Spending on our nation's defense is often a target for budget cuts, and this year's Federal Budget process is no exception. The Department of Defense (DoD) budget is discretionary, which is to say that Congress can make arbitrary decrements to it. Contrast this with, spending for social security, Medicare and Medicaid, which are non-discretionary and therefore are "un-touchable" for budget cuts and are hence often referred to as entitlement programs. I would like to place the DoD budget into context with the entire Federal Budget to better frame a perspective for making defense spending cuts. Below is my analysis of Congressional Budget Office (CBO) data on defense spending since 1973 that is available on their website. As noted by the trend line, defense spending, as a percentage of GDP, has been on a steady decline since 1973. In actuality, the decline can be seen as far back as 1943, when defense spending reached an all-time high of 43% of GDP. Post-Cold War, defense spending, as a percentage of GDP, has averaged 3.9%. President Obama has proposed cutting defense spending to 2.4% of GDP. Is this advisable considering the relatively small size of the DoD budget when compared to the real cost carriers of the Federal Budget? Analyzing defense spending within the context of the entire Federal Budget provides additional insight. The largest components of the Federal Budget include Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. The figure below presents an illuminating picture combining defense spending, entitlement programs, and the interest we pay on debt. When analyzing the entire Federal budget, Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare comprise 72% of Federal spending, while defense spending comprises 50% and interest on the debt comes in at 13%. Obviously, there are other areas within the Federal Budget that can be reduced outside of defense spending. Moreover, my analysis reveals that revenues are not keeping up with expenditures, which is not sustainable. The entitlement programs are the most predictable, in terms of their cost, because of their "