Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sen. Cruz: We Should Not Cut Our Military Force in the Face of Grave Threats Around the World
Cruz.Senate.Gov ^ | July 9, 2015 | Senator Ted Cruz

Posted on 07/10/2015 1:29:07 PM PDT by SoConPubbie

Need for a strong national defense is greater than any time in recent history

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) issued the following statement regarding the Pentagon’s announcement of cuts to our nation’s military force levels: 

“As directed by the President, the Army announced it will reduce its force level to 450,000 soldiers by the end of fiscal year 2017. Despite the increasing threats to our national security, this Administration is doubling down on the arbitrary and destructive cuts to our military that have characterized the last six and a half years. Our national priorities, our global and economic influence, and the foremost Constitutional responsibility of homeland security are all supported by our military capabilities -- and the truth of the matter is that this President’s policies have made our need for our military ever greater. Russian aggression in Eastern Europe, radical Islamic terrorism throughout the Middle East, China’s forcible expansion of its territory in the South China Sea, and a pending deal with Iran that will provide the Islamic Republic with the resources and time to develop a nuclear weapon are all more pressing threats than they were when the Obama Administration took office. And all of them are reasons to, at a minimum, maintain the current force structure, if not increase it. Yet the Commander in Chief chooses this moment to separate 40,000 additional soldiers from the United States Army. My home state of Texas will unfortunately bear some of this burden; 4,898 soldiers and their families will get caught up in President Obama’s quest for a short-sighted political legacy.

“To make the planned reductions even more troubling, the modernization of our capabilities and operational readiness are also suffering, which will place the lives of our soldiers at greater risk the next time they are deployed in combat. In addition, our reductions have not encouraged similar disarmament among forces hostile to the United States, who are building up their militaries at an alarming rate. I will continue to support legislation that increases the strength of our national security and oppose increased domestic spending that is bankrupting our nation. We need to rebuild our military in this time of global insecurity, not hasten its demise.”

###



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: 2016election; cruz; election2016; tedcruz; texas
"If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures." - Alexander Hamilton
 
"We don't intend to turn the Republican Party over to the traitors in the battle just ended. We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the Party over to the so-called moderates wouldn’t make any sense at all." -- President Ronald Reagan
 
"A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice." - Thomas Paine 1792
 
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." - Samuel Adams
 
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams
 

1 posted on 07/10/2015 1:29:07 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie; Kale; Jarhead9297; COUNTrecount; notaliberal; DoughtyOne; MountainDad; aposiopetic; ...
    Ted Cruz Ping!

    If you want on/off this ping list, please let me know.
    Please beware, this is a high-volume ping list!

    CRUZ or LOSE!

2 posted on 07/10/2015 1:29:34 PM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

Cruz is showing real wisdom.

On one hand he’s suggesting that we use more caution in deciding what fights to get into and on the other hand he wants to stay prepared for fights not of our choosing.


3 posted on 07/10/2015 1:35:01 PM PDT by cripplecreek (Sad fact, most people just want a candidate to tell them what they want to hear)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
Sen. Cruz: We Should Not Cut Our Military Force in the Face of Grave Threats Around the World

This is what happens when you elect an idiot who's only qualification for office is being a particular color.

About History? he's an idiot. About Science? He's an Idiot.

You know what he's good at? Flapping his mouth in such a way that stupid people think he's smart.

This man is stupider than Jimmy Carter, and I never thought I would say that about any president.

Incompetent bumbling fool that has made this nation a laughingstock around the world, and the consequences of which will likely end in much innocent bloodshed.

4 posted on 07/10/2015 1:36:06 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
Anyone here remember Rand Paul?

RAND PAUL, WEAKER THAN OBAMA?
Image and video hosting by TinyPic

5 posted on 07/10/2015 2:02:21 PM PDT by ansel12 (libertarians have always been for gay marriage and polygamy, gay Scout leaders, gay military.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

Maybe Obama isn’t such an idiot. He seems to be doing everything possible to weaken and defeat America. And he’s brilliant at it! If that’s his goal and I believe it is.


6 posted on 07/10/2015 2:23:54 PM PDT by Calpublican (No Comprendo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Calpublican

Agreed....His objective is the downfall of the USA and he is achieving it.


7 posted on 07/10/2015 2:37:34 PM PDT by Boonie ("Nuke 'em all...Let Allah sort 'em out...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Calpublican
Maybe Obama isn’t such an idiot. He seems to be doing everything possible to weaken and defeat America. And he’s brilliant at it! If that’s his goal and I believe it is.

No, he's an idiot. He is a loose nut dropped into a massive but highly complex set of gears. He is as smart as a bolt. He's just in the wrong place at the wrong time, and he's tearing stuff up beyond his comprehension level.

8 posted on 07/10/2015 4:02:07 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

So, we’re gonna give the pink slip to 40,000 US troops. American citizens, all. But we’re gonna allow and financially assist the over 100,000 ILLEGAL, UNACCOMPANIED MINORS that have come across the border just this year, on top of the ones that came here during last years invasion.

We live in an alternate universe.


9 posted on 07/10/2015 4:27:04 PM PDT by qaz123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

While I agree with the ever growing threats from overseas I don’t really see the point is raising an army for Washington to defend us while Washington levy’s unrelenting war upon our basic rights here at home.

What exactly are we defending in 20 years?

No the Army, Navy and Airforce should be gutted, at this point under Obama they are more likely to be used against our rights than in defense of them.

If Washington ever decides it actually wanted to defend our interest we can quickly rebuild such a force such as we did before world war 2 and every other war prior to that last declared war.


10 posted on 07/10/2015 4:53:46 PM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise; SoConPubbie
No the Army, Navy and Airforce should be gutted, at this point under Obama they are more likely to be used against our rights than in defense of them.


If Washington ever decides it actually wanted to defend our interest we can quickly rebuild such a force such as we did before world war 2 and every other war prior to that last declared war.


And our lack of preparation led to untold thousands of American and allied lives lost (Millions if you count those who died in death camps)
11 posted on 07/10/2015 5:13:41 PM PDT by cripplecreek (Sad fact, most people just want a candidate to tell them what they want to hear)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
“”No the Army, Navy and Airforce should be gutted, at this point under Obama they are more likely to be used against our rights than in defense of them.

If Washington ever decides it actually wanted to defend our interest we can quickly rebuild such a force such as we did before world war 2 and every other war prior to that last declared war.”

And our lack of preparation led to untold thousands of American and allied lives lost (Millions if you count those who died in death camps)”

You may be right in that had we been prepared before the war we could have jumped in more quickly. Not that FDR would have done so or even if he was inclined to try.

The truth is you have to try an anticipate problems because you can't always be prepared for everything and in this case being prepared has a huge on going cost and risk that is probably greater than the rare occasion on which that perpetration makes a balancing difference.

For us that risk has just got 10 times higher given the decidedly oppressive and lawless direction our ‘federal Government’ has decided to go in. I think perhaps we can't afford the risk or the costs anymore. It is time to mothball the army, navy and air force. Transfer the bulk of their assets and personnel to the State national guard where members may hold other jobs while retaining most of their skills and usefulness in the event of war or dafter(Hence National guard NOT reserve).

Our states must furthermore take a more assertive control over the guard beauro so that Washington can't simply coop the guard to gratuitously levy war against the states and their people. This means being careful about officer selection, and rather strict about dismissing officers that show inclination to act against us.

The Navy is the only place you have a case to be made but in this case the resources should be focused upon upgrading our existing fleet to modern standards.

12 posted on 07/11/2015 6:41:05 AM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Boonie; DiogenesLamp

Agreed....His “objective is the downfall of the USA and he is achieving it.”

...With the help of the Republican legislature.


13 posted on 07/11/2015 8:28:41 AM PDT by Calpublican (No Comprendo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson