Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by dadx4, Aug 2, 2014.
I went to some left-leaning sites to read their spins of this, but haven't found anything from any of them on it yet.
So the Pentagon doesn't like military cuts.
and you shouldn't either shab- he is making us weaker but go ahead and keep your unfettered love of all things obama- and then tell us all about how he protected us when the islamic extremists attack us again
I don't think you read the report. Cuts are fine. Speaking for self (though I am a career military man), I am all for drastic defense cuts that reflect our current spending problem. The main challenge in that report is that while the military's resources are cut significantly, its mission is not cut at all and in some cases continues to expand. Organizations all over the world go through periods of fiscal austerity, and our military has had to do it many times. Usually, though, before such cuts go into place, the organization decides what services or requirements it will no longer fill. For example, if we, say, cut 100,000 soldiers from the Army, a reasonable drawback in requirements might be that we will no longer provide ground combat forces to South Korea. Our military mission there could be limited to air & naval support and a ground advise-and-support mission. That is the kind of thing the military is waiting to hear.
This is not a protest against the cuts per se; those cuts are happening (period). The Marine Corps, for instance, is in the process of cutting 25% down to 150,000 Marines. That in itself is not a bad thing except that no one knows what missions are going away without those 50,000 Marines to man the positions.
Cut the mission, and the troop cuts are easy. Surely, that's a reasonable proposition?
why is that piece written under a fake name?
agree with this, I have been saying for years that America needs to reduce its foot print around the world. We project this strong front on to and in to the world, yet our core is rotting.
The military and its missions need to become smarter not bigger.
Have you seen what Hussein and his thugs have done to whistle blowers?
pretty sure an accurate description (if it is accurate) of a public govt report hardly qualifies as whistle-blowing.
Meanwhile, here's how more nonpartisan group describes the criticism in the report:
This is a problem with government spending in general. There is a desire for spending cuts and deficit reduction, but at the same time, no one wants to be the politician that actually cuts a program entirely. That leads to situations where, as you say, the general budget is cut but the mission remains the same. It's up to the administrators to "make-do" with less.
To a certain extent, that might be necessary. Government waste and inefficiency isn't a myth. But dealing with that sort of thing should be a targeted effort, not a side effect of poorly thought out budget cuts.
Nice link, from that link I did find this.
No Sword, No Justice
On Tuesday, President Obama visited the Dutch embassy in Washington to pay his respects to the victims of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, shot down over Ukraine by forces armed and backed by Vladimir Putin. Obama wrote in the embassy’s condolence book, “We will not rest until we are certain that justice is done.”
Then he rested.
Actually, that’s not fair. Obama didn’t rest. He flew off to the West Coast on a busy fundraising trip.
The sad fact is that justice will not be done with respect to Putin or his executioners. Justice won’t be done in part because President Obama won’t lift a finger to do it. Indeed, a couple of days after the president’s edifying if passive formulation in the condolence book, Obama administration officials weren’t even pretending they had much intention of doing anything significant. Perhaps that’s what Obama meant when he promised Putin he’d have more “flexibility” after his reelection. Flexibility turns out to mean saying you won’t rest until justice is done—and then doing nothing. It means presenting to the world what Leo Strauss wrote of Weimar Germany, “the sorry spectacle of justice without a sword or of justice unable to use the sword.” Under the Obama administration, we are becoming Weimar America.
Either put quotes or quote tags around quoted material. I am going to start just deleting the threads out of hand if that simple rule cannot be followed.
Fine let's cut the missions. It's not like the Japanese, Koreans and Germans cannot afford to defend themselves. Oh yeah while we are at it, let's close a few bases, oh and cut a few programs. Oh the howling, the rending of garments coming from the politicians representing those districts losing those jobs. Good luck with that!
I agree that they can as well. However, there are some political problems that come with withdrawing support (which I am personally all for) that most people don't consider when they say this.
Just take Germany, for instance. Being a member of NATO obligates said member to spend a minimum of 3% GDP on defense in order to reduce the number of freed riders. Germany spends about 2% on defense (I'm using nice, round numbers here), even though it can afford in excess of 3% with its robust economy and industry.
Yet, none of the other member states complain. Why do you think that is?
One theory is that the rest of NATO isn't particularly interested in a fully rearmed Germany capable of offensive operations. An underarmed Germany that contributes modestly to NATO is fine, however. Right now, Russia is playing that age-old game of "That used to be mine, and I want it back" with regard to Chechnya, Georgia, and Ukraine. Who knows what's next? Belarus, Poland, Finland, the Baltic States, and Moldova also used to be part of the old Russian Empire. What happens if Germany wants to start playing "That used to be mine"? Young Germans today know intuitively that Poles, Czechs, Russians, et al, are currently sitting on German land stolen from them for reasons (while just) they had nothing to do with. In short, a strong American presence in Europe keeps the arms race down, and the old hatreds below the surface.
The question is, can we really afford to subsidize the defense of all Europe and East Asia indefinitely? I don't think so.
didnt obama say being President was not in his job description ?