Presidential Brief today at 1650EST on future military budget and force posture

Discussion in 'Academy/Military News' started by bugsy, Jan 5, 2012.

  1. bugsy

    bugsy Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2010
    Messages:
    202
    Likes Received:
    0
    Today at 1650 (local) President Barack Obama, Secretary of Defense Leon E.
    Panetta and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin E. Dempsey
    will brief the media on future military budget and force posture. Press
    briefing and conference is set to be broadcast on the Pentagon channel.
    Pentagon channel may also stream it live on the web at

    http://www.pentagonchannel.mil/.
     
  2. Pima

    Pima Parent

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2007
    Messages:
    12,809
    Likes Received:
    956
    I saw already on the news about what they expect the administration to say, basically it was exactly what reuters released.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/04/us-usa-military-obama-idUSTRE8031Z020120104

    Even heard that Panetta is expected to say the Army will draw down to 490K troops under this plan.
     
  3. LineInTheSand

    LineInTheSand USCGA 2006

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    8,756
    Likes Received:
    1,004
    It was very uplifting and motivating!

    I especially like being told how many cuts there will be while at the same time being told how much the military will grow and becoming more capable than ever before.

    Please join me later today to celebrate my first 24 hours of life (I was born yesterday).

    Also, I appreciated the snake oil ads in between talking points from Obama and Penetta. I almost bought some, but I didn't have the money because I had to forward it to a Kenyan bank account as I received an email earlier today informing me $1.5 million had been left to me in an overseas account, and all I had to do was transfer some money to free it up.


    :rolleyes:
     
  4. Pima

    Pima Parent

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2007
    Messages:
    12,809
    Likes Received:
    956
    Didn't see it, but LITs you gave me my laugh for the day with...please join me in celebrating your birthday!
     
  5. cisco

    cisco Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Messages:
    142
    Likes Received:
    0
    Happy birthday LITS! It's almost my first birthday too. Can't wait! :biggrin:
     
  6. bruno

    bruno Retired Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    3,001
    Likes Received:
    301
    In todays paper, the editorial board of The Washington Post illuminated perfectly the problems of the Obama Strategy. The entire thing is resting on a very shaky and flawed set of assumptions. "We will not engage in sustained ground combat and stability operations". The last hundred years have seen countless American Politicians making those kind of strategic forecasts- and every time they are wrong, because the threat and circumstances dictate the response needed. Harry Truman said something almost identical in 1949- in 1950 he was at War in Korea. Same could be said for post Korea ("the new look" and "massive retaliation"- and yet by 1964 we were in Vietnam. The "peace Dividend" of the 1990's gave way to an undersized Army and Marine Corps that were cycling troopers repeatedly thru Iraq and Afghanistan- neither Rumsfeld nor Bush started off planning to stick around for 10 years in either Afghanistan or Iraq- but they wound up dealing with a reality of war- It's never what you plan on it being. So the President can put all the lipstick he wants on this pig- but the ugly truth is that his strategy is still fraught with "the future will be what I say it will be" rather than a strategy that is based on the ability to minimize risk and respond to the circumstances as required.
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...nse-strategy/2012/01/06/gIQAKm5pfP_story.html
     
  7. MemberLG

    MemberLG Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    2,807
    Likes Received:
    444
    the strategy could work

    - we "refuse" to get involved in African conflicts
    - Somalia was a quick exit
    - Bonsia and Kosovo were limited involvements scale wise
    - I wouldn't call Egypt and Libya a success, but no ground troops
     
  8. patentesq

    patentesq Parent

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2011
    Messages:
    1,587
    Likes Received:
    0
    Diplomacy is less effective if there is no muscle behind it.
     
  9. NorwichDad

    NorwichDad Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    1,275
    Likes Received:
    212
    My thoughts go to Somalia

    Blackhawk down. When the locals were celebrating and carrying that Helicopters Pilot's body thru the street. Not a damn thing we could do about it. Under strength can lead to trouble. There are crazy people in our world. God loves nuts which is why he made so many of them.
     
  10. NorwichDad

    NorwichDad Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    1,275
    Likes Received:
    212
  11. MemberLG

    MemberLG Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    2,807
    Likes Received:
    444
    Another way to look at it as that diplomacy is less effective if there is no will to back it up with force.

    My two cents, even with the proposed cuts, we will still have enough "muscle" to back up our diplomacy. The question becomes, are we going to use what we have.

    Use Taiwan as an example.

    Can U.S. still send Aircraft Carrier groups even if we cut the number of AC group down to 8?

    Can we suddenly process the arms sales we held up?
     

Share This Page