Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel may have fallen in many ways into the traditional role of Pentagon chief after his contentious confirmation hearings, but he’s still somewhat unique in the role, today admitting that the US Army has more troops than it really needs.
The US Army presently has well over 500,000 active troops, and has plans to “cut” that down to 490,000. In a presentation to the media today, Hagel revealed that the current missions could be handled with “between 420,000 and 450,000” troops.
Hagel went on to discuss other programs that could be reduced in size with “minimal risk,” saying the plan would potentially save another $150 billion over the existing Pentagon spending projections.
Underscoring just how bloated the US military is, Hagel went on to concede that the $150 billion was still well short of the cuts that would actually need to be made under sequestration, assuming the military is ever required to followed through on them.
Hagel didn’t reveal them, but did say he had two more “dramatic” plans prepared in the event of sequester, adding they would require halting “modernization” programs.
…could prosecute some war/security-state profiteers and confiscate some ill-gotten-gain. How much did Chertof make on scanners?
Somewhere between '98 and '01, I vaguely remember counting three across-the-board payraises in the military. At least one was under Clinton, at least one, probably two, under Bush. …eeeerie… I half-thought we were being buttered-up for something… say, what years were those again? Hmmm: http://www.alternet.org/story/11427/wanted%3A_enemy_to_j... . I was amazed just how fast I started making more than I had, or likely even could have, at a corporation. That hadn't been a motive for joining, and I'd have laughed if someone said that'd happen.
Not a secret now just how bloated individual incomes are now in gov't vs. equivalent civilian positions. By now all those salaries are ~creeping entitlements –er– –entitlements already so crept. Out here there's been talk of doing away with minimum wage, and I gather there's inflation of employment figures partly via the increase in no-benny part-timers. Apparently there's nothing equivalent in the military if they're just talking about cutting positions! So hey, how 'bout a 15% cut in fed employee base pay as well? And make 'em pay their own health insurance at least until they stop firing DU.
AS IT IS WRITTEN:
It has been prophesied that "humans" would no longer be essential in many tasks, war being chief among them. Thsi explains the Obama obssession with "drone warfare" and other computerized tasks that can be carried out with little to no human intervention. Well, my fellow "AMERIKANS" ENJOY YOUR SLIDE INTO PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE AND COMPLETE AND TOTAL OBLIVION…………..
1) The SecDef always cares more about big new expensive weapons programs than having troops. The job is about feeding huge amounts of your tax dollars to 'defense' contractors. That's how they get on those boards after they leave this job.
2) This is in line with the whole Asian pivot thing. Which was always all about the intraservice wars between navy, air force and army. The army won during the early 21st century with the Terror Wars. The Asian Pivot was always about the Navy and the Air Force trying to get that money back, because a Pacific strategy was always going to need more planes and ships and fewer troops.
15% Is that all? Try like about 95%.
95 % is to big of a cut ,lets first try 50 % cut . and as the world gradualy gets more peacefull 75 before going all the way to a 95 % cut in military spending .
Start with disestablshing US Army Europe and 7th Army. Bring those men and women home first then start cutting the bloat here in the heimat.