Gates Proposing Cuts in Military Budget

[Skybird]

You guys forget that the rest of the world for a multitude of reasons has pumped more money into the American capital market over the past 20, 30 years than there are any WWII debts or current US deficits and debts.

The US simply weants more military than it can afford by its own financial and economical power. Its economical resources, heavy industry and cars amongst others, have been relocated in the name of globalisation. One has spend much more than one had produced in fincial incomes, and a good deal for that, especially for the military, was investements that produced no future incomes. Meanwhilwe the education system has constantly detoriated while the power grid is said to represent the standard of a developement country.

In the past 600 years, practically all Euroean great powers and empires overstretched their military spending until breaking point. Practically all European great powers of the past 600 years went bancrupt over defence and war spendings. Some even repeatedly. The USA of today is repeating that megalomaniac mistake, for several reasons. For example it is thought that military superiority could compensate industrial inferiority.

The USA should and must give up the claim to militarily dominate all the globe. It simply cannot maintain that claim economically anymore. That means two things. First, the US needs to set priorities and needs to ignore hotspots that are not of direct interest for it. It already does a bit like that, but I think this trend will strengthen. Second, other nations, the European ones for example, must understand that either they give up certain military security interests being vital to them, or they take over responsibility for these, since the US will and can no longer maintain them all. The US focus of foreign policy already is massively shifting from Europe to the Pacific region anyway.

Adding to this the Euro-crisis and the flawed economic and financial design of the EU and Euzro-Zone, I think europeans are simply saying good-bye to playing a major role on the world stage.

What comes after Europe and the US, are China, India, Brazil and Islam in general - for better or worse. Most likely they will make the same mistakes the Western nations have made over the past 600 years. There is nothing new under the sun - except what has been forgotten since then.

[Ducimus]

Well, the praise, "History always repeats itself" wouldn't be around for so long if it wasn't true. The combination of Iraq and Afganistan, in the long run, may end up having the same effect on us, that Afganistan had on the Soviet Union. Just pessimistic conjecture on my part.

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Well, the praise, "History always repeats itself" wouldn't be around for so long if it wasn't true. The combination of Iraq and Afganistan, in the long run, may end up having the same effect on us, that Afganistan had on the Soviet Union. Just pessimistic conjecture on my part.

But there is relevance in what you say,and for that matter, you do not need to have pessimistic thoughts..

[the_tyrant]

you know, this morning I saw on a Chinese forum a rather interesting opinion: "Over there (America) they have all the committees and stuff, while for us one guy makes all the decisions. Democracy has a price, and surprisingly, its being payed by dictators"

I guess government costs could be further lowered.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by the_tyrant

you know, this morning I saw on a Chinese forum a rather interesting opinion: "Over there (America) they have all the committees and stuff, while for us one guy makes all the decisions. Democracy has a price, and surprisingly, its being payed by dictators"

I guess government costs could be further lowered.

What we need is less government. If history is any indicator, that is probably not what we are going to get.

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

What we need is less government. If history is any indicator, that is probably not what we are going to get.

Another convert to Reagan. "Government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem." -

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

Another convert to Reagan. "Government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem." -

Hardly. Reagan was a big spender. Welcome back.

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

Hardly. Reagan was a big spender. Welcome back.

But very targeted big spending. Reagan spending collapsed the Soviet Union.

Good to be here.

[nikimcbee]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

Hardly. Reagan was a big spender. Welcome back.

You mean Congress. He's just being bipartisan.

[gimpy117]

Good Move. Our spending has been out of control. Sure, we still need to defend our nation with new technology...but we need to get away from writing blank checks.

Also, the wars of Afghanistan and Iraq were some of the least cost effective wars EVER. A lot of it had to do with all of the pork contracts given to friends of the administration. Like all of the cost plus contracts. There were stories of contractors not even doing their jobs building wells etc. and then just turning around and reporting "costs" and getting a cut on top of that.

And to suggest Reagen's spending collapsed the soviet union? They did it to themselves. The CCCP fell from within from political strife, and lost taxes because new regional governments refused taxes to moscow. The cold war lasted a lot longer than just the Reagen years...and to suggest that it was all due to him is farce.

[TLAM Strike]

If anyone cares now...

Defense Tech posted some info on what Gates said...

We’ll have a more detailed look at winners and losers the US Defense Secretary Robert Gates outlined today, but I thought it might help to get the discussion going and for those of you who weren’t watching it live to list the biggies now…

• F-35B will go on a “two year probation” and move to the “back of the line” on development behind the “C” and “A” model. More F/A-18EF Super Hornets will be purchased and older F/A-18 Hornets will have their service lives extended for the Marine Corps to make up for the “B” delay or cut.
• EFV is gone. Savings will be used to upgrade the AAV with more armor, better electronics and weaponry.
• Army SLAMRAAM canceled.
• The Non-Line of Sight Launch System gone.
• Drawdown by 27K Soldiers and up to 20K Marines from end strength in 2015

What’s in — Air Force:

• More Air Force Reapers.
• More EELVs.
• Modernize F-15 radars.
• New long range nuclear strike bomber — that can be “optionally piloted.”

Army:

• More money for Army suicide prevention.
• Modernize the Abrams, Bradley and Stryker vehicle.
• More MC-12 surveillance aircraft.
• Quicker development of Grey Eagle UAV.
• Quicker development of vertical UAS.

Navy:

• More money for jammers.
• More money to upgrade and refit Marine Corps equipment used up in war.
• More money and accelerated development of an unmanned strike capability.
• Life extension for 150 F-18s.
• New ship classes, including a destroyer, LCS, oilers and ocean surveillance craft.

Missile Defense:

• More long range interceptors.
• More radar sites in Asia, Europe and the Middle East.

Gates said the 2012 DoD budget request will be $553 billion, $13 billion less than planned in the previous FYDP. He added that the new FYDP numbers are $78 billion less than previously planned.
“We think we have tightened up a good bit,” Gates said. “We think this is a sustainable budget.”

I don't disagree with anything Gates has proposed...

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by the_tyrant

you know, this morning I saw on a Chinese forum a rather interesting opinion: "Over there (America) they have all the committees and stuff, while for us one guy makes all the decisions. Democracy has a price, and surprisingly, its being payed by dictators"

I guess government costs could be further lowered.

Then that guy knows practically nothing about how China works or the structure of their governments.