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

To: dirtboy, sinkspur
As far as the military, it isn't just a matter of throwing money at the problem

Here, Dirt, right from the proverbial horse's mouth...(incidentally, never have I seen any administration and its DoD so far apart on the budget.):

By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Sept. 6, 2001 -- DoD "needs every nickel" to address and arrest the near decade-long decline in America's military, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld told the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense Sept. 5.

Rumsfeld asked the senators to approve DoD's fiscal 2002 budget request so the department can reverse the effects of a decade of "overuse and underfunding" and to fund the transformation of the military to combat the threats of the 21st century.

The 2002 request is the largest increase in defense spending since the mid-1980s. "This is an important first step to get the department out of a hole that the long period of underfunding has put us in," Rumsfeld said.

The request includes money for military quality of life programs, pay raises, housing improvements and TRICARE. In addition, the request bolsters readiness accounts.

Rumsfeld told the senators DoD's priorities in the budget.

"As we prepare for the new challenges … certainly U.S. homeland defense takes on an increasing importance," he said. Asymmetric threats are the more likely threats in the period ahead, he said. These threats include terrorism, attacks by cruise missiles, ballistic missile threats and cyberattacks, and DoD must address these issues.

"The proliferation of weapons with increasing range and power in the hands of multiple potential adversaries means that the coming years will see an expansion of the risks to U.S. population centers as well as our allies and friends," Rumsfeld said. "We will face new threats. Today we're vulnerable to missile attack. That's a fact. And as has been suggested by the chairman, weakness is provocative. It invites people into doing things that they otherwise would avoid."

He said the proposed budget begins funding the transformation of the military necessary to address these threats. "As we work to transform the armed forces, we're working at the same time to transform the way the Department of Defense functions," he said. DoD must encourage a "culture of greater innovation to turn waste into weapons, to show respect for the taxpayers' dollars and to speed the utilization of new technologies into the decades ahead."

Rumsfeld said that even though the world is at peace, it makes sense to increase funding for the American military. "If you think about it, the world economy is what enables the American people to go about their business and have economic opportunities and provide for their families," he said. "If we see an instability interjected into the world economy, because of war or conflict or the fear of war or conflict, the American people lose that.

"We have to remember that what underpins a prosperous economy is peace and stability," he continued. "And what provides peace and stability at this time in the history of the world is the United States of America's military capabilities."

He said the United States spends less than 3 percent of its gross national product on defense. When he first came to Washington in 1957, the country spent 10 percent of GNP on defense. "The idea that we can't afford 3 percent of the GNP to provide peace and stability that makes prosperity and economic opportunity across this globe possible is not debatable: We can," he said.

Seems Shrub is going to have to sack defense because of the tax cut!

268 posted on 09/06/2001 1:28:11 PM PDT by meandog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 265 | View Replies ]


To: meandog
Here, Dirt, right from the proverbial horse's mouth...(incidentally, never have I seen any administration and its DoD so far apart on the budget.):

And I have never seen the Pentagon say it has enough money. I agree we need to work on Defense - but after we re-orient it away from the Cold War and back to a national defense footing. Of course, your guy McVain would be continuing the Clinton tradition of using our military for everything but national defense - he was quite a cheerleader for the Kosovo intervention, wasn't he? And peacekeeping, IMO, is the leading reason why the military has declined over the last decade. So don't lecture US about how much better a job McVain would do running the military - all he would do is finish the job of running it into the ground.

269 posted on 09/06/2001 1:32:06 PM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 268 | View Replies ]

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