DoD Budget Cuts, an Outsider's Perspective

[nick4060]

Not surprisingly, I've seen a lot of complaints about budget cuts on this site and other sites I peruse as part of my work to monitor the pulse of individuals involved in the military.

Here's the pulse of one individual currently involved in the military...I'm disappointed that someone on SASC is getting paid by the taxpayers to "peruse" websites that exist to help high schoolers with their applications to the service academies and ROTC programs. I'd rather see that money spent on a few more flight hours per year for my squadron.

I'm sure there is no shortage of web forums dedicated to blaming the world's problems on the radical Tea Party boogeymen. Maybe some of those would be more appropriate for the type of discussion you're interested in having.

 

[LineInTheSand]

Here's the pulse of one individual currently involved in the military...I'm disappointed that someone on SASC is getting paid by the taxpayers to "peruse" websites that exist to help high schoolers with their applications to the service academies and ROTC programs. I'd rather see that money spent on a few more flight hours per year for my squadron.

I'm sure there is no shortage of web forums dedicated to blaming the world's problems on the radical Tea Party boogeymen. Maybe some of those would be more appropriate for the type of discussion you're interested in having.

I can think of one Obama administration website Meteor won't be perusing!

 

[pointguard]

I find your ridculous

analogy and argument(s), along with arrogance, to be exactly in line with that same line of thinking as your Boss. That's how this Administration has stayed in power with a pass from the press. Go away, go back to where your faceless world of no-consequences lie, while lying and spending other people's money on yourselves is a way of life. What you do is not honorable in my view. Again, imo you do not belong here. The people on here are doer's, not takers. Their mission of trying to help the next generation to continue to provide you and your's with the freedom to do what you do is the mission here. Don't creep it up with your intrusion.

 

[Pima]

meteor,

You have a right to your opinion, just like all of us here, and my opinion is you like to insult the other side, but want us to listen to you.

The road goes both ways, so please knock it off with insults and give some respect to those that vote for a party you happen to believe is filled with knuckle dragging elected officials driving around DC in clown cars.

The fact is our political world is entrenched and neither side is going to give in anytime soon, especially when political staffers like you say such things openly on a forum. You have only reinforced my beliefs that the world will remain entrench.

Your boss is no better than those knuckle draggers, because the fact is they will flip their position just as quick. Harry Reid only a few yrs ago when they didn't have control demanded that the filibuster rule needed to stay in place. Now, he wants it gone. HMMM!

How about Medicare reform, the left was against, but now because of ACA they use it as a success story.

Our President was against raising the Debt Ceiling, but now he's for it! HMMM!

We can throw stones at each other's glass house all day long.

For example.

It seems the favorite newspaper to leak to is the WSJ,hmm what a coincidence? I guess the point would be, if you're going to leak do it when both parties are in power.

Gee and the Dems never do this at all to support their positions? Can we admit that MSNBC is on speed dial, along with other major organizations, or did you forget that it came out in the news yrs ago how ABC's George Stephanopolis had weekly conference calls with our POTUS?

I am not saying that Tony Snow was not on Bush43's speed dial. Just saying it works both ways.

The way budgets are traditionally done is that both Houses pass a budget that goes to conference. The conference report is subject to an up or down vote in each House

Thanks for the APGOV lesson! I did not know that because I watch shows like Fox Sunday, and Wolf Blitzer, they never discuss that at all.

FYI, before you think I am one party only, I am not. My main objective now is voting out any and all incumbent, Washington needs to be sent a very loud signal that this partisanship by people on the Hill will no longer be tolerated.

 

[LineInTheSand]

What you have here is a Hill staffer, got a BA from American in basket weaving, spent a year as an intern, now some low level phone answerer, who "knows" what it's all about by reading Politico and watching Rachel Maddow.

And like I said, it's always fun to hear them talk (in only they could afford to live on the Blue line). Best look on the Green or Red lines.... there are plenty listen to (and they love to talk, especially about what they've heard (but pass off as an original thought)).


But what you REALLY don't want to assume is they know ANYTHING about the White House. Want to see Hart or Russell, OK, call them. Want them to talk about anything else in Washington? You're better off reading for yourself. All they know is what they hear at happy hours.

And this is when you start realizing how think the knowledge really is in Washington. It's sad. I mean it. It's even a little scary. The proof is here, for all to see, and this realization may have been one of the most useful things Meteor has done in his short time in D.C., in an official capacity.

 

[scoutpilot]

Meteor quoted Krugman. I bet he thinks Malcolm Gladwell is a paradigm-shifting journalist, too.

Some of us wondered where was such clairvoyance or reticence to get involved in foreign missions when the prior Administration was selling the Iraqi invasion.

Actually if you recall Shinseki was made head of the VA by the current administration. And what happened to Shinseki was exactly my point. That was done by the prior Administration, not Congress or our party. Why didn't the rest of the officers stand up for him and say he was telling the truth instead of letting him hang out to dry? Congressmen are said to be disloyal opportunists but... The administration could have marginalized one person, but if so many generals came out in opposition at the same time, it would have forced the Administration to rethink or abandon its agenda.

So just to summarize...

1. You claim that "we" (i.e. your party) wondered where the clairvoyance was before Iraq.

2. You acknowledge the military did offer Congress the very clairvoyance you say you sought, from the HIGHEST RANKING OFFICER IN THE ARMY. No one but the civil leadership can hang him out to dry, because he is the top of the Army food chain. His word IS the Army's stance.

3. You gloss over the fact that you, as a Congress (not you, personally, since I'm fairly certain you were about 13 or 14 when this all happened) ignored the "clairvoyant" prediction of the General.

4. You point out that your party (not you, since at best you're a scut-worker for a no-name legislator, or a pretender on the internet) gave Shinseki a job, as though that somehow addresses the fact that you're so out of touch with the military, history, and foreign policy reality in general that you don't even remember that the military tried to tell every last swinging richard in Congress that the plan was crap.

Congratulations, you are a curious, if inconsequential, cog in the echo machine. Have you ever even been to any of these places about which you're supposedly so vitally involved in fixing as a staffer? Do you know ANYTHING about the military? At all?

Please stop talking. Congress looks bad enough already. They don't need your help.

 

[raimius]

We get it! Republicans are knuckle-dragging, hypocritical, tea party, neoconservative, etc., etc.; while the Democrats are good, but not responsible for anything bad happening.
If I wanted that play-by-play, I'd be watching MSNBC or reading HuffPo (or Krugman).

It's no wonder Congress gets a bad rap when those involved can't stop calling each other names at the school-yard level for five whole minutes! Seriously, listen to yourselves sometime. My high school had more mature debates.

"There's no such thing as Congress. There's two separate parties on Capitol Hill with very little overlap in constituencies that barely socialize or talk with each other."
"how can you run for re-elect after cutting a deal with the devil?"
I don't know whether to laugh or cry anymore.
_______________

On budgets, America never practices Keynesianism. We deficit spend like mad when we feel like it, and find things to spend all our money on when times are good.

Want to reduce the DoD budget? Write a new National Defense Strategy, renege on a couple dozen treaties, and start ONLY defending US soil. The cost savings would be immense. Alternatively, would you rather continue protecting all our allies, delivering aid to foreign hurricane victims, keep peacekeepers in places like Kosovo, and retain the ability to conduct multiple major wars simultaneously?

 

[Pima]

Nick,

Wouldn't you love that job? Report to work and surf the net all day long, than come back to your boss and say the military is mad at us for cutting things that they need to be mission ready because we couldn't play nice with the other side.

I am sure it is followed up with, we need to get our message out that it is the other side.

I swear the Hill is worse than my kids when they were 4,6 and 8....but Mom he started it, meanwhile their fight caused my favorite vase to be broken and I am left with the job of living without it as they go on and forget why the fight started anyway.

Meteor,

How would you classify your job? I would classify it as R & D. How do you feel about cutting your job like you propose for our military. We have 400+ MOCs. That could be 400 jobs we could get rid of to save taxpayer dollars, even at 50K a yr. we are talking a nice chunk annually.

My DS,(AF O1 at UPT), in college interned for a Sen. He didn't get paid. I am sure he is tech savvy enough to peruse the web.

Please don't cry me a river about the staffers not getting paid a lot, because I know what his job, and others was. It was getting the coffee, answering phones, making copies, and collating whatever they asked. Staffers have a pretty cushy job compared to the corporate world or the military. They never have to do more with less.

Again, just saying before you throw a stone make sure your house isn't made of glass too.

 

[LineInTheSand]

"There's no such thing as Congress.

Is this where I bring up the Constitution, or will Meteor be able to visit the National Archive on a fun field trip (it's not THAT far from the Hill).

 

[Bullet]

In the immortal words of Ron Burgundy: "Well, THAT escalated quickly!"

Meteor, this has turned into a rather interesting conversation, hasn't it? Perhaps a little more than was intended when your Senator's CoS came to you and told you to "check out the internet sites the military folks hang out on and get their pulse on things like the budget". I get it, you're young, a zealot for your party and your cause, and you've got perhaps your first big "important task" and you want to do it right.

So, my first piece of advice for you: going onto military sites with a message of "all these problems you folks are complaiing about are really the fault of the other guy, and your fault as well" is probably not a good starting point. But hey, based on the bubble you live in as part of the Hill, I get how things typically work in your neck of the woods, and why your typical response is: it's someone else's fault.

Which brings me to my second piece of advice, and your actual request: You want to get a feel for the pulse of military folks? Well, one we don't accept excuses for failure, usually because the stakes are too high and we won't tolerate those among us who use them. The military is RESULTS oriented, perhaps something the folks in your world don't understand. Most military members feel that the folks on the Hill treat EVERYTHING as some political game, where results don't matter but passing blame is key. Your responses to my original questions prove my point: I ask how we can work together, and your response is "it's your (or the other party's) fault. We don't want to hear WHY THE TOILET IS BROKE, we want to hear how Congress (our Nation's plumber) IS GOING TO FIX IT. That is YOUR job; ours is simply to ensure the Nation's security.

This is the pulse of the average military person: they want to have the tools necessary to ensure they can get their job done. They want to know what their civilian leadership is going to do to fix the problems they have in this area. And THEY DON'T WANT EXCUSES . They're tired of watching the clown act and political theater that is our current political system and they want BOTH SIDES to put aside the petty tit-for-tat and solve something for once.

I think the real issue is that you don't trust the military because you don't UNDERSTAND the military. It simply doesn't fit into the dialogue you have at your cocktail parties and Georgetown watering holes. Your incompetence must therefore somehow be OUR fault, because we don't play YOUR games according to YOUR rules.

I appreciate your attempt to open the dialogue with us on the issues. But you are now talking OVER us instead of talking TO US, and that is a shame. You want to know a Pentagon insider's thoughts on the budget? Well, here it is:

- We get that our budget needs to come down. But we also think the ENTIRE budget, both discretionary and non-discretionary, needs to be reduced to really address the current fiscal problems this country faces. This will take courage, which is something our Congress DOES NOT have (your reply to my call for reducing benefits is a glaring example of this). You call this "Tea-Party knuckle dragging". We call it "common sense". There is a reason the Tea Party came into power (and it isn't the trite "because of the Koch brothers" partisan talking point the Dems choose to explain as the reason). The majority of Americans want solutions, and the current political establishment was too engrossed in staying in power to provide them. I agree with you that some of the Tea-Party can be extreme and somewhat scary (I refuse to vote for them), but I can see why they became a valid choice for so many. Ignore the sentiments that put them into power at the peril of your job security.

- We want to reduce the military's budget SMARTLY. The first step to this is to tell us what YOU want us to accomplish. GIVE US A REALISTIC NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY. For too long, this has been "be ready to do anything and everything, because you will be our "go to" solution for most international issues. We CAN do that, but this costs A LOT of money. Don't give us that type of guidance, and then tells us we need to do it for less. It doesn't work that way, and you know it (but are too scared of staying inpower to do anything about it).

- Despite what you see in your job interacting with the military, the VAST majority of us are NOT what you see from us daily. Quite the opposite actually. You rub shoulders with military men and women who have to play your games because that is life in the Beltway. It' spart of their job, and most of us can't WAIT to get out of the Beltway and back to reality (I was an exception). Get yourself to a base or post away from the Beltway and you'll see things a little differently.

- You may think you really know what is important and how the military works. Hint: you DON'T. Not by a long shot. And if you want to know our pulse, don't go walking into our workplace and telling us we don't know our jobs and you do. I will say that the opposite is also true: we really don't know and understand your world. You just don't find us telling you how to do your job. Take our advise on what is best for the military and actually LISTEN to it, because right now you have no interest in that, as you feel you know better.

- Trust goes two ways. You say you don't trust us anymore. Well, the feeling is mutual. THIS is a problem we both need to work on, and shouting at each other on whose fault it is doesn't help solve it. Go out of your way and find a military person whose opinion you DO trust. Get to know him / her. You'll find that what you think is important to the military isn't important to them. This is a start.

These are just a few small, but important, steps in getting to know "the pulse of the military". I suggest you restart your thread in a new vein to get that "pulse", and this time don't start with "it's your fault".

 

[goaliedad]

What an INTERESTING thread...

A purported staffer comes out and kicks off his posting by starting a food fight...

And if said OP is a staffer, they really have no business posting this thread here under the terms of the site. This site is not about polling military related people for non-SA/ROTC purposes.

Furthermore, this seems more like a trolling, given the stated background and defense of positions than an honest polling of the pulse of this population.

This thread isn't about SA or ROTC or even specific military issues that might affect the careers of SA or ROTC cadets or their families - it is about politics. And I don't think anyone here is going to have their political views changed by this discussion, nor even their world view enlarged. Time for this to be shut down...

Where are the mods when this thread and its OP need some moderating?

 

[raimius]

I think Bullet hit on something sadly lacking in most people. We need to be able to put ourselves in other people's shoes.

The Rancher in southwest Texas is likely to have different experiences, needs, and priorities than the accountant in Silver Springs, MD. Correspondingly, they'll probably have different solutions to our collective problems. Each may have excellent reasons, but they arrive via VERY different methods.

Let's look at WHY we choose certain methods, not just focus on how the "other" side doesn't fit with our ideas.


Example:
Gun control is a hot topic for many people. If you are an urban dweller with no real hunting or competition experience, you'll probably see guns as either a defensive weapon or the tool of thugs and murderers. If you grew up with guns as a tool for hunting or sporting purposes, you'll probably view them as something much more decent than a murder weapon. In an odd in-between, those who carry guns for law and order or protection probably view them as a weapon which can be used equally to protect or assault. When you think about those different experiences and expectations, is it any wonder why one group would suggest armed security after school shootings, another group would suggest bans and registration, and yet others just want their hobby left alone?

 

[meteor]

Here's the pulse of one individual currently involved in the military...I'm disappointed that someone on SASC is getting paid by the taxpayers to "peruse" websites that exist to help high schoolers with their applications to the service academies and ROTC programs. I'd rather see that money spent on a few more flight hours per year for my squadron.
.

I wonder if someone is parsing my OP too much or being deliberately daft. This post is outside of my official capacity and my personal viewpoint. Scanning websites may be something done for like 30 minutes or up to an hour a week, so give me a break if you think tax dollars are going to check websites.

 

[meteor]

meteor,



Your boss is no better than those knuckle draggers, because the fact is they will flip their position just as quick. Harry Reid only a few yrs ago when they didn't have control demanded that the filibuster rule needed to stay in place. Now, he wants it gone. HMMM!

How about Medicare reform, the left was against, but now because of ACA they use it as a success story.

Our President was against raising the Debt Ceiling, but now he's for it! HMMM!


For example.

Gee and the Dems never do this at all to support their positions? Can we admit that MSNBC is on speed dial, along with other major organizations, or did you forget that it came out in the news yrs ago how ABC's George Stephanopolis had weekly conference calls with our POTUS?

I am not saying that Tony Snow was not on Bush43's speed dial. Just saying it works both ways.




Thanks for the APGOV lesson! I did not know that because I watch shows like Fox Sunday, and Wolf Blitzer, they never discuss that at all.

FYI, before you think I am one party only, I am not. My main objective now is voting out any and all incumbent, Washington needs to be sent a very loud signal that this partisanship by people on the Hill will no longer be tolerated.

So, some of these comments don't merit a response because it can be easily rebutted (like the stuff on the debt ceiling and the fillibuster), but no one said both parties play the leak game. Of course they do, I am specifically referring to the DoD using that tactic to undermine the Executive Branch (at least when one party is in power)

In your initial point on this thread, you made a comment about job loss from cutting into DoD spending. Why doesn't that logic apply to any spending? Do you have any academic support for this type of Weaponized Keynesianism?

 

[meteor]

We get it! Republicans are knuckle-dragging, hypocritical, tea party, neoconservative, etc., etc.; while the Democrats are good, but not responsible for anything bad happening.
If I wanted that play-by-play, I'd be watching MSNBC or reading HuffPo (or Krugman).

It's no wonder Congress gets a bad rap when those involved can't stop calling each other names at the school-yard level for five whole minutes! Seriously, listen to yourselves sometime. My high school had more mature debates.

"There's no such thing as Congress. There's two separate parties on Capitol Hill with very little overlap in constituencies that barely socialize or talk with each other."
"how can you run for re-elect after cutting a deal with the devil?"
I don't know whether to laugh or cry anymore.
_______________

On budgets, America never practices Keynesianism. We deficit spend like mad when we feel like it, and find things to spend all our money on when times are good.

Want to reduce the DoD budget? Write a new National Defense Strategy, renege on a couple dozen treaties, and start ONLY defending US soil. The cost savings would be immense. Alternatively, would you rather continue protecting all our allies, delivering aid to foreign hurricane victims, keep peacekeepers in places like Kosovo, and retain the ability to conduct multiple major wars simultaneously?

Although it's slightly OT, this isn't a partisan thing. Even before the GOP government shutdown debacle, many Republicans and their staffers have been irked by the tactics and viewpoints of the Tea Party. Everyone loves McCain and he's been a tougher critic of these folks than the Dems.

In regard to "deal with the devil" we had a sitting Senator, tea-tard and member of the Armed Services Committee speak and attend at a rally where one of the speakers said the President should "put the Quran down" and called for an uprising to eject the President from the White House . (dot) huffingtonpost com/2013/10/13/larry-klayman-obama-quran_n_4094589.html Oh, and you don't have to trust the "liberal media" you can see that speech for yourself online, it was taped! And you can see the Congressmen right there listening to it.

I would like for you or anyone else to explain how you can come together and negotiate with a clown like this? By definition, you can't negotiate with someone who's trying to plan a coup d'teat.

 

[Idzak]

Meteor,
Thank you for post and providing bait for the SAF ad hominem experts.

“Ad hominem reasoning is normally categorized as an informal fallacy, more precisely as a genetic fallacy, a subcategory of fallacies of irrelevance.”

 

[meteor]

Btw, I think the big issue is lost here and why I wanted to post. Let me condense it.

A great majority of officers vote it in the hard-right Tea Party in 2010. >This leads to deficit reduction which inevitably whacks the military hard > Said officers complain about it even though they voted in the Hobbit warriors.

I think some of the ad hominem attacks I've recieved in response is because the criticism probably hit too close to home for some.

I had to create an account to say that because I find the unmitigated gall surrounding such complaints ridiculous.

As for Bullet's comments, all of this stuff about Congress coming together is a cliche. This isn't the military. Congressmen don't give orders to each other, there isn't some kind of hierarchy, I mean sure there's party leadership, but Ted Cruz doesn't get court-martialed for thumbing his nose at McConnell.

 

[trackandfield08]

Btw, I think the big issue is lost here and why I wanted to post. Let me condense it.

A great majority of officers vote it in the hard-right Tea Party in 2010. >This leads to deficit reduction which inevitably whacks the military hard > Said officers complain about it even though they voted in the Hobbit warriors.

I think some of the ad hominem attacks I've recieved in response is because the criticism probably hit too close to home for some.

I had to create an account to say that because I find the unmitigated gall surrounding such complaints ridiculous.

As for Bullet's comments, all of this stuff about Congress coming together is a cliche. This isn't the military. Congressmen don't give orders to each other, there isn't some kind of hierarchy, I mean sure there's party leadership, but Ted Cruz doesn't get court-martialed for thumbing his nose at McConnell.

I attempted to sit here and think of an intelligent response but (a) I decided I didn't want to waste my time because everyone else is already pointing out the flaws (and have much more experience than I do) and (b) all I could think about was this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhDSdu4hHYM

If I am banned for this, it was worth it.

 

[Jcleppe]

Well this was sure entertaining to read.

My guess, the OP is about 19 or 20, possibly an intern, at least I hope I'm right or the level of communication skills from paid staff is far less then I thought.

Careful speaking for the majority of officer's voting records, though I did enjoy the reference to the Hobbit.

Tea-tard was my favorite though.

Makes you wonder what some schools teach in English 101.

 

[Idzak]

"May God have mercy on your soul"