Military General Advocates Cuts in Military Spending

[J.T]

He claims that while the federal government has increased military spending, it has not increased national security, and such spending only serves to threaten economic security and fiscal sanity: Over the past 10 years, the DOD budget increased from $297 billion to $549 billion, not including the Overseas Contingency Operations, which alone stands at $159 billion for FY11. Even if we factor in inflation, in an era of constant budget deficits, this rate of spending is unsustainable.

Out-of-control defense spending is a major cause for the calamitous state of our overall budget. This threatens the peace and prosperity that responsible national security planning is designed to protect. We cannot allow the Pentagon to continue to spend exorbitant amounts of money without thought to overall strategy or long-term interests.
Adams offers a number of ways in which the military budget can be reduced.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/economy/commentary-mainmenu-43/8829-military-general-advocates-cuts-in-military-spending

I'm sure he's just an anti-american Liberal muzzie lover who wants to make America less safe

[Gunny]

So?

Nice signature. Out of context, but par for the course with you.

[KarlMarx]

More defense budget cuts? Defense has been is being cut over and above the savings that will be realized once the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are over. Look, even if you mothballed the DoD, you will still have over 700 billion dollars deficit, that has to come from somewhere else.

DoD spending takes up about 18% of the entire federal budget, entitlements take up 41%... it's pretty obvious where the next round of cuts should be coming from.

[ConHog]

http://www.thenewamerican.com/economy/commentary-mainmenu-43/8829-military-general-advocates-cuts-in-military-spending

I'm sure he's just an anti-american Liberal muzzie lover who wants to make America less safe

What's your point, do you think this guy is unique within the military?

[J.T]

More defense budget cuts? Defense has been is being cu
Tell it to the general. But I'm sure you know more than a general when it comes to military matters, right :rolleyes:

[ConHog]

Tell it to the general. But I'm sure you know more than a general when it comes to military matters, right :rolleyes:


Wait, aren't you one of the idiots who has been screaming that the military themselves should not be the ones deciding about repealing DADT?


More hypocrisy from JT? No surely not.

[KartRacerBoy]

I think it's time to get out of Afghanistan. That'll save lots of military money. I disliked the Iraq war (although history will tell us if Bush was right or wrong to invade in the overall scheme of things). I thought Obama was right that we should've ignored Iraq and put our resources into Afghanistan. Not so much for Afghanistan itself, but I worry about an unstable Pakistan with nukes and AQ influencing thier military.

But I've come to the conclusion that we really don't have the power or even the will to change Afghanistan, let alone Pakistan. Sometimes you just have to live with the risks and play the margins. So let's get out of Afghanistan, a country that won't help itself.

We'll just have to do what we have done with Iran and N.Korea and try to influence what goes on in Pakistan.

Or maybe we should just promote a nuclear confrontation between Pakistan and India and find the pretty baubles after the conflagaration is over. How well does opium grow in an iradiated field, btw?

[Gunny]

Tell it to the general. But I'm sure you know more than a general when it comes to military matters, right :rolleyes:

Generals say stupid shit all the time. And yeah, I DO know more. Generals don't know shit. They're so insulated from day to day operations they wouldn't know their asses from a hole in the ground. You think the Colonels. LtCol's, Majors and Sgts Major are going to let ANYTHING amiss get as far the general? Not if they can stop it. A tenet of military leadership: ALL issues are solved at the lowest level aka "the General doesn't need to know this".

And finally, the DoD budget is a Congressional matter, not a "military" matter.

[Gunny]

I think it's time to get out of Afghanistan. That'll save lots of military money. I disliked the Iraq war (although history will tell us if Bush was right or wrong to invade in the overall scheme of things). I thought Obama was right that we should've ignored Iraq and put our resources into Afghanistan. Not so much for Afghanistan itself, but I worry about an unstable Pakistan with nukes and AQ influencing thier military.

But I've come to the conclusion that we really don't have the power or even the will to change Afghanistan, let alone Pakistan. Sometimes you just have to live with the risks and play the margins. So let's get out of Afghanistan, a country that won't help itself.

We'll just have to do what we have done with Iran and N.Korea and try to influence what goes on in Pakistan.

Or maybe we should just promote a nuclear confrontation between Pakistan and India and find the pretty baubles after the conflagaration is over. How well does opium grow in an iradiated field, btw?

Sure. Let's get out of the Useless Nations and NATO while we're at it.

[KarlMarx]

Tell it to the general. But I'm sure you know more than a general when it comes to military matters, right :rolleyes:

Seems like another general agrees with me, JT...


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The nominee to be the next top U.S. military officer warned on Tuesday that cutting security spending by $800 billion or more as part of deficit reduction measures would be "extraordinarily difficult and very high risk."

Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, President Barack Obama's choice to be the next chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Senate hearing the $14 trillion U.S. debt "is a grave concern" but said he didn't view it as the country's main security threat.
The current chairman, Admiral Mike Mullen, has described the U.S. debt as the single-biggest threat to national security. Dempsey acknowledged an important relationship between U.S. security and the debt but said "that doesn't mean we can neglect the other instruments of national power."

remainder of article at:

http://townhall.com/news/politics-elections/2011/07/26/top_general_warns_against_deep_defense_cuts




The thing is that you can always find one general that will think that hamstringing the military is a good idea. There were generals that stated that the surge in Iraq was a bad idea, too... history proved them wrong, too.

[KarlMarx]

I think it's time to get out of Afghanistan. That'll save lots of military money. I disliked the Iraq war (although history will tell us if Bush was right or wrong to invade in the overall scheme of things). I thought Obama was right that we should've ignored Iraq and put our resources into Afghanistan. Not so much for Afghanistan itself, but I worry about an unstable Pakistan with nukes and AQ influencing thier military.

But I've come to the conclusion that we really don't have the power or even the will to change Afghanistan, let alone Pakistan. Sometimes you just have to live with the risks and play the margins. So let's get out of Afghanistan, a country that won't help itself.

We'll just have to do what we have done with Iran and N.Korea and try to influence what goes on in Pakistan.

Or maybe we should just promote a nuclear confrontation between Pakistan and India and find the pretty baubles after the conflagaration is over. How well does opium grow in an iradiated field, btw?

Well, actually, our policy towards North Korea and Iran has been laughably unsuccessful. Both now have nuclear weapons... our objective was to stop them from obtaining them.

A limited nuclear war between India and Pakistan will simply spread into a much larger war.

[KartRacerBoy]

Sure. Let's get out of the Useless Nations and NATO while we're at it.

I'm no Ron Paul fan, but NATO is ridiculous nowadays. There are so many nations in it that might get into conflict with one another, how will NATO choose who to aide? And with the fall of the USSR, Nato has become superflous. Are we really going to come to the aide of Russia's ex-republics if Russia attacks or pressures them like they did Georgia. That little conflagaration proved what a paper tiger Nato is to Russia.

And do you remember WW1? A few lessons for Nato to learn from the whole alliance thing.

[KartRacerBoy]

A limited nuclear war between India and Pakistan will simply spread into a much larger war.

Probably. That's why I was being sarcastic. Damn my lack of icon use!