If defense cuts go into effect

[old navy]

Constitutionalists, I have a question. How many years, according to the Constitution of the United States must we approve budgets for the United States Army?

Conservatives, I have a question for you. If you believe that the social safety net is wasteful, can you imagine any wasteful spending in the Department of Defense?

Q1-Two years

Q2-There is a need for social programs but most have fraud, waste, and abuse. Wasteful spending at the Pentagon is abundent.

 

[Nosmo King]

Constitutionalists, I have a question. How many years, according to the Constitution of the United States must we approve budgets for the United States Army?

Conservatives, I have a question for you. If you believe that the social safety net is wasteful, can you imagine any wasteful spending in the Department of Defense?

Q1-Two years

Q2-There is a need for social programs but most have fraud, waste, and abuse. Wasteful spending at the Pentagon is abundent.

So, constitutionally, funding for the Army should never exceed a two year window. And the same over site should be applied to ridding waste in all federal programs. There should be no whining and bitching and gnashing of teeth from the Right when it comes to cutting Defense spending in order to rid out the waste and abuse.

Let's see how well this works out.

 

[old navy]

Constitutionalists, I have a question. How many years, according to the Constitution of the United States must we approve budgets for the United States Army?

Conservatives, I have a question for you. If you believe that the social safety net is wasteful, can you imagine any wasteful spending in the Department of Defense?

Q1-Two years

Q2-There is a need for social programs but most have fraud, waste, and abuse. Wasteful spending at the Pentagon is abundent.

So, constitutionally, funding for the Army should never exceed a two year window. And the same over site should be applied to ridding waste in all federal programs. There should be no whining and bitching and gnashing of teeth from the Right when it comes to cutting Defense spending in order to rid out the waste and abuse.

Let's see how well this works out.

Yep, two years at a time. The bi-annual budget is a great model that most states have figured out pretty good. The US Congress though has not done a budget in how long?

I think that most right minded people have no problem with getting rid of waste. Things like 18 or so extra C-17s that the Pentagon didn't order but Representative so-and-so insisted on them because the manufacturer is in his district. That would be a good start.

 

[rightwinger]

Q1-Two years

Q2-There is a need for social programs but most have fraud, waste, and abuse. Wasteful spending at the Pentagon is abundent.

So, constitutionally, funding for the Army should never exceed a two year window. And the same over site should be applied to ridding waste in all federal programs. There should be no whining and bitching and gnashing of teeth from the Right when it comes to cutting Defense spending in order to rid out the waste and abuse.

Let's see how well this works out.

Yep, two years at a time. The bi-annual budget is a great model that most states have figured out pretty good. The US Congress though has not done a budget in how long?

I think that most right minded people have no problem with getting rid of waste. Things like 18 or so extra C-17s that the Pentagon didn't order but Representative so-and-so insisted on them because the manufacturer is in his district. That would be a good start.

There will always be a certain level of waste in the military. Just as there is in any major organization. Significant cuts cannot come from cutting waste....that should be done anyway

The military buys equipment and maintains manning to meet their stated mission. Significant savings can only come from redefining the stated mission of our military. Our military grossly exceeds any threat that is out there. We maintain the force structure we do because we act as the worlds policeman around the globe. Other countries are able to maintain smaller military than the threat requires because they know the US will make up the difference

 

[old navy]

Besides freedom, American exceptionalism is about projected power. And I'm not talking just about the ability to attack, occupy, or take over other countries. There is nothing comparable to a carrier battle group (they now call them carrier strike group or force, I can't remember) or Marine Amphibious Readiness Group on the horizon that will simmer a bad situation. The US military used to be, and will again be, not only a force for readiness, but a force for good worldwide.

In 26 years, I did as many, if not more, humanitarian ops as I did combat operations. The goodwill, feeding of people, and medical missions project American power as much as bullets and missles do.

The question then, is this part of national defense? The citizenry needs to decide that and vote in representatives that will continue a strong and robust military, or a military large enough only to defend the homeland.

 

[uscitizen]

US will have the smallest army since 1940

Smalest navy since 1915

Smallest AF ever

Per Leon Panetta - Sec of Defense

You all do realize that what we are talking about is only about decreasing the funding level of the planned funding increases don't you?

It will still be a fricking increase!

Damned idjits.

 

[MikeK]

US will have the smallest army since 1940

Smalest navy since 1915

Smallest AF ever

Per Leon Panetta - Sec of Defense

You wouldn't have a link on that would you?

Sounds made up

Ditto.

 

[MikeK]

Irrelevant

No it's not.

US defense spending as a percentage of GDP is about half of what is was in the 1960s. The US ranks 8th worldwide in defense spending as a percentage of GDP. I agree that there is plenty of room for cuts in DOD. We pay out a lot on lazy contractors for example. The global obligations of the US military require lots of money. What other countries spend on defense has nothing to do with what this country has to spend in order to protect itself.

No fair salt, ganging up on me with truthmatters like that. You two are an awesome force.

If the cuts in military spending discourage our government from engaging in such counterproductive military adventures as Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan and concentrates our military resources on defense rather than unnecessary aggression we might finally attain some much-needed control over the Military Industrial Complex.

Also, no one seems to know just how many U.S. military bases there are around the world. I have read estimates (estimates!) as low as 600 and as high as 1,000+. Even if the lowest number is true that in itself is ominous portent that we are following in the footsteps of Ancient Rome! While I'm not suggesting we pull in the gangplank and become isolationist -- let's be simply reasonable.

 

[old navy]

US will have the smallest army since 1940

Smalest navy since 1915

Smallest AF ever

Per Leon Panetta - Sec of Defense

You wouldn't have a link on that would you?

Sounds made up

Ditto.

There are numerous sources with the secretary's comments. Check out number 7 on this one.

Ten Things to Know About the Coming Defense Cuts - Battleland - TIME.com