Defense Official: Obama Calling for Defense Budget Cuts

CAN YOU NAME THIS COUNTRY ? Be sure to read to the end...

~709,000 REGULAR (ACTIVE DUTY) PERSONNEL.

~293,000 RESERVE TROOPS.

~EIGHT STANDING ARMY DIVISIONS.

~20 AIR FORCE AND NAVY AIR WINGS WITH 2,000 COMBAT AIRCRAFT.

~232 STRATEGIC BOMBERS.

~19 STRATEGIC BALLISTIC MISSILE SUBMARINES WITH 3,114 NUCLEAR WARHEADS ON 232 MISSILES.

~500 ICBMs WITH 1,950 WARHEADS.

~FOUR AIRCRAFT CARRIERS AND 121 SURFACE COMBAT SHIPS AND SUBMARINES PLUS ALL THE SUPPORT BASES, SHIPYARDS, AND LOGISTICAL ASSETS NEEDED TO SUSTAIN SUCH A NAVAL FORCE.

~IS THIS COUNTRY.....

RUSSIA? NO

CHINA? NO

GREAT BRITAN? NO

FRANCE? WRONG AGAIN ( What a Laugh!!!!!)

MUST BE USA ? STILL WRONG (SORT OF)

GIVE UP ?

THESE ARE THE AMERICAN MILITARY FORCES THAT WERE ELIMINATED DURING THE ADMINISTRATION OF BILL CLINTON AND AL GORE.

But it seems like there is a pretty good case for having done that - During the Clinton administration didn't the Cold War as a justification pretty much evaporate? The Soviet Union wss gone by 1993- so who would all of those ICBMs, SLBMs and Air craft carriers target? What would those 20 wings have done since 1993- certainly they wouldn't have changed the equation one bit in any of the conflicts we have been involved in to date. I mean we've been at war for 7-1/2 years- I have yet to see anyone suggest that we have a threat anywhere that would call into question our aerospace or maritime dominance and when they talk about exhausting the force- it's the Army and the Marine Corps - not the really big ticket items that are worn out. So if none of those folks are peer competitors - then wasn't eliminating all that the right thing to do and what's the justification for not cutting the Defense procurement budget if there is no one who can touch us now or in the next 10 years? So who is the threat on the immediate horizon that justifies the F22 when the F35 is coming right behind it? Our most immediate threats are Iran and North Korea- do we think that they will justify unlimited expenditures on hardware? Life is about priorities and accepting calculated risk in some areas -it seems to me that the DoD budget faces that reality as well.
 
Iran and Korea are laughable jokes. The real threat is CHINA. Oh yeah CHINA. When they close the panama canal to US ships, and attempt to collect on opour debt CHINA. Be clear they didn't build ultra quiet subs, and increase the standing Army force numbers for nothing. When the march across and swallow Tiawan we will have nothing to say. When they decide the Pacific is their empire right up to California, we will have nothing to say.

Oh and those pesky little Russians are still hanging around waiting for a moment to rise again too. They both use Iran and Korea to distract from their objectives. Those cuts will be regretted and so will the ones that are about to occur. The difference is we had a nation that would come together in the 1990's. Today the average fat american family is so divorced from the defense of this nation they think an "I Support the Troops" bumper sticker has real meaning.
 
Iran and Korea are laughable jokes. The real threat is CHINA. Oh yeah CHINA. When they close the panama canal to US ships, and attempt to collect on opour debt CHINA. Be clear they didn't build ultra quiet subs, and increase the standing Army force numbers for nothing. When the march across and swallow Tiawan we will have nothing to say. When they decide the Pacific is their empire right up to California, we will have nothing to say.

Oh and those pesky little Russians are still hanging around waiting for a moment to rise again too. They both use Iran and Korea to distract from their objectives. Those cuts will be regretted and so will the ones that are about to occur. The difference is we had a nation that would come together in the 1990's. Today the average fat american family is so divorced from the defense of this nation they think an "I Support the Troops" bumper sticker has real meaning.
I think I will disagree with you. :smile:

China...is not a "real military threat" to the USA for several reasons:

a. WHAT would they gain?
b. They are on their way to becoming a "global peer" through economics. Do you realize that NO nation has EVER become a global peer without military conflict? They're well on their way to doing it
c. They have WAAAAY too much to lose with a military conflict with anyone that can hurt them either economically or militarily: a military conflict would bring into question their governmental system to their people; something they really do NOT want to do
d. Taiwan...okay, to play devil's advocate: so what? What would the world lose if Taiwan became a "real" part of China? Remember Hong Kong? Did the world's economy collapse because the "red star" flew over HK? No. Will it? No. China has TOO much to gain by keeping it as is; separate and different.

FYI...we have been "at war" with China for perhaps 20 years in an economic sense, and we're losing it big time.

No, I don't fear a military "global conflict" with China...I think we're going to be fighting these little "small regional" wars... :frown:
 
Heres what I think. Russia is gonna attack Isreal. WE are gonna sit by and watch, because Obama is gonna downsize our military, and our economy is gonna be so bad, no one will want to stand up for them.
 
I can respect your positions Fleiger. I don't believe China really wants to use their military against us. They take a very long veiw and would favor never firing a shot. Point is the Chinese see all Asia as their empire, and the long held conflict between the Chinese and Japanese is still a sore spot. There are a lot of very old Chinese guys who still remember what happened in WWII. Not wanting to go into the dark night quietly.

The regional stuff just keeps us off balance and chasing fires like halloween night in Detroit.
 
ds52262, first an observation. Armed Forces end strengths out of the Clinton Administration were exactly what Bush 1 and his JCS, Gen Powell proposed.

Secondly, let's start on the remainder of your accusations. List the FOUR carriers that the Clinton administration did away with. USS America doesn't count since it had already been scheduled for razor blades.
 
Last edited:
These were long term planned decommissionings due to both force reduction and the arrival of the newer Nimitz class carriers. Their Service Life Extension Programs (SLEP) had not been maintained and, should the Clinton Administration have changed the plan, keeping them active would have been cost prohibitive. Extensive post cold war force reduction was well in place before "Clinton/Gore". To somehow attempt to twist this into a present day gloom and doom scenario in order to cause undue concern for present and future cadets and midshipmen is irresponsible.

The following is a good analysis of the bipartisanship of the 1990's force reduction:

http://www.csbaonline.org/4Publicat...ld_War_Defe/H.20000831.Post-Cold_War_Defe.php
 
Hooray! :w00t: Let's cut the Defense budget by 10% but give almost $5 billion to ACORN! :rolleyes:

Remember when reductions in the rate of growth (not real-dollar reductions) were labeled as "draconian cuts"? I wonder if this will be portrayed the same way? :rolleyes:

But hey, this is the NEW America! Remember, we can't crank our thermostats up to 72 degrees in the winter and expect the rest of the world to simply accept it. In the NEW America, it's the President who can crank it to 80 and WE have to just accept it. :rolleyes:

Meanwhile, the NEW era of goodwill was opened by a letter to America's traditional ally, Iran. After eight years of being treated as a pariah by the war-mongering Bush, The Messiah sent them a letter offering to negotiate in good faith. Their response? To publicly laugh in our faces and announce that the letter was a sign of weakness. Yeah! THAT worked well! :rolleyes:

Brace yourself, folks. As already mentioned above, we're about to re-live the glory days of the 1970's all over again. Wonderful!



Oh, and on a different note, I can't help but wonder if we're being visited again by an old departed friend. :rolleyes:

I'm sure that my ship's inability to get underway one an occaision circa 1993 because we had no money for fuel oil was also part of Bush 41's master plan. :bleh2:
 
Last edited:
so I guess early retirements might be being offered again ?!?!
 
...sent them a letter offering to negotiate in good faith. Their response? To publicly laugh in our faces and announce that the letter was a sign of weakness.

"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." -- Winston Churchill
 
so I guess early retirements might be being offered again ?!?!

It wouldn't surprise me.

Same goes with SA graduates being allowed to leave before their commitments are completed.



For the record, I think the Pentagon budget can be cut by far more than 10% without affecting readiness. What seriously ticks me off about this is that, while the rest of the government is being bloated with more spending than any of us can easily wrap our minds around, THIS is the FIRST place the new overlords decide to cut, and cut FOR REAL, not in the usual manner they "cut".

It's so predictable that it would be funny if it weren't so sad and DANGEROUS. How many HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS of dollars could be chopped off the Federal budget in other areas? But NOOOOOOOOOO. We need to cut the MILITARY!! TYPICAL! :mad:

I guess they still support the troops, eh? :rolleyes:
 
Early retirement. I dont think I can even count on retirement anymore. After they get done giving away 700 Billion they may not have enough left to pay retiree's.
 
Interesting discussion -

I wonder how many parents who are military and former military will be advising their children who seek a military career to rethink their goals?
Anyone?

BTW - This should probably go on the Pro/con thread but it got rather convoluted. For Army at least, going ROTC does not guarantee you will get an Active Duty commission - Active Duty slots are competitive and may become increasingly so. You may want Active Duty but may end up in the Reserves. If you go to West Point then you will be commissioned Active Duty.
 
I wonder how many parents who are military and former military will be advising their children who seek a military career to rethink their goals?
Anyone?

My favorite radio personality has a motto that I long ago adopted as one of my own: "My success is not determined by who wins elections."

I would advise those who dream of attending USxA and serving their country in the Armed Forces to go right ahead and DO IT. If you let someone else (especially some dirtbag in Washington) dictate your future, then it wasn't yours to plan anyway.

Got a dream? LIVE IT! Screw the politicians! :mad:
 
I don't think many parents would advise a child to re-think it. I am not. DS wants to serve in the AF, end of subject. If you are a AFROTC scholarship recipient it states for the AF you will serve 5 yrs active duty, they are not put into the reservist component, they just don't get a regular commission. I would bet that they will allow that option if the belt continues to tighten. That option happened only a few yrs ago when they realized that the newly minted capts were too big of a group. I bet scholarships will become harder to come by, and thus less might apply for the free education. Palace Chase will become very popular again, like it was in the late 90's.

It is very easy to reduce it 10%, but like Bullet said, the FY10 had a 10% increase in the budget. All they are going to do is re-submit the FY09.

Cannibalization will become more prevalent, flight hours will be reduced, good deal TDY's will disappear. They may eve go back to homesteading to reduce costs for PCS'ing. Probably will reduce PME in residence also. Also see the BAH lag behind even more than it already does. WIth the housing market so bad, I am sure every post/base this yr will see their BAH drop big time, that alone will save millions. BRAC might also be sped up for anybody on the hit list from the last round 2 yrs ago.

What's really interesting is last week the AF announced that they are asking for flyers who retired to come back in because they have a shortage. Somebody asked Bullet if he was going to do it, short answer no way, we would take a paycut.
 
Last edited:
I didn't spend most of my adult life in the Air Force for the retirement, and would be seriously disappointed if my daughter began her service for a check. In our family it does seem to be the family business, but we raised her to follow her dreams. If she stays for five and dives OK, if she stays for 20 or 30 her choice. She has been given an opportunity to serve her country, and I hope she enjoys it as much as her Parents, Grandparents, Aunts, Uncles, and Cousins have.

That said looking at the things facing our country, and our military I am very concerned about our future. 700 billion dollars is a lot of debt
 
I always say that the military reminds me of a bulemic person. They eat and eat, than all of the sudden they realize it is too much and force themselves to purge. It also seems to be in a set time period, about every 15 yrs. I remember the RIF in 91-92. Young guys were very concerned, the old guys, said well let's hope they don't do it like back in the mid 70's. Guys actually would step out of the jet and be called to the commander and informed you're out. 15 yrs later here we sit again. We will rationalize that we are the greatest military in the world and that we don't need all of these programs. Cut them to the bone, and then several yrs later, we will say crap. The military can cut right now b/c people won't care...any paycheck with less benefits is better than no paycheck. When the economy comes around again, people will leave and you will be left with great military members who are dedicated, but now you need to invest to get it back to the stature it once was.

During the 90's they messed with the retirement pay scales, and when funding opened up they went back to the original plan (20 =50% + 2.5% for ea yr...90's was the high 3)

I am still on the thought that a RIF or less commissioning will happen. Cuts always start with what we can do without...medical benefits will change, housing will change, homesteading might occur, xtraining will be less frequent, bonuses might be changed and places like Shades of Green may be sold off. They mean nothing to the operational world except they can take those funds and divert them to their fiscal budget.
 
They may eve go back to homesteading to reduce costs for PCS'ing.

What does this mean? I don't remember that term from my day.

I suspect I know, but I'll ask anyway. :redface:
 
Back
Top