Posted on 01/20/2002 9:49:47 AM PST by cody32127
While noting that U.S. armed forces remain the most powerful in the world, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld blasted the Clinton administration Sunday for defense cutbacks he said left the military in such a "run down" condition that rebuilding could take up to a decade.
"The infrastructure had decayed and it is still decayed and it will take now probably six, eight, ten years to get it back to the place that it ought to be," Rumsfeld told NBC "Meet the Press" host Tim Russert.
The Bush Defense Secretary then added, "It takes time to run down a great military and it takes time to build one back up."
He suggested that the full dimension of the Clinton cutbacks were only now being felt. "During a president's term of office, what he does with the military has very little effect during that period of time. Each president inherits what was done in preceding periods."
Rumsfeld was responding to Democratic Party and media arguments that the U.S.'s success in the Afghanistan war shows that criticism of Clinton's military cutbacks is unjustified.
Separately, the New York Post reported Sunday that a full 89 percent of Clinton budget cuts under the president's "Reinventing Government" initiative came at the expense of the armed forces.
In his recent book "In the Arena," former Reagan administration Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger contends that President Clinton had reduced U.S. military forces by approximately 50 percent during his eight years in office.
89% of Clinton's reinventing government came at the expense of the armed forces. 89%!!!!! Good grief.
this is kinda mind blowing but not totally unexpected since ol' rapist was throwing the GAY thing in their faces in an attempt to destroy the military.
Now, Have anything to say about that? My unit hemo'd soldiers worse than an arterial cut. People jumped ship like rats. And under Clinton, officers that had nothing better to do than getting their command killed got promoted faster than those that were worth following. Mostly kiss ups and psychofants. And it wasn't just my unit that experienced this. But since I am out now, I can say something about it. We were threatened if anyone blew a whistle about it. Never heard about that? Doesn't surprise me one bit. It was under the, "You can't speak disparaging words against the bent one, traitor, sleazebag in the Ovary office, Chicken in Charge." bullcrap they handed us.
I have been "active" in the Reserve these past years, plus work as a Civil Servant at a Naval Shipyard ... so I have "my finger on the pulse" and I can tell you - the military have lots of love and respect for Reagan, Bush(41) and Bush(43) - and nothing but contempt for Clinton.
Look I've posted this before and I'll say it again. I blame GHW Bush, Bill Clinton, both of their S.O.D.'s both houses during those terms and both parties sitting during those terms. Even when the GOP won the houses they sat there like a bunch of idiots letting Clinton put it deeper and deeper simply because they thought it would make him look bad and them look good and didn't give a care one way or another if any ship floated or gun fired.Bush should have fought harder. He was no Ronald Reagan mainly because he was against most of Reagans policies. The crapolla that candidates shouldn't speak evil against the party chosen is hilarious Bush Sr done it till the day Reagan made him running mate.
Go back and read that article I linked. We were down to 12 carriers at the end of Bush sr SOD Aspin wanted 10 Borda said 12. I think W wants 10 as well. Like I said if we are supposedly entering an extended conflict somebody better start acting like it then and do the necessary build up. But let's address the real issue here. It is the constitutional duty of government to provide for the nations defense. That alone above all else should be priority #1. If we ask a sailor to spend 6 months operating those 8 boilers then we should make sure those 8 boilers and related machinery and piping are safe enough so that sailor and half his shipmates are blown to bits and burned to death by a steam break because some politician wanted to save a buck for the national forest or faith based programs. Forget that we are supposed to be at war right? Our defense is suffering and all aviable money should be going there till the level of readiness is sufficent that we can handle problems without calling up reserves all the time and equipment maintenance get's done in a timely manner. The patch and go military we have been using for the past 13 years needs to be halted. The maintenance needs to be done properly that means down time.
Look I support all military including down to the local NG's. Why are we using them as deployed troops? That is not the same thing as a combat ready unit and you know it. NG's especially Army NG's are vets from the Navy and Air Force as well and probably make up 50% of the units. These guys never touched an M-16 except with blanks, never had combat training and yet we allow them to be deployed as ready troops? This garbage started under Pappy Bush because the military had already been down graded to that point. If you see nothing wrong with a carrier having on two of it's generators functional, fuel problems and no radar as a ship ready for a 6 month deployment then me and you have very opposing views on combat readiness. I'll explain to you why there was no radar in the article I posted. With two generators that meant no chillers were functional. Chillers are the ships airconditioning system. No air conditioning no electronics believe me on that one I spent 4 years in the AC&R shop.
The gyro would have possibly been functional as it's location had a back up A/C unit. Now when both parties of congress and the senate as well as POTUS start addressing this problem with the seriousness it deserves ahead of spending money on nonsense issues some even beyond legitimate function of government then I'll reconsider.
I remember that too. I was watching from the comfort of my home, of course. But I felt nothing but awe and admiration for Ronald Reagan and MRS. REAGAN, comforting the families and the troops. I just shook my head and told my husband that that man had the hardest job in the world and he would always have my deepest admiration for the way he and Nancy carried it out. No smirking jokes and phony tears like X42 at Ron Brown's funeral. Reagan was a real man, like GW Bush is proving to be.
This nation has been cursed with legions of lazy people who vote Democrat. The Democrats in Congress cut spending for the military (except their own little pork barrel projects that the military want). Republican Presidents have never had a clear Republican House and Senate to help them steer the "ship of state" onto a proper course.
Where were YOU when the 1994 Republican House and Republican Senate were pilloried by the Democrats and the Media for their "Medicare Cuts", "School Lunch Cuts", "Shutting down the Government" .. .. that effort cut the heart out of the conservative movement ... and too few conservatives were speaking out against the lies. Where were you when the Democrats forced the military cuts onto Bush(41). Were you rallying your friends and family to speak out, letter write, etc.?? Were you writing to Bush to ask him to "stay the course" and resist the Democrat Congress.
It is convenient to blame someone else ... but fact is, it is more your own DAMN FAULT than it is Bush's. He probably wondered where the moral support was when he got boxed into corner after corner by the Democraps and the Media, and groups failed to speak out to support him.
I go back to the bottom line . .. Bush respected the military, and did not mis-use them. He tried, and for that, I will forgive him his mistakes. Clinton - his actions weren't mistakes, they were deliberate, and are unforgiveable. You lack clarity to see the difference, you lack charity to forgive an honorable man, and thus you show you lack honor and don't deserve any charity for YOUR mistakes.
I will retract this harsh condemnation against you if you can show me that the PUBLIC wanted different than what the Democraps delivered and the public fought against the Congress for more military funding. Or show me that Bush wanted the same or less military spending than the Congress forced him to accept ... but absent that .. . you have no claim to be accusing others when in fact you too might be part of the "silent masses" that silently acquiesed to the gradual deterioration of the military because no one stood up to the Democraps and called them for what they are ... "TRAITORS and SOCIALISTS". It is convenient to "BLAME" ... but what the heck have you done that is so good and helpful to the military? Right now, you seem to give aid and comfort to the Democraps - ("everyone does it" and "it started with Bush" is the Democrap mantra to shift blame away from Clinton.) Heck, the military growth started under Reagan, but the peak spending year was in 1986, so some Democraps say that the decline started with Reagan in 1987 - another variation of "it's not Clinton's fault".
I would suggest that you look at G.H.W.Bush's military record, his record of service, including V.P. under Reagan, how he waged the Gulf War . ... and give him the respect that he has EARNED ... and cut him some slack over his mistakes. I have yet to find any serious conservative who is ready to trash R.Reagan for the 1983 Beirut barracks massacre ... give R.Reagan's overall record ...he earned the respect of the military.
Mike
I had the same experience sitting at home eating breakfast surrounded by a nice new snow cover,when I saw that weasel Russert implying the military that was doing such a great job was Clinton's military.
Rumsfield did a good job of deflating that baloon.
I only wished that Rummy would have gotten a little more agressive and said. We have a good military in spite of Clinton . Militay people love this country and will get the job done in spite of the commander in chief. - Tom
Thank you for your service, but CVN-71 is not the Rosie. It is the TR, the Big Stick, the Roosevelt, but not the Rosie. My son spent four years on the TR, including the Gulf War. Don't let him hear you call it the Rosie.
Oh please stop the GOP apoligies. The cowards sold out. They fought for position, got it, then concentrated on keeping it rather than the very agendas that got them in power to begin with. The GOP leadership did what it did to itself and they continue to do so today by refusing to clean up their own corruption and useless chair warmers. What next an accusation of forcing Newt & others to have an affair?
The ones who did fight the good fight have my upmost respect. Notice though it was the Senate 10 including Lott who spat in the faces of the house managers. Oh I forgot we are to forget that also. You see unlike many who cursed, yelled and screamed about the Clinton Excutive Orders, Deals with China, and so on I don't support Bush doing so either. I do not support Fast track trade and I was angrier when he used 9/11 as an excuse for it. If GWB was half the POTUS and supported half the things some persons mistakenly think he does he would do OK. Bush is a created legend and there are myths galore on what stands he took on issues. Nobody bothered to read them. They are Clinton/Gore LITE. Pro 2nd Ammendment? Youbest read the fine print on that one.
But as for Bush Srs Gulf War? Let's put it like this shall we? Any POTUS who takes this nation to war for any intention other than elimination of the enemy to a point where they are never a threat again including stopping just short of achieving that victory has my profound disgust. I put them to the same level as LBJ. You fight to win complete unconditional victory or you stay home. If the intention is not to remove the enemy then no I do not support it. We lost in effect three wars because POTUS of those times failed to do this. We as a nation owe the vets of those wars a profound apology for sending them to wars we had no intention of actually winning.
I have no problem with us going to war. JUST DECLARE IT AND DO IT RIGHT!
It was funding for another carrier. But if you had looked toward the bottom where I put up the bold underlined print that should have explained it.
This thread has Rumsfield accusing Clinton of shorting the military and rightfully so. However I'm showing the shorting started under Bush sr and Sec. of Defense Cheney. Have you been following the USS KENNEDY threads? If you think it was bad then you must have missed this part. Keep in mind what Rumsfield said. The previous POTUS made a mess of the military. Now the following paragraph was written in August of 1993. Clinton took office Jan 20, 1993. A ship does not get this way over night here's that paragraph.
The America needs constant attention. Commissioned in 1965, it is showing its age. A month before leaving Norfolk, a senior enlisted crew member complained to his congressman: The ship was operating on only two of its six electric generators, without radar and unable to pump fuel. This would be its third six-month cruise in three years, and without the standard 18 months at home for repairs, salt water and full steaming had taken their toll.
The pot calling the kettle black? Three six month deployments in three years when a carriers cycle for that is 5 years in a carriers normal cycle. Yes Warner is from Virgina the only state with a shipyard left that can produce a carrier thanks to everyones cuts.
But what is getting lost in this is why are the two newest conventional powered carriers in this shape? Their age? No I don't think so. Kitty Hawk and Constellation are nearly 5-10 years older and the AMERICA was decommed in 1996. So why then? To get rid of carriers period namely conventionals. The KITTY HAWK & CONNY will be decommed this decade. The AMERICA and KENNEDY would have made it possibly to 2015-2020 if they had been properly maintained.
BTW I was in when the other Rossevelt was just being decommed. The nick name was Rosie.
Have a look see at this DOD link and see who actually called for the cuts first. I do not find it an unusual question to ask why two aircraft carriers two years difference in age were ran to early graves while two other ships their class nearly 10 years older are still in service. I ask why was maintenance neglected? Look at the opening statement in Free Republic and actually read it.
Better yet here it is so you want have to go off page.
Free Republic is an online gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism on the web. We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America. And we always have fun doing it. Hoo-yah!
Whats wrong do you as some others think this statement does not as well apply to the GOP? Bush sr messed up so did Cheney so did both parties in congress so did Clinton. Why is that such a hard fact for some to except? It's hypocritical to call the DEMS names and not address the wrongs as well inside the GOP for doing the same thing.
What some can't comprehend is there is a difference between someone being a good person and a great leader. Jimmy Carter is a good man and was a sorry POTUS the same with Bush sr. Reagan was a good man and a good POTUS. Bill Clinton is a sorry man and the most sorry POTUS bar none.
But when I read an appointed office holder from the GOP trying to blame all the military problems on just one person I draw the line. There is plenty who caused this. Let me tell you a constitutional fact of life. Bill Clinton only got away with what congress allowed him to. It was their duty to stop him. It was not their duty to play party politics and leave this nation with a so called damaged POTUS in office it backfired on them. They lost the senate for it. The GOP leadership can not continue to make the lame excuse the DEMS have made them a victim. They fought a lot harder as a minority than they are now. The DEMs could not ask for better usefull idiots than Lott and Hassert. What's even more disturbing is the cheers for the high poll ratings. DUH, hey people get a clue that means the opposition is well pleased also. Get it?
Why, Joe LIEberman says Clinton built up the military and that is why the war on terrorism has gone soooo smoothly.
Help!...Snowed in....four days....desperate....out of meds....cat soup tomorrow....Help!
Greg
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.