secnd world war, the realeason is we we to wa wefund tla war through extra buet appropriations calle supplentals to t defense budget but bause we were a w, congress waquite unpreparedo take har look at thebac defense budgetside from wt we wereayg for war. and so those cos also nt up at theame te as w rspending money on the ar. inact we've mre than doled the defenseudget ovr th last tenears. we'veone ititho rious sutiny at this point it isime for scrutiny and mh of that cahappen without jeoparding our natial seurity. so when the preside talks aut the 400 billion over 12 years, is that reasonle? or is at notven enough? >> not oly is that asonable, but iould suggesth it m be the best that t pentagons goi to do. the president sai $400 billion er 12 years. all these commission that have been sdyg the debts and decit and makin proposals about wtto do among otr things aut defense haveeen saying somhere bween 00 illion and a trillion dolarsver ten years, whic is shoerthan the esident's 12 years. noyou n do that. ifact y c probably do whathe president said a ill t t defenseudg grow wit inflatn. ut y coul