... the White House plans to eliminate over a trillion defense dollars in the next ten years. Details of those proposed cuts were laid out by Rep. Barney Frank’s (D-MA) Sustainable Defense Task Force in a 56 page report titled: Debt, Deficits, & Defense – A Way Forward. None of the service arms are spared.... and people thought I was being alarmist when I said 220 after the election. The details are worse.
The Navy will be reduced to eight aircraft carriers (from twelve planned) and seven air wings. Eight ballistic missile submarines will be cut from the planned force of 14, leaving just six. Building of nuclear attack submarines will be cut in half, leaving a force of 40 by 2020. The four active guided missile submarines would be cut, too. Destroyer building would be frozen and the new DDG-1000 destroyer program cancelled. Among other huge cuts, the fleet is to be reduced to 230 combat ships, eliminating 57 vessels from a current force level of 287.
It gets better ...
The Air Force must retire six fighter air wings equivalents, and at the same time build 301 fewer F-35 fighters. The nuclear bomber force will be completely eliminated in the name of unilateral disarmament—the B-1 and B-2 and B-52 and other bombers will still be able to drop bombs, but their nuclear weapon wiring and controls will simply be removed. Procurement of the new refueling tanker and the C-17 cargo aircraft will be cancelled. Directed energy beam research and other advanced missile and space warfare defense projects will also be eliminated or curtailed.Elections mean things. We have one in NOV. If you want to take power away from Barney Frank (D-MA) - then vote in NOV.
Active duty Army personnel will be slashed from 562,400 to 360,000. That includes elimination of about five active-component brigade combat teams (the report is not exactly). The Army will also suffer a myriad of other cuts, including closure of overseas bases.
The Marine Corps would be cut by 30%, from 202,000 to 145,000, and the other funding cuts planned for the Corps mean the United States will not be able to mount a major amphibious landing on any hostile shore. Marine Corps programs to be killed include the V-22 Osprey tilt rotor aircraft and the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle.
Cuts will need to be made - but they need to be made in a way that does not take away our nation's ability to project power.
Funny - when you read this report you almost thing that is the Democrat's aim ... but they don't call it that. Oh, no. This is even funnier - they show a little ankle here - in the document they call it, “Strategy of Restraint.”
That has a great track record - especially for a nation at war. We are at war, you do know that - right?
Elections do have consequences. We knew what they were going to do--they told us as much. The shame goes to those who today are surprised, and who claim "Wait, I didn't vote for this!"
ReplyDeleteWhat did you vote for? "Hope?" "Change?" "Purple ponies and a puppy for every child?"
Please.
The shame goes to those of you who voted for this. There is no surprise.
Funny thing is, when the sh$t hits the fan next time and we are unable to respond, they will blame everybody but themselves.
ReplyDeleteBuy more guns and ammo, we are going to need it.
After reading this, I sure could use a Prozac. >:o
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, its a bit of trouble getting down to that farmacia in Juarez to replenish my meds.
Kinda like a stroll along the Green Line these days....
Anyway...I see a big pitch coming for a fleet of "simple" "small" ships ...As in LCS.
J'Accuse!
ReplyDeleteIt's beyond criminal naivete'...... This is malfeasance, or worse. The first job, the absolute priority of the Federal Government is to provide for the nation's defense, to do those things for the states which they cannot individually do for themselves.
They need money for defense? Cancel ObamaCare, take back the money from GM, disband Fannie & Freddie, and any other number of things.
The imbeciles in leadership positions just don't seem to understand that evryone who beats their swords into plowshares will end up as slaves of those who didn't.
Oh man this sounds awesome I can't wait to be unemployed.
ReplyDeleteThey'll probably have really sweet benefits by then too.
There is no stupidity behind this.
ReplyDeleteThe continued vandelism of our country is very on purpose.
The question is; what are YOU (we, us), going to do about it.
I just threw up a little in my mouth.
ReplyDeleteWhat made any one at all think that this would not be coming? Win, lose, or draw in AFG? These people loathe the military and will strip it to the bone. And we won't mothball those CVNs either, we will put them to the cutting torch.
ReplyDeleteWe will be nearly incapable of defending US interests anywhere west of Hawaii or east of the coast of Maine. And unwilling to do so in any event.
He will make Carter's cuts look like the heyday of the Reagan budget.
Laid off since April. No fun and the benefits ain't that great.
ReplyDeleteFurther along this line, you might want to check out "The End of Influence: What Happens When Other Countries Have the Money" by, of all people, Brad DeLong!
ReplyDeleteI'm with Toaster802 and AW1Tim on this. There is no stupidity behind this. It's deliberate.
ReplyDeleteD'accord, AW1!
ReplyDeleteDoes this surprise anyone? Many in Congress and the left have long thirsted to raid the DOD budget for their own pet causes.
ReplyDeleteThis cannot be stupidity or lack of understanding of military issues, but the conscious neutering of our country to render is susceptible to whatever demands that any foreign enemies care to make.
ReplyDeleteIt would be bad enough if this were driven by a sudden realization that we are broke and have no money. However, this will merely be spun as necessary sacrifices in order to engage in a new round of socialist welfare programs and vote buying schemes.
Yes, elections have consequences. In this case the very destruction of the country which STUPIDLY elected Obama.
I hold the mainstream media as most responsible for their willful failure to expose his obvious antipathy to our country, and his socialist goals, and his despicable assocaites.
Are these the "enemies foreign and domestic" we have sworn to defend against?
For now, we best be giving genrously and otherwise supporting conservative challegers wherever we can, in our own state or not. Sharron Angle is a good one, Pat Toomey [Sestek's opponent] is another.
Read the linked article to see that they also plan huge unspecified savings in manpower (active and retired) costs.
I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.
ReplyDeleteI never could understand what domestic enemies there could be. Now I do but it seems it is the one I am supposed to obey and his cronies.
The time to defend the constitution and the country from the domestic enemies is now by letters, E-mails etc. and in 124 days at the ballot box. Send the Cdr's breakdown and link to this study to every American you know. Our country cannot survive with the status quo. We have to vote this liberal crop of sabatours out of office. As they say in Chicago, vote early and vote often!
Redeye, can I ask a question? I was once in your position, granted the economy was a little better. I traveled to Chicago to find a job. My sister just went from Philadelphia to Tampa for a job. My other sister just went from Charleston SC to Washington DC for a job. Do you think folks aren't willing to
ReplyDeletea) relocate for work
b) take a job that is "beneath" them?
Good luck finding work, man. I know it sucks.
call your neighbors, friends and relatives (both living and deceased). Hey, Chicago rules.....
ReplyDeleteOh, Legal and Illegal too.....
ReplyDeleteAs per Dem SOP, they plan on cutting the muscle and bone, and leaving the fat.
ReplyDeleteBarney Frank has a real hard-on for the military (pardon the pun). For instance, cutting back to 8 CVN isn't just going to influence the nation for one president's term. It would take at least 20 years to build back up. Probably more like 30.
ReplyDelete<span></span>
30 June 1950: # Active combatants in USN: 237
Major combatants deployed in C7F AOR: 2 -- USS Valley Forge (CV-45) w/CVW-5 embarked, and USS Juneau (CL-52).
30 June 1950: North Korean forces continue to push South Korean forces south after taking Seoul on the 28th. DPRK forces south o the Han river and have taken Kimpo airfield.
30 June 2010
"<span>The Navy will be reduced to eight aircraft carriers (from twelve planned) and seven air wings. Eight ballistic missile submarines will be cut from the planned force of 14, leaving just six. Building of nuclear attack submarines will be cut in half, leaving a force of 40 by 2020. The four active guided missile submarines would be cut, too. Destroyer building would be frozen and the new DDG-1000 destroyer program cancelled. Among other huge cuts, the fleet is to be reduced to 230 combat ships, eliminating 57 vessels from a current force level of 287."</span>
Deja vu all over again?
w/r, SJS
Lol theat report is laughable. Theres no way the House and Senate would ever let it get that bad. Im sure it will be bad but not that pathetically bad.
ReplyDeleteSG,
ReplyDeleteI'd relocate right now, but I can't save up the money for the move. With the increase in property taxes and the costs of living here, it's taken up what i used to be able to set aside.
I may end up just having to sell everything off and start over. I'll do it if it comes down to it, but I'd rather not just yet.
OK, but they can't pass a budget that includes these cuts with only one house of Congress from 2010-2012. Instead of focusing on the details of their fantasy military cuts, what about the details of what the gridlock will actually look like from 2010-2012? If no appropriations bills are passed, what happens exactly?
ReplyDeleteAmerican citizens with any cognitive brain functioning left will punish the progressive liberals and rhinos in Nov 2010. The House will be back under Rep. control then IMPEACH OBAMA before he ruins anymore of America. The damage that his failed policies have already done in 18 months are horrendous. America will not do well with another 24 months of him after Nov 2010.
ReplyDeletePunish by the power of the vote.
Impeach Obama after the Nov 2010 elections to save America for our chidren's and grandchildren's futures.
Emergencys like this progressive liberal parasite in office need proactive voters and some politicians with bold moral courage.
We are open to anything. I live in Houston. Lots of jobs and lots of competition. Thanks for the thoughts.
ReplyDeleteOo! Oo! Can we kill the LCS? :) If we're killing all those other programs, the money pit needs ta GO!
ReplyDeleteAnybody what doesn't like that is a Yancy Streeter.
This is a crying shame and we have nobody to blame except the American public for electing these yahoos to Congress time after time. Elections do matter and there is one coming up real soon. I do think we need to reduce our worldwide footprint if countries are unwilling to pay for their own defense. Why are we still hanging around in Germany and Japan other than forward basing which is costing us through the nose. Why don't we just tell them you want us here then pay the bills. We need to stop being everyone's policeman.
ReplyDeleteI know that this is very isolationist point of view and it doesn't have us out there pushing free markets and freedom, which has been working great for us so far. I say we pull back, stop wasting our time on nation building other than our own and then if kids want to play we then use our concentrated military to fix their collective red wagons. I hate the idea of giving up so much, but we have a problem with huge deficits that isn't just magically going to disappear and that means the military is going to take a hit, but it can't be the only one. So we need to formulate a plan that concentrates our forces and also forces cuts in domestic programs to ensure the pain is shared by all.
There's nothing "sustainable" about this. Just the opposite.
ReplyDeleteThis would be the end of the Navy because all major shipyards would close. Halt DDG construction and we lose Bath and probably Pascagoula, too. Halving sub construction will force Electric Boat to go. Reductions in the number of CVNs means disruption to the current build rate that keeps Newport News open.
All that's left is amphibs, and why build them if you can't build escorts?
All that means no ability to build any warships bigger than an LCS in the US. Ships will wear out and there will be no way to build new ones. God forbid we actually need a Navy at that time.
'Phib:
ReplyDeleteAn important one that slipped by:
"Ending or delaying procurement of a number of military systems – the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, MV-22
Osprey, KC-X Aerial Refueling Tanker"
With a limited organic capability (hey, nothing like having your 4.5 gen fighter used as a tanker for your range-limited, older 4th gen fighters...) and the current KC-135 fleet in horrid shape, that has all the wisdom and insight of, oh, I don't know, maybe Bernie Madoff?
Just sign me "Puzzled in Palookaville" *DONT_KNOW*
w/r, SJS
It would not be hyperbole to call this plan "the end of the Navy." Not as we know it, but the end, full stop.
ReplyDeleteHalt DDG construction and both Bath and Pascagoula close. Disrupt the CVN build rate and Newport News closes. Same with subs and Electric Boat. All that's left are amphibs, and why build them if you can't build escorts and you're going to gut the Marine Corps? The Regional Maintenance Centers will eventually wither and die as the Fleet wears out.
Once gone, those shipyards and their specialized capabilities will not come back. We won't have the yards to build or maintain anything bigger than an LCS or FFG. Ships will wear out and we will be unable to build more to replace them. Game over.
Shoot, no amphibs either with 'goula gone from lack of DDG business.
ReplyDeleteTo some extent I agree with the commenters but to offer an alternative universe in which the US no longer patrols the whole world but stays at home, disestablishes AFRICOM, EUCOM, CINCPAC, SOUTHCOM, where's the harm to the US by cutting back force levels designed to patrol the entire world and wage other peoples wars (OPW)?
ReplyDeleteWhat idiot thinks we accomplish anything by doing ANYTHING IN AFRICA?
Why exactly are we subsidizing a force in being to support SOKOR against NORKS when the SOKOR folks have an economy 10,000x larger than NORK?
If we aint afraid of Japan why should China or Korea or the rest be? Let 'em work it out themselves.
The Defense Industrial Base arguement is pursuasive because Congresscritters will scream blue murder as their districts and states lose defense jobs hand over fist. The Won administration seems remarkably unconcerned with consequences to the critters and they have somehow used their spidey sense to pick up on this as the election results roll in in the fall. I'm not sure at this point if I much care about retaining some of these shipyards with their 500% cost overruns, shoddy workmanship, infinite build schedules that make it take 13 years to launch a new TAGOS ship. Na, be much cheaper to the ROKS or Japanese build and maintain our ships. Not trolling or looking to argue with good folks like Bryon. It's my perspective as an overhaul manager in 3 yards, 2 overseas and one in the States.
What the article describes leaves the US plenty of power to defend the country against Canada and Mexico and every navy in the rest of the world, combined.
Mais oui! C'est merde!
ReplyDeleteThe problem is that the United States is a trade power. Protection of the sealanes is a sine qua non for commerce. And as a global power in economic and cultural terms, there will be people who just plain hate us. When they attack (as on 11 Sep 01), it would be nice to nave something more forceful than a strongly worded note to retaliate with.
ReplyDeleteI think we can still kick a whole lot of butt with the reduced numbers, but we have to keep an eye on getting rid of world power toys like the B2 and SSGN. I know that the SSGNs are on the chopping block and the B2 are going to be nuetered. I have to agree with Curtis that Afica and several other locations are a waste of our tax dollars. It is nice to show the flag all over the world, but to be everyone's defense force on our tax dollars is BS. We can still support world commerce by forcing others to spend their money to protect their coastlines. We can still patrol and send reaction forces when necessary. We can still apply ample force to kill pirates if we have the stomach for it.
ReplyDeleteIf we were serious about protecting sea lanes we would implement PLAN SALAMANDER and keel haul those bastard pirates. There is nothing to be gained by doing Africa Partnership Station with the key strategic country (smirk) of Gambia. Sorry. NOTHING.
ReplyDeleteAnd southern partnership station? How about under Barry's watch we lost South America to Venezuela and Iran. Good job, Barry.
APS and SPS are LCS type missions. Worthless. Get rid of the mission, get rid of the ships. We can roll with a 240 ship navy. We just need to get rid of the Global Force for Good missions, and with it those 55 Little Crappy Ships.
with Osprey killed, CH-46 simply too old, how the hell are supposed the Marines to move in say AFG?
ReplyDeleteNote that they probably neutered B-2s to give Navy two more SSBNsabove 4 I've predicted not long ago...
ReplyDeleteI can almost see now F-35 going thru cut numbers-rise price-cut numbers loop that decimated F-22 numbers...
First, I suspect that protecting rice bowls is a bipartisan effort. Second, having ships that cost multiple billions and the better part of a decade to launch is a direct result of the revolving doors that exist between politics, the military, and large corporations. Bet McChrystal gets a few million dollar gigs on the boards of banks and defense contractors. I know, guys like that have significant expertise in derivatives and in manufacturing aircraft, lol. Third, we are broke.
ReplyDeleteCurtis- while I buy some of your thoughts, your final one ignores the rapidly rising Chinese fleet.
ReplyDelete"<span>What the article describes leaves the US plenty of power to defend the country against Canada and Mexico and every navy in the rest of the world, combined."</span>
Of course, if the Chinese want to protect the sea lanes with their largest (and most indebted) trading partner, they may need a larger fleet.
And, with Iran cozying up to Venezuela it is likely that their fleet will increase, and the possibility of a nuclear armed nutjob Iranian proxy state like Venezuela makes me nervous.
Any cuts, let alone cuts of this magnitude may well be the end of the Navy as finlandia outlined it.
Some adults need to take a look at what missions we want to be able to do and size the force to fit that, not figure out how much can be looted from DOD for welfare programs and then cutting the force to make a number. Maybe after January 2011, or 2013.
man it would take pages to refute the idea that we can just take our marbles and go home. Yeah, lets do it and - leave the Pacific to our rivals, the Chinese. They sure as hell aren't our friends - when will we learn? Compete - or die.
ReplyDeleteWe seem to be having a discussion as to whether we want to enjoy our position in the world or cede it. We get to be the boss - or we get to be bossed. Simple as that. Don't let anyone tell you power is like money - it's not. If you get power, I lose power. Pretty simple.
And that plays out in every arena - political, economic, diplomatic, military, and so forth.
My reading of the actual report (not the DailyCaller piece) is that the report called for the delaying (by about 5 years) of KC-X, not ending it. The confusion probably comes from the fact that in the report the KC-X is lumped in with a bunch of other aerospace stuff (JSF, Osprey, etc.). That paragraph was written in such a manner that it looks like they're considering ending or delaying all of the systems, but if you dig into the report, the section on KC-X only calls for delaying it by 5 years.
ReplyDeleteBecause yeah, when I read that alarm bells started going off...there's a lot of stupid stuff in the report, but ending KC-X is. Not. An. Option. The rest of it might be detrimental to U.S. security in the short and/or long term, but without KC-X American airpower will cease to exist in a few decades (and maybe sooner, depending on whether or not we have a catastrophic failure that grounds the -135 fleet). Period. That's not hyperbole, that's cold hard fact.
However, the report actually makes a good point in that delaying would allow possible focus on a 787 or A350 based program, as opposed to the 767/A330 based program now. The 767/A330 idea is like buying a '60s era Chevelle in 1980 to replace your Model T. It's better than the Model T, but it's still old technology.
I'm sure Barney Frank wants to cut the military's budget, but he's not the CINC, SecDef, or the Armed Services Committee. Until I see one of those parties seriously entertaining his suggestions, I'm not that worried about it. Frankly (no pun intended), I don't have a problem with DoD spending less money, and I think arguing about where we could/should spend less is a good debate for Congress to have. That said, the devil is in the details.
ReplyDeleteAll the Chinese need to reduce US defence budget is to stop buying US treasury bonds...
ReplyDeleteWe're not allowed to say hard on in the military any more. O:-) :-P
ReplyDeleteYeah, it's not like it would actually 'save' any money.
ReplyDeleteI know you have all been waiting for them, so here's a few comments from someone who's not as far right as the majority here.
ReplyDeleteFirst, Barney Frank's name is not the only one tied to the Task Force. Here's a quote, "...Representative Walter B. Jones (R-NC), Representative Ron Paul (R-TX), and Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), to explore possible defense budget contributions to deficit reduction efforts that would not compromise the essential security of the United States."
There are two Democrats and two Republicans which would imply bipartisanship, and a Tea Party favorite is even in there.
Second, everyone is complaining about the budget, the deficit and how much money we are spending. You can't have it both ways. I don't know about you, but when I hear $600 Billion for the Defense Department my brain shudders, and we all know how Senators and Congressmen love their cut of the DoD budget. The best example is from a few days ago - the Air Force announced they are considering cutting the B-1 program - all of it. The Senators and Congressmen from the districts with the B-1 bases immediately stood up and said the B-1 is vital to national security and cancelling the program is non-negotiable.
I agree with many comments below - the rising Chinese threat, too many bases in Europe, what is Africom going to do. But the expense of SSBN(X), JSF, KC-X, two wars, rising manpower, etc. cannot be ignored. I think if you start the conversation with, "what does our military REALLY need to be doing," and not just be cash cows for Congressional districts, I think you might find some different answers.
"Far right?" Dude - I support gays in the military, an 18yr old drinking age, decrimilization of small amounts of ganja, brew my own ice tea, garden, own an organic farm-share, and want an emphasis on a sound liberal arts education. My favorite international city is Paris, and I try to take the kids to NYC once every other year.
ReplyDeleteOk, that may make me gay from Byron's perspective (and that is coming from a guy that surrounds himself with small, yappy, puff-ball kick-dogs) - but far right?
As for the B-1 - if you know what the B-1 and B-52 did for our forces in AFG that no other aircraft could, you might change your mind.
Errr, aside from the Paris thing (its a tie between Krakow and Dubrovnik for me)...hear, hear! Or "here, here" - even as a history nerd I've never known which was right.
ReplyDeleteCurtiss,
ReplyDeletethe deal in Africa is to engage the miserable states with face to face warm human handshakes to let them know while we build wells and treat for disease, that they are not alone. we are trying to fill the vaccum and believe it or not Africa is a theater of operation in the continue war against the caliphate er terror....
oh yea and the return is pennies on the dollar
ReplyDeleteUm, MAYBE if we had a MARTIME STRATEGY we could defend the requirements.
ReplyDeletestand by for the assrape from the training commands and maint facilities....
Old Salt- I don't really mean to suggest that I would do many of those things but asked that we imagine what those who think like the Party in Power would do since this is how they view our role in the world. The only downside that they see is the loss of defense jobs in their districts.
ReplyDeleteI've commented elsewhere my thoughts on a strategic partnerless never-ending war with China that could never be won.
We don't patrol the SLOCS now so why worry about not doing it in the future? I think Eaglespeake has the piracy stats for any SLOC all Oceans and they're pretty grim but don't seem to be any sort of barrier to trade.
Nancy: Barney, we are in real trouble here. We have spent and spent, and I don't know how to get out of this tar pit. Wages are sticky. Taxes are sticky. Saying no is not only hard, it is unpopular. What can we do? I need a drink...
ReplyDeleteBarney: Never fear, my trusted leader. I know what we can do and it is so obvious. We cut DOD. I know, I know, you might think that their will be a popular backlash, but there won't. Everyone that has a yellow ribbon magnet on their car doesn't REALLY support the military, they just put that on their car so they can use it to claim their support while bashing the GWOT. We don't have to worry about the public. See, DOD has to keep their mouth shut. Everytime we've done this in the past, DOD just takes it. They are the only folks you can kick and they just take it. The only people that might complain would be the milbloggers, but those chumps never changed a thing. Sure, they offer a voice to the supressed masses in uniform, but what can they really do? Answer, nothing! My plan is perfect! *Evil laugh*
Nancy: Wait, wasn't there some deal with USNA and milbloggers? They caused a stink or something?
Barney: Uh, no. Maybe. Whatever. Quit nay-saying. Damn, woman, just evil laugh and it will all go away. *Evil laugh*
Nancy: *Evil laugh*...
Ender,
ReplyDeleteYou got a listening device in there or something?
Funny thing, that Defense Budget. It represents about 22.8% of the total budget, and only about 3.4% of GDP.
The slicing of US military capabilities to ribbons to the tune of a reduction of $100 billion annually will reduce the current budget deficit ($1.68 TRILLION) by a mere 5.8%, leaving 94% of the deficit intact.
If we got rid of the $780 billion for DoD, we would still be faced in 2010 with about $1 TRILLION, about 58% of the budget deficit.
I am sure that the administration and CBO have wildly optimistic figures on revenue streams, and will tell us that cutting defense spending instead of entitlements is the only way out.
Maybe we should join the EU. The above model is Euro-economics. Another funny thing about that defense budget, though. It provided the defense for those EU countries that they refused to provide for themselves.
I said majority - there's always the exception.
ReplyDeleteAnd I understand the contributions of the B-1 and B-52, but I was trying to illustrate that it's hard to have a conversation and find solutions when people are closed minded.
Anon,
ReplyDeleteBy closed-minded, do you mean those who refuse to drink the kool-aid of slashing defense to dump into entitlement spending?
The preamble says "promote the general welfare" and "provide for the common defense". Instead this administration wants to provide general welfare and slash the common defense.
Those of us who find that problematic do so with good reason.
Part of this is the old City Mayor "reluctantly considering major cuts to to police and fire dept" scam, which always winds up cuts to mental health care and the library, i.e., the defenseless and the obscure.
ReplyDeletePart of it is national delusional denial of the harsh realities of the real world. Too many "journalists" and too few reporters.
And part of it is the legacy of the red diaper babies and the greater unacknowledged influence of Karl vis-a-vis Groucho and Harpo.
A fine kettle of fish.
That hurts, Sala! And I've taught those little puff ball dogs to hamstring people...it's easier to drag the body inside the doorway :)
ReplyDeleteSoutherners have made their own tea for a long time, what's new with that? But you're right, the eco-garden is a bit ghey ;)
Just because someone has a different POV than you do does not mean they are close minded. You may want to consider that they have measured your arguments and found them wanting.
ReplyDeleteDo you ever consider that you don't have the right answer?
Regis,
ReplyDeleteI've got a man on the inside.
I applaud your understanding of economics (which we all should take the time to learn better), but you forgot to mention how friggen sweet it looks with Obama straddling the B-1's canopy with a .44 and firing a round into the plane to symbolize the end of wasteful Government spending. This is the problem with high-technology hardware. It just looks cool and expensive. If we made our planes look like SU-25s or A-10s, they wouldn't make such great props for photo ops, and therefore, great PR for killing.
I can only hope the SECDEF (who was reading the tea leaves months, (years?) ago) has got us out in front of this issue.
ReplyDeleteThe other thing that is bothering me in terms of this, is that our SECNAV has been pulled to oversee the efforts in the Gulf. Yes, it is important. But, is he engaged in making sure the Navy makes it through these cuts alright? Do we have him in the upper level meetings to bat for us? Or, is he too fully engaged down south?
YNSN, if you look at the SECNAV's priority list for the navy: 1) Sexual harrassment 2) Environmental Affairs, you would see that he has NOTHING to do with the Navy. NOTHING. He oversees the neutering of our service. Period. 30 year shipbuilding plan? Nope. He has no chop. Everything goes to Robert Work. So not having this SECNAV in DC is like not having a door gunner on the space shuttle.
ReplyDeleteEasy there Byron! As a good conservative, I burn hundreds of rounds of ammunition every month, hold 2 black belts, drive an SUV and I garden. Hell, I tripled the size of my vegetable garden from last year, and even compost my own soil.
ReplyDeleteSheesh.
Oh, and my dogs are Boxers. But I do have cats too. Maybe that is gay?
NAME INFRINGMENT!
ReplyDeletenot sold on Africa ops. Direct action? Yes. APS? No. Waste of time and money. Teaching Gambian sailors the finer points of destroyer firefighting techniques, space isolation and counter ballast sounds kinda silly to me when they are in rowboats.
ReplyDeleteSecDef has given speeches on how we should reform, transform and spend less money. The terms are general, the thought is not. SecDef is on board for looking for things to cut. Here is a couple of recent speeches. He's asking the question. Frank's committee's report will be used as the roadmap for cuts.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.defense.gov/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=1467
http://www.defense.gov/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=1460
Okay - where is the call to cut domestic spending, especially entitlements that represent 60%+ of the budget.
ReplyDeleteIf memory serves, we have a budget of 2.9 trillion, and had revenues of 2.7 trillion. That's deficit spending.
Now that we've had a one party town, all that applies, and we spend an additional $1.5 trillion over an above what happened before.
Now - we go after Defense spending, something we clearly CAN afford??!!
Folks - this is simple politics - the DEMS hate the military, unless there's a union plant in their district. Make no mistake, the extreme left would get rid of it, and Obama is part of the extreme left.
I emailed a letter to my Senator about this. I probably won't get a response, but I believe it needed to be addressed.
ReplyDeleteWas looking for a pithy quote from one of our Congress's previous eras of historical amnesia, namely the disarmament hearings and movement of the 20's and 30's. Something that might capture the flavor of the times, and help explain what seems to be this deep-seated yearning in our political DNA to try to prevent war by preventing our abilty to wage it...
ReplyDeleteNone to be found.
So as Frank's "disarmament committee" channels Nye and La Follette, Ben Franklin come through again with a useful reminder:
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!"
Let the "lambs" not be silent...
Sorry Gator, but been using the handle for sometime now. It is just the first time commenting here in the new format. You are the Gator and I am just Sandy like my yard, what I see when I look out any window, what I see on the way to work and where I spent a year embedded with the Army.
ReplyDeleteI like it.
ReplyDeleteWR,
ReplyDeleteSee my comment below. But you are spot-on.
yep... yep.
ReplyDeleteSalty,
ReplyDeleteyoure correct there... I am talking more direct interfaces, like a 3-4 man op team in a village building wells and helping crop growth. Not Mil - Mil team building excercises.. kinda like the GEICO commercial of the dude falling backwards and expecting the Gecko to catch him.... your point is well made.
The spirit is the point we'll get to the delivery I suspect. But we got to build trust first.
Can I publish your put up to my wordpress blog? I'll add a inbound link to your forum. That’s one really nice post.
ReplyDeleteMy weblog; how to increase chances of getting pregnant
Hey this can be a real cool website
ReplyDeleteFeel free to surf to my homepage ... trying to conceive tips