If the “supercommittee” fails, the US will have its smallest military force since World War 2. This is the claim that hawks in general and the Pentagon spokesmen in particular have been pushing in an attempt to convince lawmakers, who really don’t need all that much convincing when it comes to overspending, that the Pentagon should be immune from any serious “cuts.”
And by cuts, of course, we mean cuts in the rate of growth, as the previously announced cuts, which Defense Secretary Leon Panetta still complains about at every conceivable opportunity, were taken out of future hypothetical spending increases, backloaded many years down the road.
The World War 2 claim is likewise nonsense, resting on numbers of troops instead of overall expenditures. The electronic, drone-happy US military of 2012 might only have the same number of guys as the force immediately post World War 2, but it will still have a dramatically larger inflation-adjusted budget. Indeed, the “worst case” scenario, which Pentagon officials are treating as though it is going to cause the world to come to an end, is to bring spending to the level of 2007. The US military would still have a budget several times higher than any other military on the planet, and would rival the rest of the planet combined.
But reports suggest that Panetta et. al aren’t even making preparations for how they would spend a 2007-size budget, and instead seem to be focusing their entire effort on ensuring that each new budget is the largest in the history of mankind.
Did Obama appoint Panetta just to whine on behalf of the military-industrial complex. I've said it before, but here goes again. 70 members of the House sent a letter to the Deficit Reduction Committee that stated that $1.8 trillion could be saved if we pulled our troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq. That's four times more than the DOD is whining that they will have to cut in ten years. If the US pull troops out of Germany, Italy, Japan, and other countries, it would save dozens of billion. If we stopped letting the Israelis conduct our foreign policy, it would save many more billions. mothballing half of the obsolete carriers would also safe lots of big bucks. There, I've saved $2 trillion bucks.Why couldn't those bozos in that committee do this.
You're making too much sense. Reason number one why they wouldn't listen.
Their defective brains created their arrogance.
Ah!… But when you think you own the world then such budgets, insane as they are and peasants be damned, are justified.
This just proves one thing-We've given so much to the military and made them so powerful that it might be too late to reign them in. Someday they're gonna figure out that they can just walzt down Pennsylvannia avenue and take control, they won't even need a puppet like Obama.
The pentagon looks out for itself, not America.
Military men only care about the size of their weapons and their potency. They see the whole world as a potential battlefield where peace is a dirty word.
Military men are deranged. They are not normal. For them the world is a violent video game and they must be the winner.
Military men need serious counseling. They need to look at the flowers, watch laughing children at play, listen to music. They need to look in a mirror and ask themselves: "Why am I a killer?"
http://www.dangerouscreation.com
As much as I agree with you I'm reminded of the fact that non-military men AND women are all too happy to give them what they want. Which makes them complicit "killers".