We've been at war since 1898, usually fighting more than one at once.
Healthcare costs are 120% of the problem.
Healthcare costs are 120% of the problem.
For example, 50 years ago veteran's benefits were part of the DoD budget. Today, they're part of the healthcare budgets. VA spending accounts for 20% of all government health spending -- and has grown astronomically over the last decade. It's huge.
I urge you to take a second look at the numbers you're quoting. Specifically, consider how much of the "healthcare spending" increase is actually a hidden increase in military spending which has been quietly shifted into a non-military budget.
As a bonus, public spending on healthcare in the US is matched by massive private spending, being responsible for most bankruptcies and foreclosures and tying many people to wage labor who would rather be entrepreneurs.
We know that healthcare with better outcomes than current ones doesn't have to be expensive. That money has been wasted. There's no established cost for endless multifront war other than our own historical experience, so it's hard to know if money is being wasted there.
We do know that we would have been running surpluses through the recession and into the foreseeable future if our healthcare system had the same costs as other systems, and wasn't a pile of rent-seeking, kickbacks, monopoly and artificial scarcity, and rats.
However, it is not "120%" of the problem as you suggest. Military spending is similarly out of proportion (arguably much moreso) and military spending consumes much, much more of our federal budget than healthcare.
I'm not objecting to the idea that we need to fix our health care system -- you are right on. I'm saying that it's not "120%" of the problem; defense is, and has always been.