Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When the Obama administration proposed canceling a host of expensive weapons systems last spring, some of the military industry’s allies in Congress assumed, as they had in the past, that they would have the final say.
But as the president signed a $680 billion military policy bill on Wednesday, it was clear that he had succeeded in paring back nearly all of the programs and setting a tone of greater restraint than the Pentagon had seen in many years.
***
Once the Senate voted in July to stop buying F-22s, Mr. Emanuel said in an interview, that success “reverberated down” to help sustain billions of dollars of cuts in Army modernization, missile defense and other programs.
***
Mr. Obama has said that he does not intend to reduce military spending while the nation is engaged in two wars. But Mr. Gates also wants to cut more futuristic programs to free money for simpler systems like helicopters and unmanned spy planes that can help the troops now.
This is no big shocker..Dem's always cut defense and intelligence budgets..thats we had planes crashing into buildings killing thousands of people on 9/11...business as usual...
So far every program that I have seen cut was a boondoggle. I'm sure protecting the Czech Republic from an Iranian missle strike is important except that the system doesn't work and Iran has no such missles, even if it did, why would it attack the Czech republic?
That's one of the most leading and still evasive statements I've ever heard. Care to elaborate on exactly what working "around" the military means? Kinda sounds like you're making it up as you go to be honest.
Better the service people get raises, body armor and armored vehicles they can use now than we subsidize yet another weapon system that will never be used in our lifetimes.
Seriously, to all you defenders of this pork, how do you justify throwing away money on missiles in the Czech Republic when family members had to buy protective gear for our people deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Considering that I work around the military, I can assure you that you don't know very much about the military and spending.
What happens when we waste billions of dollars on defense contractors for pie in the sky garbage that they can't deliver?
Why do we have to have the best weaponry in the world?
It's bankrupting our country.
We already have enough weaponry to kill everyone numerous times over.
I'd rather live in a country focused on peace than minding other countries business and killing based on our own desires.
Considering I was in the military as well as my wife and know what a bullet flying past my head sounds like, I think I pretty much have a damn good idea what I am talking about.
The wasteful spending you are talking about... was forced onto us by congress. Yes we buy stuff that costs way to much, because we are forced to! I had to personally throw away $150 dollar torque wrenches because doing the paperwork to replace a 50 cent park cost more than the wrench in man hours (civilian man hours that is, why didn't they just let someone in uniform do it is beyond me).
We still need those new weapons, now more than ever. Technology is a force multiplier and with more and more Americans either unable to serve in the military or more likely unwilling to serve (got to love being able to take advantage of rights without paying for them eh?), we need every force multiplier we can get right now!
When the Obama administration proposed canceling a host of expensive weapons systems last spring, some of the military industry’s allies in Congress assumed, as they had in the past, that they would have the final say.
But as the president signed a $680 billion military policy bill on Wednesday, it was clear that he had succeeded in paring back nearly all of the programs and setting a tone of greater restraint than the Pentagon had seen in many years.
***
Once the Senate voted in July to stop buying F-22s, Mr. Emanuel said in an interview, that success “reverberated down” to help sustain billions of dollars of cuts in Army modernization, missile defense and other programs.
***
Mr. Obama has said that he does not intend to reduce military spending while the nation is engaged in two wars. But Mr. Gates also wants to cut more futuristic programs to free money for simpler systems like helicopters and unmanned spy planes that can help the troops now.
Tell it to Sec Gates. I think he knows better than we do what's necessary and what's not necessary right now.
Dont you like that Obama is cutting spending?
Just wait until you hear about the additional logistics support, and system upgrade, costs when they are disclosed in a few years. Often, these types of decisions are shortsighted, and result in far more significant future expenditures.
I think its a good idea to cut defense spending... some of it is just not needed... we shouldn't be in an arms technology race which is the same as the nuclear arms race... instead of finding new ways to kill someone, they should be investing the money to find new ways to save someone... it is defensive spending, not offensive spending...
I think its a good idea to cut defense spending... some of it is just not needed... we shouldn't be in an arms technology race which is the same as the nuclear arms race... instead of finding new ways to kill someone, they should be investing the money to find new ways to save someone... it is defensive spending, not offensive spending...
In theory I agree but that's not the reality we're dealing with. We have an administration that is pushing us further into what's going to be a very long and costly war but wants to cut spending for the future wars these actions are bound to get us into. Our military is spread too thin to be truly effective and now we're going to cut off the weapons they will desperately need in a very short time. This is no victory.
I have a suggestion on how to drastically cut military spending: Lets end the wars (wasn't that a campaign promise?). We cannot win these wars the way we're proceeding. It's time to either bring out the big guns for a decisive victory or throw in the towel. While the left seems to believe Obama has some sort of mystical power, they seem to conveniently forget that he does have one very real super power. He's commander in chief of the US military. While he can't declare war, he has the power to move troops anywhere he wants at any time he wants. Even if most of congress is in the pocket of those who profit from war, they can't have their war without troops. All Obama needs to do to end these wars is to bring them home. He does indeed have that one super power.
This is the same administration that's pushing an inept health care initiative but excludes illegals from buying their own health care. ?????????? One of our biggest financial drains is illegal health care and they want to disallow the illegals who obviously aren't going home any time soon one of the few chances they'll ever have to actually give a little back. This forces them to continue to drain taxpayers pockets and reduce the quality of health care for everyone.
I HOPE (I really do) that Obama decides against sending in more troops and calls for a withdrawal... we lost, I am not ashamed to admit it (cause we are NEVER going to win a war against a foe that uses religion and money as its recruitment tool)... We should of neutralized the targets immediately (i.e. kill them) and withdrawal and sabotage their infrastructure through alternative means... that's how you fight an "ideal".. you cannot win with troops or propaganda...
Yes, our troops are spread out too thin... why do we have troops all over the world? We aren't an INVADING force... Weapons of next decade isn't going to matter when everyone else is decades behind you... right now, our allies are buying or new technology, how is that helping us win future wars? Allies are only TEMPORARY status (just like Al Qeada)... It feels more and more that are allies are buying our weapons to bully around the rest of the world (which is what is happening now)... we are defending our country, we are inviting future wars by selling our weapons...
We don't need to constantly "futurize" our weapons either... what good is a weapon if you can't kill the target, which is what we should be doing... investing money so that weapons can't kill targets... a device that prevents you from dying from a gunshot... or cloaking devices... that's something the citizens and our armies can use and benefit from... defense! not offense!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
