The knives are out for the defense budget, according to this New York Times article:
In a shift of doctrine driven by fiscal reality and a deal last summer that kept the United States from defaulting on its debts, Mr. Panetta is expected to outline plans for carefully shrinking the military — and in so doing make it clear that the Pentagon will not maintain the ability to fight two sustained ground wars at once.
Instead, he will say that the military will be large enough to fight and win one major conflict, while also being able to “spoil” a second adversary’s ambitions in another part of the world while conducting a number of other smaller operations, like providing disaster relief or enforcing a no-flight zone.
Pentagon officials, in the meantime, are in final deliberations about potential cuts to virtually every important area of military spending: the nuclear arsenal, warships, combat aircraft, salaries, and retirement and health benefits. With the war in Iraq over and the one in Afghanistan winding down, Mr. Panetta is weighing how significantly to shrink America’s ground forces.
Everyone knows that defense spending has to be slashed. It just has to. Because it has doubled in the last 10 years. All by itself, while no one was watching and nothing was going on in the world, anywhere. And even if there was, nothing like that will ever happen again. We’ve got drones, now.
Even though, as this chart demonstrates, the DoD’s share of the US federal budget remains at a relatively low historical percentage of GOP.
Because federal expenditures on mandatory spending such as Medicare, Medicaid, and – eventually – Social Security are on unsustainable tracks, and therefore we must balance the budget by sacrificing our current national security strategy. Which won’t, of course, do a thing about the unsustainable mandatory spending. But will allow the political class to kick the can of courage down the road a little while and hope for either, 1) a miracle or, 2) for the implosion to happen on somebody else’s watch, while 3) keeping our fingers crossed that none of the world’s bad actors get froggy. Because when it comes to national security, hope is an excellent strategy. Trust us.
Keeping in mind that shutting the doors on DoD entirely would still result in an $800 billion increase to next year’s aggregate deficit, which now stands at $15 trillion, $4.6 trillion of that having been added in the last three years. This amounts to a nearly 60% increase over the preceding eight years as a proportion of GDP.
We’ll almost certainly have to radically reduce the ground forces, a couple of fighter wing equivalents and at least one or two aircraft carriers – the same forces which have allowed the US since the Cold War days to provide forward presence and deterrence.
Which is actually OK, because the Islamic Republic of Iran has just told us that the USS John C. Stennis is no longer welcome in their neck of the woods:
Iran’s army chief on Tuesday warned a nuclear-powered U.S. aircraft carrier not to return to the Persian Gulf, as Iran’s navy ended 10 days of tense war games in the Persian Gulf…
Gen. Ataollah Salehi, the commander of the Iranian armed forces, lauded Iran’s defensive skills and lashed out against the USS John C. Stennis and its battle group. The carrier and its accompanying ships left the strategic Persian Gulf last Thursday, their departure filmed by Iranian drones.
“We warn this ship, which is considered a threat to us, not to come back, and we do not repeat our words twice,” Salehi said, according to the Iranian Students’ News Agency.
So there’s one we can cut right there.
The Iranians just made it easy on us.
I can only pray that our nation survives long enough to throw the current bums out and revers course on everyo one of their disastrous policies. Of course, that means virtually every single thing Obama and his fellow corruptocrats have done since January 21, 2009.
If this is not achieved in the November elections, our security from foreign threats will be the least of our problems as the inevitable class warfare will destroy our nation from within.
Thanks, Obama. In three years you have nearly destroyed the once greatest nation on earth.
John,
That was the plan from the very beginning.
What part of “fundamentally changing the US” did you not understand?
From the mouth of the Community Organizing Great Divider to Satan’s ear.
It’s not a matter of throwing the bums out. The bums are you and I… well you at least
. It’s also not just Obama’s fault…all he did was step on the accelerator. He’s an ass for that but this has been in the cards since the 60′s at least.
This is a problem that mathematically cannot be fixed. The people of this nation won’t give up their entitlements. Not without blood in the streets (and we will have some of that I’m sure). At the end of the day all that is left to decide is what the next govt. structure is going to look like.
My one suggestion to fix this is that if you are employed by the federal govt. or receive federal subsidies (entitlement) then you are ineligible to both run for federal office or vote in a federal election (excepting military service). Same is true for state and local levels. It removes the folks that benefit from being able to vote “ME”.
But it’s too late to fix it… the plane is out of controlled flight and the pilot continues to pull back on the stick when we’re in a stall.
ammo and bottled water, my friends… it’s the only math that makes sense anymore. Because remember, we just gave the govt. the authority to detain any American citizen without charges indefinitely. Sure, we don’t intend to use it on your average Joe Snuffy…. until we need to.
And guess what? We will need to.
Are you saying that since I am receiving Social Security (for which I paid taxes for over 50 years) that I can’t vote in Federal elections? How about my military retirement (31 years service)? Does that disqualify me as well?
You obviously need to read what I wrote again (excepting military service).
As for social Security, yeah if you take it, you should not be allowed to vote in federal elections. Yes, I know you were taxed for it… don’t you think I am too? But the question is ultimately is it sustainable? The answer is no. We can either keep on doing the same thing and kicking the can a little farther down the road, or we can change things.
One of those changes is to admit that the politicians robbed the Social Security Piggy bank and get over it. The money is gone and it’s not coming back. Expecting to get paid is simply going to bankrupt your grandchildren and if you need it (social Sec.) that badly, then you failed to plan appropriately for your own welfare and thus, shouldn’t be allowed to vote because you opt to take your neighbors dime (again, I get you paid into it…so have I – I just realize a lie when I hear one)
I agree with you…to a point. I agree wholeheartedly that this destruction started back in the 60s (thank you LBJ for giving Congress access to SS…THAT was a brilliant move) and that Obama is just the last idiot to step on the gas pedal.
But barring someone from the ability to vote simply because they take Social Security is a straw-man argument. My parents paid into SS, therefore it is their right to expect at least what they paid into it back. I get that the system is flawed and will cease to exist long before I ever see a dime. But I’ve understood that from the get-go as have many of my contemporaries. Therefore I do not plan to be able to count on SS at any point in my life. It’s not part of my plan for retirement. However, my parents were not aware of the circumstances that have brought us to this current Charlie Foxtrot we now face and paid into the system expecting what was promised. Therefore I do not see the sense in penalizing them for having been lied to with no proof to sway their beliefs.
And there aren’t enough people in this country who could feasibly forgo their SS payouts in order to make a difference/prolong the life of/save SS. In addition to the fact that, by barring SS recipients from voting, you just eliminated the best sources of experience from the voting pool. Have you looked at the younger generations in this country? Are you SERIOUS that you want THEM (us) to be fully in charge of the future of this country with very little voice of experience to balance things out? Be careful what you wish for…
I fully believe that if you haven’t done a hitch in the military, you should not be allowed to vote in Federal elections. After all, if you haven’t served, you didn’t care enough about the country to protect it. Only after I get back everything I paid in to SS, plus interest, will I “take my neighbor’s dime.”
uh, no. You’re taking your neighbors dime right now if you’re drawing SS. Do you think they set aside your payments just for you? No.. they blew that on some stupid scheme like the Blutarski Memorial Thruway. Your current SS payments are being made by me, and every other taxpayer plus some fools from China that think we’ll honor our bond obligations.
I didn’t say you like it or agreed to it, but the fact of that matter is that it mathematically cannot continue… and when it goes south, it’s going to go south overnight… fast. History has plenty of examples for us to figure out what’s going to happen.
No nation in history has ever survived a debt to GDP ratio like ours >100%. And the FUJIGM attitude, is what got us here. (Understand, I know you served, I know you have sacrificed for your Country) But your country (primarily its elected representatives lied to you.
The fact that all the lamp posts in DC are not already in use as gallows indicates that people do not yet understand the magnitude of the debt we are in….
income $21,737.00
expenses $38,188.00
added debt $(16,451.00)
savings $385.00
total outstanding debt $142,000.00
If that were your household budget…. would you get it? What would you have to do in order to bring down the 142K in CC debt?
Yeah.
It. is. not. gonna. happen.
We are screwed. Better you understand it sooner rather than later. That’s why which carrier we get rid of, who gets elected, it’s all sort of a waste of breath. We will be lucky to keep the riots from destroying our cities… let alone worrying about Iran going nuke.
Chaps;
You, me, all of us were and are unwilling participants in a Ponzi Scheme.
Trees don’t grow to the sky and what can’t go on, wont.
So, prepare yourself for day of “Cold Turkey”.
Well, we should be charging those who spend their money on things other then their defense, then ask for our help to protect them. That would help.
As far as entitlements, I think the public unions, state and local are going to be the next big thing. Oodles of people in all sorts of non-critical, or non-demanding positions going on 35 year vacations with big compensation packages. The unions are bringing more and more people into this class of retirement category, like Mike inspector in California. Then stuff like this – http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2011/12/29/philly-councilwoman-to-retire-and-collect-478000-pension-then-start-back-to-work-on-monday/
Given all, it is not economically survivable.
That s/b Milk inspector.
Saw all this earlier today….DON’T get me started…
All of this was as clear as a bell in 2008 prior to the election.
Plan Barbancourt looks smarter and smarter..
But then so does the Duck Blind option..
“…[Panetta} will say that the military will be large enough to fight and win one major conflict, while also being able to “spoil” a second adversary’s ambitions in another part of the world while conducting a number of other smaller operations, like providing disaster relief or enforcing a no-flight zone.”
Brilliant announcement! So our enemies assure the U.S. is drawn into a remote war in say Kurdistan, and after we get our ‘one-war’ equipment and troops there, the enemies attack Poland. Good luck with a no fly over Poland. These lawyers are brilliant strategists, I am glad we have Leon Panetta. Perhaps he will do better in Bogata than his former colleague and Defense Secretary Les “no tanks” Aspin did for us with a U.N. aid mission in Mogadishu.
Yup. When it comes to contingencies, two is one, one is none. Commit to one regional conflict, and everyone else knows you’re out of options.
Gee, I can’t imagine that factoring into anybody’s strategizing. It’s not as if the rest of the world doesn’t have full-time staff studying US Naval deployments looking for an opportunity to impose their country’s will.
This kind of thinking caused almost fatal underestimates of what equipment we needed in WWII.
General: We need 9,000 parachutes.
Industrialist: I’m making 200,000.
General: Why so many?
Industrialist: The president wants to build 50,000 planes with an average crew size of 4. I simply multiplied.
Just living the dream.
National defense is mandated by the Constitution, “Medicare, Medicaid, and – eventually – Social Security” are not. I’m sorry, those major cuts need to come from where?
Are you under some mis-apprehension that the Constitution is still the law of the land? Seriously. The govt. JUST passed legislation allowing for the indefinite detention of US Citizens without a trial!! Yeah, we all know it’s not aimed at the average Joe Citizen. At least it won’t be until it needs to be that is. I’m pretty certain there was some mention about something like that in the 6th amendment…
This is how Republics END.
I just want to say that Cro is not me, even though sometimes he sounds like me, right down to the unused lampposts in DC.
I’m happy with that, though.
Yeah, sorry to say but that was sort of my point, just not made very well. This crap has been going on for decades and decades and “we” (collectively as a population) just let it happen. My solution is to fire everyone in Congress, start from scratch with a ONE term limit with no perks for serving.
Interesting that the two low points come around 1978-9 and 1999, both times followed by aggressive acts against this country. In the late 70′s Iran began its war on us and we all know how the Clinton administration helped China (missile guidance through Clinton friend Loral) and the Islamo-nazi types (through the stupid restrictions placed on the FBI and CIA communications plus plenty more). If the graph would go far enough back I’d bet that we were at a verrrrry low point leading up to WWII, too. Strength is expensive; weakness is more expensive.
Ugh. Just…ugh. We are going to regret this.
What is the line from the movie “The Hunt For Red October”?….”this situation will get out of control and we will be lucky to live through it….”
Bad juju is coming. Anyone who thinks otherwise is mathematically challenged, at the very least.
You had me at “we got drones”
As You wrote: “…Because when it comes to national security, hope is an excellent strategy “.
Etch that in stone. It has worked for a long time. There are no true writers/thinkers on the grand strategy needed for the future.
Basing “defense” spending, as a percent of GDP is always bogus!
It is absurdly tantamount to a landlord raising one’s rent, only because the renter’s income has increased! It has nothing to do with reality, or any ‘threat’. It is illogical.
Defense spending must always be based upon the real and existential threats against our nation (which are? Seriously tell me?), and not any imagined or conjured up threats that would again waste our precious blood and treasure…. been there, done that – like Sadam Hussein and his ephemeral WMD.
I fear not, Russia, China, Iran, and NK, et al. Why should I? We could cut out ‘defense’ budget by 10%, 50%, or even by 90% and still wipe those supposed threats off the face of the earth. And they know it. So why do we continue to play their games, and risk our own blood and treasure while they all rebel amongst themselves?
I’ve seen enough of war and death for spurious and political reasons. Let the rest of the world kill each other, rather than us. I am an American. I am happy to provide for my fellow Americans with Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security! It is far better to support my fellow Americans than continue pointless but massively expensive wars against a bunch of third world no names, who really pose no threat to me or my family.
[PS: All the neocon and conservative hawks ironically remind me of Samuel Gompers, and his "More, more, more..." refrain. '-)]
Fliterman,
“We could cut out ‘defense’ budget by 10%, 50%, or even by 90% and still wipe those supposed threats off the face of the earth. And they know it.”
True, but this reminds me of an excellent line by Steven den Beste, asked whether we could still fight a two-front war. He responded that we could fight a ten-front war, but eight of them would be nuclear.
If we pare back our capabilities on the grounds that we can still wipe the next biggest threats off the face of the earth, we reduce our options in the face of, say, an Iranian nuclear provocation, to (a) do nothing, or (b) wipe the threat off the face of the earth.
They know we can. They might just be dumb enough to wonder if we will. Your recommendations make it more likely that we’ll have to.
Don’t get me wrong – I believe we could cut defense spending somewhat and still have a capable military, but for all kinds of reasons I doubt these cuts will be made with the imperative of preserving combat power and cutting nonessential spending.
You know one of our favorite sayings around Lex’s playground…..”Pull back into orbit, and Nuke them. It’s the only way to make sure.”
Basing “defense” spending, as a percent of GDP is always bogus!
It is absurdly tantamount to a landlord raising one’s rent, only because the renter’s income has increased! It has nothing to do with reality, or any ‘threat’. It is illogical.
Defense spending must always be based upon the real and existential threats against our nation (which are? Seriously tell me?), and not any imagined or conjured up threats that would again waste our precious blood and treasure…. been there, done that – like Sadam Hussein and his ephemeral WMD.
I fear not, Russia, China, Iran, and NK, et al. Why should I? We could cut out ‘defense’ budget by 10%, 50%, or even by 90% and still wipe those supposed threats off the face of the earth. And they know it. So why do we continue to play their games, and risk our own blood and treasure while they all rebel amongst themselves?
I’ve seen enough of war and death for spurious and political reasons. Let the rest of the world kill each other, rather than us. I am an American. I am happy to provide for my fellow Americans with Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security! It is far better to support my fellow Americans than continue pointless but massively expensive wars against a bunch of third world no names, who really pose no threat to me or my family.
[PS: All the neocon and conservative hawks ironically remind me of Samuel Gompers, and his "More, more, more..." refrain. '-).... ]
flit
Yes you make a good point about defense spending must “always be based upon the real and existential threats against out nation”. Today the deficit is the biggest threat against our nation, so line up all of the department heads that receive any discretionary funding – heck throw in social security and medicare too – and have them proclaim an across-the-board 20% cut in benefits AND wages AND retirement bennies for their employees.
Go on, call me when you get that done. Quit proclaiming you are happy to provide for 46 million receiving food stamps, 1 in 6 children living in poverty, retirees receiving minimal returns on their hard earned investments, and thinking that defense spending cuts will somehow ameliorate all of those societal ills.
Fliterman, you didn’t make any more sense when you repeated yourself. ‘Nuff said.
Hey Mike Myers. Give me a specific. And something to back it up, rather than some blasé, incomprehensible sharpshooting at phantoms.
If you gotta a real and intelligent point, make it. Otherwise go pound sand!
What’s keeping china from building their own co-prosperity sphere?
What’s keeping Russia from reasserting hegemony over eastern Europe?
What’s keeping Iran from shutting down the Straits of Hormuz and bottling up a fifth of the worlds oil?
Your failure to recognize dangers in the world around you says more about you than it does about the world.
Measuring defense spending as a function of GDP isn’t a perfect metric, but it does help correct for things like inflation, and the larger the economy the more must be spent to overcome the opportunity costs of defense.
Why do you care about China? They are not going to bomb Pearl Harbor, are they? Will they strike our shores?
Why do you care about Eastern Europe? Russia is not the Soviet Union. And most of you guys would like to see those European Socialists suffer anyway. Youser!
I don’t care about the Straits of Hormuz. It will affect China far more than us if Iran is really stupid. We have oil from other places. Let the next Iranian revolution not involve our men and women. Let them kill each other.
Chicken little foreign policy is not realistic in a nuclear and a globalized world. Give it up. The Empire is over. Things have changed. Protect our shores and way of life. Forget about foolish imperialistic fantasies and all foolishness that drains us.
I think your think is more like Stalin’s than mine…. FWIW
Thank you, flit for demonstrating once again there is no such thing as an intelligent liberal.
First off, oil is a (nearly) fungible commodity traded on global markets. Any significant disruption to supply, say closing the Straits, will result in an increase in prices for all customers. That’s why gas prices in the US increase whenever the Gulf region gets unstable.
Secondly, I’m not terribly interested in China or Russia. I am interested in places like South Korea and Poland, specifically trading with them. I want to capture the benefits of free trade, and in order to do that I need to ensure the regional bully doesn’t coerce my trading partners into trading with them. Since I don’t trust the regional bully (I don’t really trust anyone not to act in their best interests) I need a defense force capable of raising the costs of forced hegemony to unacceptable levels.
I do oppose the foolishness that drains us. It’s why I support eliminating Social Security and Medicare.
What’s keeping china from building their own co-prosperity sphere?
What’s keeping Russia from reasserting hegemony over eastern Europe?
What’s keeping Iran from shutting down the Straits of Hormuz and bottling up a fifth of the worlds oil?
1. They need to export. They start a war who they gonna export to?
2. Russian military is a shambles after nearly two decades of minimal investment.
3. The only true threat in the post.
You say there are dangers in the world. I can agree with that. Germany must be dangerous as we keep nearly 50K troops there. Japan must be dangerous as we keep a similiar amount there as well. And we continue to patrol the worlds’ oceans 365x24x7, which is not needed. We really need to concentrate on patrolling the areas that could be a major problem. Right now that is two – Persian Gulf and South China Sea.
Another problem is wasted money on gold-plated systems. It is far past time to make do with good enough. For example, the Swiss bought 22 JAS-39′s to replace the F-5′s. The Swiss defense minister admitted the Typhoon and Rafale were better, but much more expensive, aircraft, and the JAS39 was “good enough”. It’s time the US military had the same standard applied. No more gold plated, expensive, overly complicated stuff like F-35; build the F-15SE’s and more F/A18E/F’s instead.
Defense is going to be cut. How much depends on the prevailing economic and political climate in the next 5 or so years. The military would be well served by getting in front of it and admitting yes there are plenty of things that the services duplicate, and there are plenty of “good enough” things we can procure etc. to defend our interests and the country. But we can no longer afford to have everything be 100% brand new high-tech masterpieces that cost moogabucks for one item.
+1 on most.
However, as one of the 50K in Germany, it’s not that we’re here for Germany. It’s mostly forward locating for the issues still outstanding, i.e. Africa, Mid East and European problems. Same with Japan – keeping the forces close to the problem sets.
The 365/24/7 at seas is moslty concentrated in the problem areas, which are far greater than just the two you mention- HOA and the Arabian sea, the Med…etc.
But I agree with the buy what we need vice not the most expensive toy on the shelf.
What’s keeping china from building their own co-prosperity sphere?
What’s keeping Russia from reasserting hegemony over eastern Europe?
1. They need to export. They start a war who they gonna export to?
2. Russian military is a shambles after nearly two decades of minimal investment.
1. So did NAZI Germany and Fascist Japan.
2. Eastern Europe will stop even this decrepit military with what, exactly, if we’re not there? Western Europe? They ran out of bombs five minutes into the No-Fly Zone campaign over Libya and had to drop American ordnance.
The fatal flaw in your argument is that you’re assuming threats think like us, assuming their pain level is similar to ours, assuming their goals are similar to ours.
Oh, yeah: your a shambles after nearly two decades of minimal investment. Where we’ll be in far less than those two decades. We have broader global responsibilities/goals, and so we’ll fall harder and faster.
Eric Hines
Thanks E, you pretty much covered what I was going to say. I would invite Phalanx08 to talk to a Georgian about how much of a shambles the Russian army is in.
Jeez, it took nearly every single combat-ready Russian troop to take on world power Georgia. The vast majority of the Russian military is NMC. Russia isn’t conquering anybody in the foreseeable future.
it took nearly every single combat-ready Russian troop to take on world power Georgia.
And yet, they succeeded. Think anyone in eastern Europe, or in the ‘Stans, is more powerful than “world power Georgia?” NMC soldiery is stronger than the opposition the Russians face–for those targets NMC would be an upgrade. Conquering may come uglily, but it still comes.
Besides, there is more than one way to intimidate a country–as Russia demonstrated to Ukraine and to Europe simultaneously when Russia cut off their oil supply. The troops then are for show.
Eric Hines
Isn’t it tautological to say “we don’t repeat our words twice?” Or did he mean we don’t say things four times?
Perhaps it sounds better in Farsi.
The biggest thing that chaps my hide is that incredible amounts of fraud and waste in the budget. Ever heard of “crazy checks?” Talk about a racket. Get your kid declared mentally disabled and get a check from Social Security. We pay people to stare at meat all day, unable to detect bacteria or any problems. Our government has banned the incandescent lightbulb, told us how much water has to be a toilet (now I just flush twice or thrice, wasting more water than an old fashioned toilet did) and told us that cars are going to average a certain miles per gallon. It’s out of control. When the most prosperous counties are surrounding Washington, D.C., that’s a problem. We have far too many bureaucrats making $100,000 a year and who will retire after 25 or 30 years getting half that and full benefits for the rest of their lives thanks to the evil of public sector unions.
That’s not to mention Solyndra, Karma (electric cars we’re subsidizing to the tune of $7,500 per copy that cost $100,000 and are made in Finland), farm subsidies and all of the other bailouts and other corporate welfare that is greased by campaign contributions and free junkets. It’s a shame that we can’t flush our entire political class every few years, because all of them are stuck in D.C. at the trough.
Social security is not a Ponzi scheme. A Ponzi scheme is voluntary. When GWB dared suggest we reform it, the oldsters jumped up and down like organ grinder monkeys and the GOP, the scared bunch of cowards they are, backed down. It’s unsustainable. And I told my kids, even though you’re paying into it, don’t expect a dime from it. It won’t be there.
I didn’t understand why we needed Part D (thanks a lot, so-called “conservative” GWB) and Obamacare (will collapse this country) when we have Medicare and Medicaid, which are going bankrupt. They’re unsustainable, too. A friend of mine was a case worker who dealt with Medicaid patients and he said the corruption was off the charts bad.
The biggest thing problems I have with the DOD is that there are too many stars nowadays, gold-plated systems and the military retirement system. As a retiree, I realize that the promises we’ve made are fundamentally unsustainable. We’ve got to reform the system so it can continue indefinitely. Maybe we need a 401K-type system and some benefit cuts.
It’s crazy how many flag officers we have now, considering our military is wasting away, but I guess that’s all of those joint staff tickee-punchee billets that are a product of Goldwater-Nichols. We could cut 40 percent, at least, of the flag officers and be okay. The biggest thing that bugs me about the flags is that all of them end up on the boards of defense firms when they retire. If that isn’t a conflict of interest, I don’t know what one is. But then again, I’m just an old rotorhead.
The F-35 is a boondoogle and we won’t buy half of the promised numbers. I thought it was supposed to be cheap! If I remember correctly, it was supposed to be $50 million per copy. Buy some of them and replace the rest of our tactical fighter fleet with new-build F-16s (perfect for bomb-trucking and air defense over the U.S.) and the Rhino. The Littoral Combat Ship is the biggest joke I’ve ever seen. Besides the big flight deck, it’s a useless speedboat with some empty space, no fuel capacity, a popgun up forward and a Sea RAM out back. If that’s a frigate or any sort of warship for that matter, I’ll eat my cover. But yet, that’s going to fill out the fleet of the future? Hope we have plenty of tankers, because those thirsty deathtraps will need them.
The world is a more dangerous place, yet we’re disarming at a frightening rate. The Norks are prowling and growling. Iran will soon be nuclear and that’s going to be ugly. The Russkies are showing signs of going back to the bad old days. We’re surrounded by hostile states and thanks to the “Arab Spring,” the Middle East is about to get extremely unfriendly to us and Israel. But hey, we don’t need to have two-conflict capability. If something else happens..oh well!
Awesome. Great. I can hardly wait.
+1!
I see E Hines & grizzledcoastie saved me a lot of mental strain & keyboard time…good shooting guys…now back to the Barbancourt..
We don’t remeber history.This has happened before. toruble is we don’t have our maufacuring base that we did in 1939.
It is in China…
Re-Reading Churhill’s WW2 History. Eerie paralells.
too eerie…
Maybe the Iranians could solve our problems for us, nuke D.C. as awful as that sounds, I’m not sure anything short of that will fix the issues we have with our representatives.
This discussion, is I think germane. China has been upgrading its naval capabilities at an alarming rate over the last decades, focusing its efforts almost exclusively on anti-aircraft carrier, anti-access/area denial capabilities, to include the militarization of space and cyberwarfare. For those at home following with a program, that’s unmistakeably us they’re coming after.
We might not want to go to war with China, but that doesn’t mean it can’t happen. The two ways to prevent miscalculation are to maintain a robust military presence and technology base to ensure deterrence, or disarm and take our pieces off the chessboard.
We appear to be selecting what’s behind door number two, while showing a brave face. That’s just going to get people killed.
Our people.
But look at the bright side, Lex–at least all the dead will be a “diverse” lot. Lets remember to keep our priorities straight..
But hey, at least they’ll have all of the proper sexual harassment training and will be a military that “looks like America!” Even if they can’t tie knots or do common maintenance. Or fight a war.
Being the biggest, baddest kid on the block ensures no one challenges you. And the sad thing about it is that our debt payments are building China’s military. While shrinking ours. Once, during WWII, the debt we incurred build the greatest military the world has ever seen. Now what did our debt build? Dependency? I seen nothing tangible except stuff with politicians’ names on them. Is everything in West Virginia named for Sheets? Cripes.
no no.
not us. never us. they want what they regard as theirs. sea control and exploitation of the natural resources of the sea bottom and formosa.
we used to do the accepted battle fleet thing but honestly, should formosa decide to remain free and independent it can engage itself and do the independence dance and fight for independent survival by exerting its own self, just as S. KOREA does.
does not require carrier battle groups from us.
Nor do I much care about sea control in the name of Malaysia or PI. Let them if they like challenge the big dog over turfy little islets in the S China sea. Not seeing any reason any of us have to fight that fight.
Asia is where the worldwide market dynamism is, and ours is a market-driven economy. The Asian hemisphere will either have to trust the US to play its traditional balancing role with respect to the emerging hegemon, or accommodate to it.
Tell me again, why do we have troops in Germany and Japan?
mojo/
Dunno about Europe (aside from inertia and the politics of NATO) but we have maintained bases in Japan for, imo, mainly three reasons: 1) to guarantee the nuclear umbrella to Japan to keep Japan from developing it’s own nukes–an event the rest of SEA with long memories of the “Co-Prosperity Sphere” would abhor and (so the logic historically went) might set off a new regional arms race (although China is now triggering a slo-mo, low-key one anyway) and 2) as a secure back up to any war in Korea that might see US bases/ports overrun or made in-operational by sustained fires, and, 3) forward reach in support of Taiwan. Valid reasons? “Whom knows?”
The case for troops in Germany is pretty similar, to provide a guarantee to Europe against German expansionism and to provide forward staging areas for Middle East operations.
German expansionism? You mean they’re worried the Huns might invade Greece’s debts? Force the Italians to stop swilling bad coffee and get an actual job? Call the French bad names?
That last I can get behind. The French are just plain annoying.
And here I thought, based on my time in Munich, that we were there to help finish off the year’s beer supply and ogle pretty girls in dirndls… And to prop up the local economy. I doubt the ravening Russian tank hordes will be assaulting the pass anytime soon, myself.
But I’ll take your word for it.
Nobody’s worried about any of hat because there are thousands of US troops in Germany.
German expansionism is more of a psychological threat than a real one. You can see it in a lot of the rhetoric flying around during the Eurozone breakup. I’m convinced that this situation would be much more precarious if there wasn’t a fairly impartial and powerful third party (or is that 18th party?) sitting in the middle. No matter what comes from the death of the Euro we can be pretty sure it won’t include European armies marching against one another.
Plus there’s the whole relatively easy access to the Middle East thing, which isn’t unimportant.
…they’re worried the Huns might invade Greece’s debts?
The Greeks are certainly pushing for the opposite. How does Germany have the cheek to denounce us over our finances when it has still not paid compensation for Greece’s war victims? There are still Greeks weeping for their lost brothers
and
By their statements, German politicians and German financial institutions play a leading role in a wretched game of profiteering at the expense of the Greek people….
Both from http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/02/18/greece-germany-idUSLDE61H1IZ20100218
Fights have begun over less.
Eric Hines
I rise to Fliterman’s challenge to provide some intellectual and logical meat for my position.
There was a time after the Civil War where the US Army was essentially a border constabulary. Flit might say that their only mission was to complete the genocide of Native Americans. However one might describe that military activity (and I wouldn’t describe it that way) that was a sufficient military establishment for our purpose. We were involved in filling up a continent–done by importing vast waves of people from Europe.
As an economy we didn’t need much (other than immigrants) from the rest of the world. We exported cotton to England and whale oil and timber to a number of places and imported (some) machinery from Europe. We had beaten off the last foreign invasion of the United States (War of 1812); we had dealt with some foreign piracy issues (to the Shores of Tripoli)and could pretty much go it alone without the rest of the world (other than the need for those immigrants). In Flit’s phrase, we could tell the world to go pound sand. In fact we were occupied in nation building.
Flit’s view is so 1880:
“I fear not, Russia, China, Iran, and NK, et al. Why should I? We could cut out ‘defense’ budget by 10%, 50%, or even by 90% and still wipe those supposed threats off the face of the earth. And they know it. So why do we continue to play their games, and risk our own blood and treasure while they all rebel amongst themselves?
I’ve seen enough of war and death for spurious and political reasons. Let the rest of the world kill each other, rather than us. I am an American. I am happy to provide for my fellow Americans with Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security! It is far better to support my fellow Americans than continue pointless but massively expensive wars against a bunch of third world no names, who really pose no threat to me or my family.”
As a practical matter Flit may be correct in the sense that it’s improbable that a Russia or a North Korea could project force and actually land troops on the beach at Santa Monica to conquer and subjugate the the United States. And while it’s possible that a China–and certainly a Russia–could send an ICBM to the United States to incinerate some of Flit’s fellow citizens (why have an amphibious landing at Santa Monica when you can simply nuke West Los Angeles?) that’s probably not going to happen.
So far so good for Flit’s thesis that we can and should simply withdraw into the continental United States and let the rest of the world go to hell. We’re all right Jack and all that. It certainly fits within a long standing and honorable isolationist political philosophy espoused by many in the United States. I happen to believe that it’s misguided; and it doesn’t become less misguided if repeated twice.
The United States like any other maritime nation is dependent upon international trade. The world has become increasingly interconnected–not less interconnected–since the latter half of the 19th Century. Mischief along the international trade routes hurts the US–and ultimately Flit’s fellow citizens myself included. Mankind ultimately consists of a bunch of greedy SOB’s pursuing their own economic and political interests. That hasn’t changed since the first caveman clubbed the second caveman over the head in order to steal his haunch of mastodon (or maybe to steal his wife). It just happens that we’ve constructed an infinitely more complicated and intertwined system today. Pulling back behind and within the North American littoral doesn’t get it for us now.
We had some time in WWI and WWII to make up for our border constabulary, small army/navy pre war positions. In a nuke exchange, or a cyber attack (a more likely scenario than an invasion) we won’t have time. Deterrence is the only option. As for mischief on the trade routes? You need a navy in being in order to stop that.
Nice post, Mike Meyers.
My apologies…..
PPS GUYS:
Often forgotten is that, forgetting strategic/tactical utility of forward basing–or even operational transportation costs AND cost of building/maintaining transport platforms (air and/or sea) it is actually cheaper apples-to-apples to keep troops in Europe & Japan than base them in the US because the host govts offset much of house-keeping basing costs, etc.
German expansionism?
Actually, I agree with mojo on this one; our military resources are misplaced there. To achieve your goals, Jeff (pardon my edit) to provide a guarantee to Europe against [Russian] expansionism and to provide forward staging areas for Middle East operations., those resources need to be shifted several hundred miles east.
Eric Hines
On the honorable isolationist position. Charles Lindbergh delivered a speech in Des Moines Iowa on September 11, 1941 decrying Roosevelt’s preparations for war. Here’s an excerpt from the final part of the speech. I think Flit and Lucky Lindy would get along just fine.
“The war groups have succeeded in the first two of their three major steps into war. The greatest armament program in our history is under way.
We have become involved in the war from practically every standpoint except actual shooting. Only the creation of sufficient “incidents” yet remains; and you see the first of these already taking place, according to plan [ill.]– a plan that was never laid before the American people for their approval.
Men and women of Iowa; only one thing holds this country from war today. That is the rising opposition of the American people. Our system of democracy and representative government is on test today as it has never been before. We are on the verge of a war in which the only victor would be chaos and prostration.
We are on the verge of a war for which we are still unprepared, and for which no one has offered a feasible plan for victory–a war which cannot be won without sending our soldiers across the ocean to force a landing on a hostile coast against armies stronger than our own.
We are on the verge of war, but it is not yet too late to stay out. It is not too late to show that no amount of money, or propaganda, or patronage can force a free and independent people into war against its will. It is not yet too late to retrieve and to maintain the independent American destiny that our forefathers established in this new world.
The entire future rests upon our shoulders. It depends upon our action, our courage, and our intelligence. If you oppose our intervention in the war, now is the time to make your voice heard.
Help us to organize these meetings; and write to your representatives in Washington. I tell you that the last stronghold of democracy and representative government in this country is in our house of representatives and our senate.
There, we can still make our will known. And if we, the American people, do that, independence and freedom will continue to live among us, and there will be no foreign war.”
Lindbergh may have had a point. I’ve often wondered why we had Essex class carriers appearing in the Pacific in January 1943. They take a long time to build, as did the Brooklyn and Cleveland class cruisers, the fast battleships etc. But we had Naval expansion bills passed through Congress in 1936 and 1937. The question is had we not prepared–anticipating trouble–what would our response have been when the Japanese struck Pearl Harbor? And the isolationist position on that point is, “Would the Japanese have struck Pearl Harbor if Roosevelt et al had simply left them alone to pursue their interests in the Western Pacific?” And the modern question is what would or will happen if we leave China alone to pursue its interests in the Western Pacific? Will free trade continue to flow? The answer is “Maybe”.
War with the Empire of Japan was inevitable. They needed the rubber and oil resources in Indochina and there was no way they were going to leave the US territory of the Philippines sitting astride their lines of communication. Remember the Philippines were attacked at the same time as Hawaii. Lindy was wrong, by 1941 war was inescapable.
Once Japan had declared war on us Germany would have followed in an attempt to get Japan to open a second front with the USSR.
After 59 comments, more or less, all I got to say is y’all need to learn a lot more about banking. Fractional reserve banking.
+1000 and one more for good measure.
Another casualty..
Boeing to Shutter Wichita Plant Amid Declining Defense Spending
[...] do we gain, though, by cutting defense? Consider these items, courtesy of Neptunus Lex: …shutting the doors on DoD entirely would still result in an $800 billion increase to next [...]