Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:47 AM Jan 2012

Panetta to Offer Strategy for Cutting Military Budget

Panetta to Offer Strategy for Cutting Military Budget

By ELISABETH BUMILLER and THOM SHANKER

WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta is set this week to reveal his strategy that will guide the Pentagon in cutting hundreds of billions of dollars from its budget, and with it the Obama administration’s vision of the military that the United States needs to meet 21st-century threats, according to senior officials.

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.

- more -

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/03/us/pentagon-to-present-vision-of-reduced-military.html

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Panetta to Offer Strategy for Cutting Military Budget (Original Post) ProSense Jan 2012 OP
A quick and effective way would be to ferret out the crooks and parasites that work in the pentagon- dmosh42 Jan 2012 #1
That would be effective atreides1 Jan 2012 #2
If ProSense Jan 2012 #3
Shut down a few oversea bases... that would cut down some budget glowing Jan 2012 #4
Good news. Scurrilous Jan 2012 #5

dmosh42

(2,217 posts)
1. A quick and effective way would be to ferret out the crooks and parasites that work in the pentagon-
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:54 AM
Jan 2012

plotting with the lobbyist for corporations on how to keep the wars going!

atreides1

(16,079 posts)
2. That would be effective
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 12:05 PM
Jan 2012

But it isn't going to happen...the first thing they go after will be pay and benefits for active and retired service members!

Once they've cut that, then they'll start on equipment.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
3. If
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 12:09 PM
Jan 2012

they actually shrink the military, that will save billions. From the OP:

"Instead, he will say that the military will be large enough to fight and win one major conflict"

 

glowing

(12,233 posts)
4. Shut down a few oversea bases... that would cut down some budget
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 12:25 PM
Jan 2012

AND stop making so many damned weapons just because there is a defense contractor in every state. Give these defense contractors the ability to change their production lines into useful items for the modern world. If you have the capability to make a bomb with precision, then you have the capability to create a new type of product that the country could utilize... like a modern transportation capability with a high-operating capacity to self-operate with the precision technology of a weapon. No reason for human error on multiple tracks for train transit, coupled with auto and air hubs to make cities modern, convenient, and more use friendly for people living within and visiting. Time is valuable. Losing time transporting one's self to work or to school or to pick up groceries is time wasted away from work, from family, from down time.

The world does not need more bombs. It's actually easier to create economic warfare on a country, than it is to place large military instillations abroad. AND if you really want certain areas to modernize and for their countries to be ruled more by sectarian law, it would be much better to put a nice foot forward, rather than bombing entire villages and creating enemies for life. If countries get help modernizing conveniently like running water, access to electricity (and doing it in a sane manner with alt. energy like solar, wind, geo-thermal), access to education, building modern housing and modern transportation, access to free internet and computers and cell phones.... all of these things would actually create friends along with opening up the world to people so they can interact within the world.

Young people have conveniently had access to the internet and chatting.. They literally web-chat with one another classroom to classroom. They can learn about each other, what their interests are, what their cultural heritage is about, what types of foods they like, games they play, and what they are interested in doing as a career. The similarities between people connects them. It makes it hard to want to go fight in a war and bomb and shoot people who you met via the internet and learned that their peers share so many connections and similarities.. and that the differences aren't all that scary (I'm not speaking of the extremists like the Tea Party here or violent extremists groups abroad), but unique and neat to learn about.

The biggest connection we see right now is the way that "capitalism" as it is being played out today, is destroying lives here and abroad. Those at the top 1% are vile in every country, and now that we are global and companies are trans-global, those at the top are ruining lives everywhere. I suppose the reason countries are trying to pass thru various legislative processes the ability to limit internet access, is because they are deathly afraid of factual information reaching their people that they cannot control and that people around the world can stay connected and learn from one another and allow their humanity and compassion for one another unite the people of the world in a manner that allows us to create equality, justice, and a better future for ourselves on this planet here and now. Those at the top are losing their hold... Its like they are grasping at the sand, but as we know, sand is fine and slips through the fingers no matter how long or hard they try to hold it or keep trying to pick it back up.

Its why I love Occupy. It was the last connection in the Global resistance. It finally came ashore and it woke us up.... and now, we are finally talking about what is fair and how do we create systems that work. Capitalism cannot continue on... It means that people are always going to need to buy more stuff... and that the stuff we buy is continuously being re-supplied... however, that is fallacy. There are finite resources. WE cannot hope to have a future planet unless we do things differently and figure out a global way to share our resources and also fairly create a happy, fulfilling existence.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Panetta to Offer Strategy...