a fourth
went to combat personnel. Vari-
Gus service costs added anothe,
$51a billion and pensions and
other outlays took another So
billion, $500 million.
Total charges for housekeep-
ing" says the survey, may be
computed at $347 billion of the
$50 billion. That's more than 81
out of every SO spent"
The foregoing picture tells why
so many more billions have to be
spent now. The Administrations
theory was that a small combat
operation-some B-36's and fast
fighter planes and a few atomic
bombs-would stop the next wal
almost before it got under way
Nobody figured on the kind of wal
the other side might have up it!
sleeve.
But it would be a mistake tt
say that what was spent was