Grahamnesty just said Panetta told him that 800,000 DoD layoff notices go out Wednesday even if this apparent deal IS passed. This is in addition to FY13’s existing 10% cut. This is in addition to 10% cuts in other non-DoD areas this week. Feinsteen said the cuts don’t account for priority, that high priority programs are also cut by 10% (actually 13.3% since it 3+ mo into the FY). That’s a DoD budget that has been cut 23% since last year. And they said they will still vote for it, and wait for Feb Debt Cieling debates. Real reason: they can all say they cut without making difficult decisions or taking responsibility. Time for a real conservative approach; cut the active-duty military to 500,000; change the name of the DOD to the Department of War, and only conduct actual wars, not extended occupations.
No more adventures involving 100,000's of troops for extended periods with no plan or idea what success looks like, and no more perpetual funding devices for heavy donators. As a taxpayer, I can't afford to provide for defense contractors, school teachers, AND health insurance opportunists. Time to cut the subsidy payroll.
Time for a real conservative approach; cut the active-duty military to 500,000; change the name of the DOD to the Department of War, and only conduct actual wars, not extended occupations. I assume your cuts in equipment would be commensurate with the size of the force. How many ships, planes, tanks, etc. should this new 500,000 force have? What would be the breakdown among the various services? What percentage of our GDP should be spent on defense?
As of 30 September 2010, 1,430,895 people were on active duty in the military, with an additional 848,000 people in the seven reserve components. You are proposing a reduction of two thirds in active duty personnel.
The Chinese have 2.3 million active duty personnel. Russia has 1 million. Mexico has 267,000. ROK 640,000.
Shouldn't our military be structured based on threat assessments and the capabilities of our potential enemies?