Yes We Can Cut the Defense Budget: Why it's Time to Stop the Military Spending Spree

[Ban Hammer 13,363]

Normally in business, when the company has too many people for the level of business that its currently capable of, that would be considered time for layoffs.

it's a stretch to compare national defense to a business. however, i have seen firsthand in the military the budget knife cutting positions and people. lost lots of good people that way.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Frank wasn't advocating an across the board, one-shot cut. He said he would look into the different areas where we can cut military spending. Continuing the current budget makes absolutely no sense.

Recent history has shown that in a time of military change in the United States, particularly after an extended period of combat, the Armed Forces have the potential to regress into a "hollow force" – that is, a force with a large number of troops but without an adequate budget to pay for training and equipment modernization.

link

The term "hollow force" was coined by former Army Chief of Staff Edward "Shy" Meyer in regard to the period immediately after Vietnam. A lack of resources and innovation combined with low morale meant, despite having an Army that looked strong on paper because of its large numbers, the United States? senior service was in reality poorly prepared to fight. In retrospect, the term has also been applied to the period after World War II.

link

Look, just like any government program - there can be excess spending and inadequate spending. The issue of cutting our current military budget isn't an ideological argument, but based on necessity. We cannot sustain our current military spending.

as pointed out by aj earlier, our defense spending isn't as high percentage wise as many other countries.

need i remind you of what ronald reagan once said: Of the four wars in my lifetime, none came about because the U.S. was too strong.

Can you show me those stats?

[Dan J 277]

Normally in business, when the company has too many people for the level of business that its currently capable of, that would be considered time for layoffs.

it's a stretch to compare national defense to a business. however, i have seen firsthand in the military the budget knife cutting positions and people. lost lots of good people that way.

We are 60 years past WWII, and almost 20 years past the end of the Cold War. Do we really need an active military of the size we do today? We do have the draft for a reason.

[Ban Hammer 13,363]

Frank wasn't advocating an across the board, one-shot cut. He said he would look into the different areas where we can cut military spending. Continuing the current budget makes absolutely no sense.

Recent history has shown that in a time of military change in the United States, particularly after an extended period of combat, the Armed Forces have the potential to regress into a "hollow force" – that is, a force with a large number of troops but without an adequate budget to pay for training and equipment modernization.

link

The term "hollow force" was coined by former Army Chief of Staff Edward "Shy" Meyer in regard to the period immediately after Vietnam. A lack of resources and innovation combined with low morale meant, despite having an Army that looked strong on paper because of its large numbers, the United States? senior service was in reality poorly prepared to fight. In retrospect, the term has also been applied to the period after World War II.

link

Look, just like any government program - there can be excess spending and inadequate spending. The issue of cutting our current military budget isn't an ideological argument, but based on necessity. We cannot sustain our current military spending.

as pointed out by aj earlier, our defense spending isn't as high percentage wise as many other countries.

need i remind you of what ronald reagan once said: Of the four wars in my lifetime, none came about because the U.S. was too strong.

Can you show me those stats?

i'm certain you can look up topics by aj as easily as i can.

Normally in business, when the company has too many people for the level of business that its currently capable of, that would be considered time for layoffs.

it's a stretch to compare national defense to a business. however, i have seen firsthand in the military the budget knife cutting positions and people. lost lots of good people that way.

We are 60 years past WWII, and almost 20 years past the end of the Cold War. Do we really need an active military of the size we do today? We do have the draft for a reason.

no, we don't. there is no draft.

[Heracles 417]

Don't tell me they are dumb enough to cut R&D. That is absolutely the worst area to cut in. Moves like that can put a country 10 to 20 years back.

Why not cut by closing down the many bases in overseas countries. Let Italy, Germany, Japan, South Korea pay for themselves.

[spookyturtle 9,466]

no, we don't. there is no draft.

The draft ended about 35 years ago.

[Dan J 277]

Frank wasn't advocating an across the board, one-shot cut. He said he would look into the different areas where we can cut military spending. Continuing the current budget makes absolutely no sense.

Recent history has shown that in a time of military change in the United States, particularly after an extended period of combat, the Armed Forces have the potential to regress into a "hollow force" – that is, a force with a large number of troops but without an adequate budget to pay for training and equipment modernization.

link

The term "hollow force" was coined by former Army Chief of Staff Edward "Shy" Meyer in regard to the period immediately after Vietnam. A lack of resources and innovation combined with low morale meant, despite having an Army that looked strong on paper because of its large numbers, the United States? senior service was in reality poorly prepared to fight. In retrospect, the term has also been applied to the period after World War II.

link

Look, just like any government program - there can be excess spending and inadequate spending. The issue of cutting our current military budget isn't an ideological argument, but based on necessity. We cannot sustain our current military spending.

as pointed out by aj earlier, our defense spending isn't as high percentage wise as many other countries.

need i remind you of what ronald reagan once said: Of the four wars in my lifetime, none came about because the U.S. was too strong.

Can you show me those stats?

i'm certain you can look up topics by aj as easily as i can.

Normally in business, when the company has too many people for the level of business that its currently capable of, that would be considered time for layoffs.

it's a stretch to compare national defense to a business. however, i have seen firsthand in the military the budget knife cutting positions and people. lost lots of good people that way.

We are 60 years past WWII, and almost 20 years past the end of the Cold War. Do we really need an active military of the size we do today? We do have the draft for a reason.

no, we don't. there is no draft.

We don't have an active draft right now. But we have the ability to enact one should the need arise. AKA Selective Service.

But of course, drafts tend not to be very popular in a democracy, so having an oversized active military force, gets around that PR nightmare.

Edited November 19, 2008 by Dan + Gemvita

[Heracles 417]

Can you show me those stats?