• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pentegon set to release new cuts to Active Duty

Don't know about him...but for me....Yes. In fact until we get our own country in order that would be a HELL YES. There's an old saying. You cannot help others out of the gutter unless you can help yourself first. If you can't then you will just get dragged into the gutter also.

When the gutter is genocidal dictatorship, you have no point whatsoever.
 
Obama not only let Putin invade Georgia, he praised him for it.

I wouldn't feel to 'safe' if I were you.


U.S. president George W. Bush's statement to Russia was: "Bullying and intimidation are not acceptable ways to conduct foreign policy in the 21st century."[345] "Russia has invaded a sovereign neighbouring state and threatens a democratic government elected by its people," said Mr Bush. "Such an action is unacceptable in the 21st century." [346]
Russia
 
shrug...

These cut are typical and unsurprising. When liberals are in control, the soldier gets the ax.

When I served under Reagan and Bush, we were getting 1 to 2 % pay raises(Glenn was fighting for us and we did eventually get higher) and most married service people qualified for food stamps.
 
To keep referring to the next generation military equipment as "toys" makes me wonder whether you really do agree with me. Vast technological superiority IS the deterrence I was speaking about. It's not total troops (China and North Korea trounce us), it is the huge gap between US military technology and everyone else.

As for the soldiers pay, it is really a separate issue. Ask the soldier on the front line if he would give up hellfire missile support for an extra $50 in his paycheck.

Yes, paying soldiers more is a noble goal that I support, but not at the cost of technological superiority that helps the US keep those soldiers alive both on the battlefield and by keeping them off the battlefield all together through deterrence.

These aren't "toys".

I cannot thank this post enough. Soldiers are an absolutely critical part of our military and I dislike any cuts to their pay, or even subpar raises. However, the position we are in is that government spending is going to be cut. If you do that, you have to cut from the military, and if you do that, you have to do it in a way that gives you the best possible military for the money. That means hard choices have to be made. Until I see the full list of how this is done, I cannot really comment on whether I think it is the right plan, but that soldier pay and benefits are going to be negatively impacted is something that was inevitable.
 
Fair enough. We already have superior war weapons. Presumably we keep an adequate inventory. Presumably we continue research on improved versions but stop funding huge purchases, particularly those that the military really don't want and are developed to pork an area and re-elect a Congressperson and invest in the upgrades to current equipment that improves the safety of our current military.

So, I retract the term "toys".

Does not work that way. There is a huge difference between having superior weapons, and having vastly superior weapons. How many lives are saved by one improvement to a weapons system? Sometimes alot, and that is so even if you already have the best weapon system in the world.
 
The Airforce has a habit of updating their airframes every few decades and the F-16 and F-18 are both showing their age. Improvements only go so far until you find the airframe needs replacement. VTOL aircraft like the F-35 are the natural replacement to the old style airframes, increasing the flexibility of the military tremendously.

I mean, you can argue that the "military" really doesn't want these new airframes and vehicles... but then they also didn't want airplanes, aircraft carriers, tanks, rifled muskets, etc.

Reminds me of a discussion a little bit ago about the A-10. People where upset because the Air Force wanted to retire it. They made the legitimate point that nothing else could fulfill it's role as well, which is true. The point however is that for the money, other things would increase total military force more than the A-10. People want easy solutions, and rarely are they easy solutions, there are always tradeoffs.
 
Wall Street Journal said:
The military received a 1% increase for 2014 with food prices alone projected to go up 2.5% to 3.5% this year. These people risk their lives everyday for all of us and yet live at or near the poverty level and now some want to cut their pay and increase their costs even more.
I wonder. Is the journalist reporting this being deceptive or ignorant? Food prices are handled on a different line item than base pay. Base pay went up by 1% from 2013 to 2014, but BAS (basic allowance for subsidy) went up by 1.5%. Granted, not the same as the 2.5% to 3%, but the article is in error. What else from these people are in error?

2014 base pay for E-4 with 4 years is $2,328/month and BAS is $357.55. Lets not forget that BAS is tax free, and they get a healthy housing allowance also if they don't live on base.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I am sick and tired of these articles that keep deceiving people.
 
Interesting the cuts will bring us down to levels we had 'before' WWII. With a poontang like Obama in charge with his track record, the rest of the world will likely start displaying their aggressiveness.

I think (as a non American) the cuts are manpower cuts to reduce down to pre WW2 levels - not to reduce equipment down to pre WW2 levels.

This graph may help you understand how you're still spending at least as much as the next 14 biggest spenders on the military and that includes Russia and China's budget combined.

_72789460_military_spending_624v3.gif


Why do you "need" to spend 3 times as much as China and Russia's total yearly expenditure anyway?
 
The Airforce has a habit of updating their airframes every few decades and the F-16 and F-18 are both showing their age. Improvements only go so far until you find the airframe needs replacement. VTOL aircraft like the F-35 are the natural replacement to the old style airframes, increasing the flexibility of the military tremendously.

I mean, you can argue that the "military" really doesn't want these new airframes and vehicles... but then they also didn't want airplanes, aircraft carriers, tanks, rifled muskets, etc.

Does not work that way. There is a huge difference between having superior weapons, and having vastly superior weapons. How many lives are saved by one improvement to a weapons system? Sometimes alot, and that is so even if you already have the best weapon system in the world.

So, where does this end? Surely you know I am not advocating surrender. I have read of several cases of major weapons development that have run billions above the already lavish budgets. I have also read of instances where our soldiers died because their vehicles were not properly armored - even i an era where the military was under almost no fiscal control. So, there are smart investments and foolish ones.

Now, if you are one of the people who believe that the spending by government in excess of revenue is a good thing (and based on our current debts - this might even be true though it seems illogical) then sure, lets not cut anything. Lets design and build better and better weapons even if the current military feels they are unnecessary (NO SARCASM INTENDED).

But - let me respectfully point out why I don't support this thought process. We've done this on a miniature scale with our police departments. Instead of their trusty Glock and a pump shotgun, out officers now drive armored vehicles, dress in "space suits" and operate fully automatic weapons. Do you feel any safer? I don't. If anything, it's made them engage at a level that seems inappropriate, such as using large SWAT forces to arrest minor criminals. For my usual annoying anecdote, my neighbor Ulysses apparently sold drugs. Apparently he sold them to undercover officers over a period of time. Since he constantly pestered me for work (I am a landlord and I hire occasional workers for repairs and yard cleaning type stuff) he must not have been very high level. In the early morning hours, they surrounded his townhouse (shared walls) and they blew his door off with grenades, they dragged his little kids screaming violently out of the house, threw them to the ground and they must have used 50 officers in this project. When I opened my garage door (not realizing WTF was going on) they pointed a gun at me and ordered me to get the **** back inside (which I did instantly). There was no resistance - in another era, 3 detectives would have accomplished the arrest.

Our military is pretty well armed right now. How much better do they need to be? 100 times? 10 times? double? Where does it stop? Not developing a trillion dollar plane is not the same as proper armor for a battle vehicle. Nobody would suggest we don't protect our soldiers or invest in maintaining the equipment they use. Nobody would suggest that we don't research improvements to our current aircraft. But if we won't close any bases, we won't stop building unrequested systems, we will just consume more and more of our resources on a military that already spends nearly what the rest of the world spends every year.

I'm an army brat. My father was a 100% disabled Veteran until he died in 2012. Blinded in the Korean war, he lived in darkness for so many decades. I am not anti-military. I just feel that it may be time to lower the priorities the military gets. If you genuinely believe that every one of these projects they want to cancel will risk that same sad ending for heros like my Father, then sure, lets forget about spending restrictions and print up another trillion. But lets stop bitching about "government spending". Apparently it doesn't matter.

FWIW, Israel spends 14 billion compared to our 680 billion. They are subject to attack by every country they have borders with. We do not have but 2 borders. Nobody seems to be willing or able to attack us other than lunatic terrorist groups. Is there anything to be learned from this? Maybe not, maybe I'm wrong.
 
I cannot thank this post enough. Soldiers are an absolutely critical part of our military and I dislike any cuts to their pay, or even subpar raises. However, the position we are in is that government spending is going to be cut. If you do that, you have to cut from the military, and if you do that, you have to do it in a way that gives you the best possible military for the money. That means hard choices have to be made. Until I see the full list of how this is done, I cannot really comment on whether I think it is the right plan, but that soldier pay and benefits are going to be negatively impacted is something that was inevitable.


I think before we again start talking about cutting the military, we should hold the governments feet to the fire over fixing entitlements....It's kind of like this whole immigration thing. Fix the border security first then talk about the rest....
 
I think (as a non American) the cuts are manpower cuts to reduce down to pre WW2 levels - not to reduce equipment down to pre WW2 levels.

This graph may help you understand how you're still spending at least as much as the next 14 biggest spenders on the military and that includes Russia and China's budget combined.

_72789460_military_spending_624v3.gif


Why do you "need" to spend 3 times as much as China and Russia's total yearly expenditure anyway?

All the equipment in the world is useless without the manpower to use it.
 
I think (as a non American) the cuts are manpower cuts to reduce down to pre WW2 levels - not to reduce equipment down to pre WW2 levels.

This graph may help you understand how you're still spending at least as much as the next 14 biggest spenders on the military and that includes Russia and China's budget combined.

_72789460_military_spending_624v3.gif


Why do you "need" to spend 3 times as much as China and Russia's total yearly expenditure anyway?
Partially because we protect our allies that don't spend so much. Besides. How much do the people making military equipment in China make vs. our union labor in Boeing et al?
 
I think before we again start talking about cutting the military, we should hold the governments feet to the fire over fixing entitlements....It's kind of like this whole immigration thing. Fix the border security first then talk about the rest....

Absolutely.

At least the military personnel are working for the tax payer money they get. I say the first cuts should go to the non producers of society.
 
Absolutely.

At least the military personnel are working for the tax payer money they get. I say the first cuts should go to the non producers of society.

I think two years in the military should be mandatory at age 18.
 
I think two years in the military should be mandatory at age 18.

I would never want to serve with slaves. Conscripts are, throughout history, unreliable.
 
I think two years in the military should be mandatory at age 18.
I would like everyone to sever, but it isn't practical in our nation.

Do they get to keep their weapon after the two years is up?
 
I would never want to serve with slaves. Conscripts are, throughout history, unreliable.

Especially with the types we have... Too many subgroups of the American culture have no respect for others. I would not want to see these people serve.
 
I think before we again start talking about cutting the military, we should hold the governments feet to the fire over fixing entitlements....It's kind of like this whole immigration thing. Fix the border security first then talk about the rest....

Because as soon as you start on the "cut everything...except stuff I like" mantra, nothing gets cut.
 
Because as soon as you start on the "cut everything...except stuff I like" mantra, nothing gets cut.

No one is saying that...Entitlements are far and away the largest drain on our budget, it only makes sense to look at that first.
 
No one is saying that...Entitlements are far and away the largest drain on our budget, it only makes sense to look at that first.
Especially when illegal aliens get them too. Where is the fiscal control on these?
 
I am all for cuts to federal spending including the military. The biggest problem with this is that the military won't cut in the right places. The military wastes so much money on useless crap it is unbelievable. I guarantee the military will cut things like unit training funds way before they cut things like generals doing battlefield circulations. Or how about stop sending people to jump school and than continuing to pay those people jump pay when they are not in a job that will ever make a combat jump.
The war in Astan and Iraq were perfect examples of military waste. There were so many high level commands over there soaking up resources when they could have done everything they needed to do conus. With things like SatCom and siper net it dosent matter if you are in the next room or the other side of the world so why deploy them.

I am in a unit that runs pretty high on rank but for the short time I was in BAF I am sure I saw more Cols and CW5s than I normally see in a week. And where there is one Col there is a ton of lower folks supporting him.
 
Back
Top Bottom