Senate Armed Services Panel Resists Defense Cuts

Modbert

Daydream Believer
Sep 2, 2008
33,178
3,055
48
CQ Politics | Senate Armed Services Panel Resists Defense Cuts

Members of the Senate Armed Services Committee are resisting the idea that defense spending cuts should be part of an effort to curb the budget deficit.

During a Tuesday hearing, a bipartisan chorus of the panel’s more conservative members applauded a blue-ribbon defense review group’s conclusion that Pentagon spending should increase, not decline, in the years ahead.

That recommendation came from the Quadrennial Defense Review Independent Panel, which Congress created last year to provide a bipartisan assessment of the Pentagon’s 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review, a congressionally mandated study of defense plans and resources.

The panel’s chairmen — William J. Perry, a Defense secretary under President Bill Clinton, and Stephen J. Hadley , a national security adviser to President George W. Bush — presented their findings at Tuesday’s hearing, six days after a similar presentation to the House Armed Services Committee.

The fiscal 2011 Defense budget request of about $549 billion is, even after adjusting for inflation, the largest since World War II — and that’s not even counting the additional $158.1 billion request for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the coming fiscal year. But Perry and Hadley warned that this sum and the projected growth — which barely exceeds the rate of inflation — is insufficient to pay for everything the country has asked the Pentagon to do.

Fiscal responsibility at it's finest! Thoughts USMB?
 
Why would anyone expect fiscal responsibility from a bunch of Democrats?

Did you not read the article?

Members of the Senate Armed Services Committee are resisting the idea that defense spending cuts should be part of an effort to curb the budget deficit.

During a Tuesday hearing, a bipartisan chorus of the panel’s more conservative members applauded a blue-ribbon defense review group’s conclusion that Pentagon spending should increase, not decline, in the years ahead.

Committee on Armed Services
 
Do you not realize that the Democrats control that committee, just like they control every other part of Congress? They are all politicians, and fiscal responsibility is not something they understand. Since the Democrats on the board are going to blame the Republicans for this, despite the fact that the committee could easily pass the defense budget Obama, a Democrat, and Gates, a Republican, are asking for even if every Republican on that committee voted against it. I am just preempting their position.
 
Do you not realize that the Democrats control that committee, just like they control every other part of Congress? They are all politicians, and fiscal responsibility is not something they understand. Since the Democrats on the board are going to blame the Republicans for this, despite the fact that the committee could easily pass the defense budget Obama, a Democrat, and Gates, a Republican, are asking for even if every Republican on that committee voted against it. I am just preempting their position.

Nobody said the defense cuts didn't go into place or still aren't. In reality, the more conservative members including both Dems and likely most of the Republicans still don't want the defense cuts. Which is why I said fiscal responsible my ass.
 
Defense review calls for Navy buildup
(...) The report by (...) former White House National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley and former Defense Secretary William Perry (...) calls for expanding the Navy from its current fleet of 282 ships to 346 ships. (...)

Defense review calls for Navy buildup - Washington Times

Who can tell me just how many ships is enough to protect the United States? 346 ships? For WHAT??? We can't even build a fucking fence on our southern border, but we can build 346 US military grade warships? REALLY?
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top