Meat Axe on Defense

[Navy1960]

In the midst of the most dynamic and complex security environment in recent memory, sequestration would severely diminish America’s global posture. An additional 100,000 soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airmen would be separated from service. Those reductions would lead to:
 The smallest ground force since 1940
 A fleet of fewer than 230 ships, the smallest level since 1915
 The smallest tactical fighter force in the history of the Air Force

http://armedservices.house.gov/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=eded5e34-f515-44e5-825f-9ff6fb746426

As we all know or at least, let's hope most know the looming cuts in the Defense budget are at hand as a result of both parties unable once again not being able to agree on budget matters. Now that it is at hand those who knew this was about to happen seem have a collective memory lapse, and seem to see this as a plot from only one side of the Isle. That said, this Meat Axe approach to Defense is complete nonsense and as can be seen will have results that will impact this nation not only in defense but also in the private sector in terms of jobs and the economy, which everyone can agree is not a good time to lose even more jobs. While it is true our nation spends more than the next 10 nations combined in defense spending and there is a large need in Defense for a top to bottom review of how DOD conducts its procruement and it's my contention that it's there that Defense will find massive savings in how it spends money as well as a world wide reduction in deployment in places that this nation does not need to be in the business of protecting. Take for example, Western Europe, France, Germany, etc. why do you suppose that nations like France can lower their retirement age while at the same time we are making plans to raise ours? , could it be because they do not have to share the burden of their own defense needs? because our nation has been shouldering that burden since the end of WW2? Still further, take any number of programs in Defense, such as the F-35, which was intended to be a low cost alternative to the F-22, and replace existing fighters in the Navy, Air Force, Marines, and many other nations and offer a common platform. the only problem is that after years and years in development and billions in cost overruns, the F-35 is approaching the original cost of the F22 now and frankly I find it more than entertaining when those in congress harp on money lost by companies like Solyndra, etc. when contractors in Defense have lost over the years a 100 times more than that. In fact there is 53 Billion dollars missing from the funds to rebuild Iraq.

So in conclusion this Meat Axe approach, at least in my humble opinion is not only a terrible mistake, but it also represents a lazy Congress unwilling to do what is needed to actually fix a long needed fix in Defense and bring to the warfighter the tools they deserve to protect this nation and be good stewards of American tax dollars. Take your pick on what party you want to lay the blame for this to, but last I checked both parties signed up for this deal and both parties now hold responsibility for the consequences of it's implementation.

 

[Big Black Dog]

In an effort to cut back on expenses, I expect the military to do away with uniforms any day now...

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

In an effort to cut back on expenses, I expect the military to do away with uniforms any day now...

Soldiers will now be required to procure their own uniform and weapon from a private company...but it must be a private company on a list of campaign contributors approved by the obama admin .

If they don't they will face increased taxes.

^ no this isn't a stretch, after all obamacare and the supreme court has set this precedence

 

[onecut39]

In an effort to cut back on expenses, I expect the military to do away with uniforms any day now...

We could cut the defense budget in half and still spend more than any other country in the world.

Our military hardware gleams as our country crumbles.

 

[waltky]

House passes $700 Billion Defense Bill...

House Votes Overwhelmingly to Pass $700 Billion Defense Bill
14 Nov 2017 | WASHINGTON -- Once the Senate approves the measure, which is expected , the bill will be sent to President Donald Trump for his signature.

House Republicans and Democrats joined forces Tuesday to decisively approve a defense policy bill that authorizes $700 billion to restock what lawmakers have described as a depleted U.S. military and counter North Korea's advancing nuclear weapons program. Lawmakers voted 356-70 to pass the legislation, with 127 Democrats backing the measure. Once the defense bill clears the Senate, which is expected this week, the bill will be sent to President Donald Trump for his signature. The defense bill for the 2018 fiscal year allots some $634 billion for core Pentagon operations and nearly $66 billion for wartime missions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and elsewhere. The funding boost pays for more troops, jet fighters, ships and other weapons needed to halt an erosion of the military's combat readiness, according to the bill's backers. Trump's 2018 request sought $603 billion for basic functions and $65 billion for overseas missions. But securing the higher amounts remains contingent upon Congress reaching an agreement to roll back a 2011 law that set strict limits on most federal spending. That's a lot harder than it sounds, however. Lifting the budget caps will face resistance from Democrats who also are seeking to increase the budgets for domestic agencies.

Rep. Adam Smith of Washington, the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, voted for the bill while also criticizing Congress for refusing to come to grips with its out-of-control approach to budgeting. Smith said it's inconsistent for Republicans to push for billions of dollars more in defense spending while also advocating tax overhaul legislation that will deepen federal deficits over the next decade. Even if Congress had a "fit of fiscal responsibility" and decided to raise revenue instead of cutting it, Smith said, "we're still looking at needs within the national security budget ... that are wildly beyond the amount of money that we have." Republicans insist tax cuts will essentially pay for themselves by spurring economic growth. But the Armed Services Committee chairman, Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, urged his colleagues to focus on the military's immediate and substantial needs. "It is morally wrong to send men and women out on missions with our military, for which they are not fully supported, fully trained, (and) equipped with the best equipment our country can provide," he said.

An American flag flies over Capitol Hill in Washington.​

The defense legislation includes $12.3 billion for the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency and orders a more rapid buildup of the nation's missile defenses as Pyongyang has refused to back away from developing nuclear missiles capable of striking the United States. The bill includes money for as many as 28 additional Ground-Based Interceptors, which are anti-missile missiles that would be launched from underground silos in Alaska in the event the U.S. decided to try to shoot down a North Korean missile heading toward the United States. The interceptors are designed to directly hit the enemy missile outside the Earth's atmosphere, obliterating it by the force of impact. Lawmakers also have required Defense Secretary Jim Mattis to develop a plan for increasing the overall number of so-called GBIs from 44 to 104. The bill also directs the Pentagon to procure more ship-based interceptors and missiles for the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, or THAAD, a U.S. mobile anti-missile system.

North Korea's U.N. ambassador, Ja Song Nam, said in a letter Monday to Secretary-General Antonio Gutteres that the unprecedented deployment of three U.S. aircraft carrier groups "taking up a strike posture" around the Korean peninsula has made it impossible to predict when nuclear war will break out. The carriers are participating in joint naval exercises with North Korea. "The large-scale nuclear war exercises and blackmails, which the U.S. staged for a whole year without a break in collaboration with its followers to stifle our republic, make one conclude that the option we have taken was the right one and we should go along the way to the last," Ja's letter reads.

The policy bill also grants U.S. troops a 2.4 percent pay raise, which is slightly higher than the wage increase the Pentagon had proposed. Lawmakers also approved an increase of more than 20,000 active-duty and reserve troops from last year's level. The Army gets the largest boost and will receive 7,500 more active-duty Army soldiers and 1,000 additional reserve troops. The defense bill provides money for 90 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, 20 more than Trump asked for, as well as 24 F/A-18 Super Hornet jet fighters, 10 more than requested. The budget also includes three Littoral Combat Ships, two beyond the budget request. The ships are new to the fleet and operate in congested areas near the shore against small boats and mines.

House Votes Overwhelmingly to Pass $700 Billion Defense Bill | Military.com