What is the point of wearing down Russia's conventional forces at this point?

Before the conflict, the US would kick Russia's ass in a conventional war.

The only sort of war that the US could lose against Russia is a nuclear one.

And that's what this conflict is bringing us closer to. The

The Steven Simler, I'm so glad to have you back on Bad Faith podcast.

You guys, you know him.

You love him as a founder of Security Policy Reform Institute, seemingly one of the only places that are doing a competent job of tracking all of

the military spending that's been happening. And the reason why we really want to talk about

that right now is because we've just passed this omnibus budget that has some pretty

significant implications for our kind of national priorities. There they are written obviously in this

many thousand page document that apparently very few people, except first, even similar have read.

So welcome to bad faith, Stephen. Hey, Brianna. Good to be back. All right. What do we need to know

about what's in this thing? You have a really excellent breakdown that includes a Rothko-esque chart of spending priorities in which

you make it clear that only about a third of the fiscal year 2023 spending bill is for programs

unrelated to military or law enforcement, meaning that two-thirds are to military and law enforcement.

Break this down for us if you can.

You know, before I get into the methodology, what I wanted to do is just confront the narrative

that was coming from the Democratic Party that they were essentially declaring victory from this

bill. Before the details were released, we had both Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer saying that it was a

good bill, which typically means that you should believe McConnell and not Chuck

Schumer. And lo and behold, here we go. So what the Democrats were saying about this bill is that

it's the highest level of non-military spending in history. So basically, when you look at the

...