Panel commissioned by Barney Frank recommends nearly $1T in defense cuts

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Leave the military alone and don't make drastic cuts. It's not a friendly world in which we live.

Unlike some others here I'm not so naive as to believe that isolationism makes sense in a military context. The US owes its position in the world because of its military presence in strategic regions.

That said, clearly the economic conditions require that cuts be made. As the dod gets the largest portion of the national budget I don't think its possible to ringfence it from cuts. If you do that you aren't going to make much of a dent in the deficit.

America needs to face the hard realities of the situation that its in.

[Dan J 277]

Leave the military alone and don't make drastic cuts. It's not a friendly world in which we live.

This sort of option makes it easy to exploit defense related spending for all sorts of waste. How many billions went into Iraq and into pockets of contractors who never delivered services? How many multi-million dollar defense company CEO's do we need to defend the country?

[SuperDuper! 230]

Over 10 years, which is about 100 billion per year, which is barely 10% of the yearly defense related spending of 1 to 1.2 trillion each year.

A trillion here, a trillion there, and pretty soon you are talking about a lot of money.

After a trillion, it is quadrillion, folks!

[spookyturtle 9,466]

Sorry dude but most other countries like China are too busy investing their money in China to start any war. Even Russia of all countries has smartened up. $300,000,000,000 a year is still more than enough to protect the country.

You also seem to ignore the American streets; with many being worse looking and more dangerous than Baghdad streets. Yet when it comes to that, the police have no money to fight the crime and protect the cities Americans live in. Just had a look at the women cops of Memphis show yesterday. I cannot believe that is America, the country you beat on about, as it looks like a third world country. You think that is what imaginary enemies want or are going to attack? Good one bud. Get over your pride and wake up dude.

The problem with the current approach is that the US military has a blank check book. All while Americans, their cities and their communities are counting dimes to pay for power alone.

But you live here instead of the promised land. Australia would be a sitting duck for a Chinese invasion, basically defenseless. Who's going to bail your sorry a$$es out, Norway? Sweden, or one of the countries with the happiest people? You come from an insignificant player on the world stage. A weak US is bad for the entire world.

[spookyturtle 9,466]

This sort of option makes it easy to exploit defense related spending for all sorts of waste. How many billions went into Iraq and into pockets of contractors who never delivered services? How many multi-million dollar defense company CEO's do we need to defend the country?

I never said that I agreed with the war in Iraq. We need to be able to go anywhere on the globe with a substantial force to keep things in balance. We don't have to invade or attack, the rest of the world just needs to know that we can on a moments notice. See what happens when one of these nut leaders uses the bomb. Who will be there? We need to have the balls that Israel does.

[Dan J 277]

I never said that I agreed with the war in Iraq. We need to be able to go anywhere on the globe with a substantial force to keep things in balance. We don't have to invade or attack, the rest of the world just needs to know that we can on a moments notice. See what happens when one of these nut leaders uses the bomb. Who will be there? We need to have the balls that Israel does.

Sure, but do we really need to spend as much as we do to maintain that capability?

If you put defence spending into a sort of untouchable category, you leave it wide open for corruption and waste.

[Heracles 417]

But you live here instead of the promised land. Australia would be a sitting duck for a Chinese invasion, basically defenseless. Who's going to bail your sorry a$$es out, Norway? Sweden, or one of the countries with the happiest people? You come from an insignificant player on the world stage. A weak US is bad for the entire world.

Dude get over your paranoia, the rest of the world is not sitting there scheming to attack. Nevertheless, how about bailing your own country out first? What about poor Americans, are they not bad news? Evidently I care more about Americans than you do. You simply care about the notion of America. It's why you are living in the past. Wake up bud.

Just saw this today, look at how many are living in poverty. That works out to be close to 80 million Americans.

Furthermore, streets like this are not isolated to Camden, NJ. No foreign nation sure as hell wants this on their books.

Edited June 14, 2010 by Booyah!

[Heracles 417]

Over 10 years, which is about 100 billion per year, which is barely 10% of the yearly defense related spending of 1 to 1.2 trillion each year.

###### I didn't even read that, over 10 years. Man, I at least thought someone smartened up and was considering the dramatic saving per year.

That cost saving should have occurred yesterday.

Edited June 14, 2010 by Booyah!

[Heracles 417]

Sure, but do we really need to spend as much as we do to maintain that capability?

If you put defence spending into a sort of untouchable category, you leave it wide open for corruption and waste.

What good is such a high expenditure? Realistically, what are foreign invaders going to want to take? Camden, South Central? Perhaps middle America; which resembles rust out ghost ships - thanks to the death of manufacturing.

It's absolute lunacy to have so many Americans living in poverty, while you waste hundreds of billions on defense.

Edited June 14, 2010 by Booyah!

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

What good is such a high expenditure? Realistically, what are foreign invaders going to want to take? Camden, South Central? Perhaps middle America; which resembles rust out ghost ships - thanks to the death of manufacturing.

It's absolute lunacy to have so many Americans living in poverty, while you waste hundreds of billions on defense.

Cutting defense will only work until the SEIU figures out how to unionize the troops.

[Heracles 417]

Cutting defense will only work until the SEIU figures out how to unionize the troops.

Ironically the most socialist sector of them all is the military. Funny how no righty has any issue with the trillion America spends each year nor the socialist aspect - from food to job guarantee - when it comes to the military. This hypocrisy [double-standards] is what I now call, pulling a VJ Steven.

Wasting an investing a country's money into the military is how and why the Soviet Union collapsed. Spook for once is right though. I pay my taxes regardless, therefore, it ain't my money being wasted or literally burned up, it's America's.

Edited June 14, 2010 by Booyah!

[SupportGeek 21]

But you live here instead of the promised land. Australia would be a sitting duck for a Chinese invasion, basically defenseless. Who's going to bail your sorry a$es out, Norway? Sweden, or one of the countries with the happiest people? You come from an insignificant player on the world stage. A weak US is bad for the entire world.

Are you serious? China invading Australia? Why? Do they have some overwhelming need for Kangaroos and Fosters?

China is unlikely to invade anyone with a very slight possible exception of Taiwan.

If China did invade Taiwan, a US military twice the strength still wouldn't make a difference to the outcome, it would be over before you blinked.

While I agree the military is the best place to make the cuts (Its the single largest place the spending goes), Im not certain what it looks like is proposed are the best choices.

[mawilson 2,133]

A panel commissioned by Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) is recommending nearly $1 trillion in cuts to the Pentagon’s budget during the next 10 years.

Good start, but $1 trillion is still only about 10-15 percent of their budget over the next 10 years.

[^_^ 5,021]

China is unlikely to invade anyone with a very slight possible exception of Taiwan.

If they think they can get away with it, China is very likely to intrude on Indian soil at the parts of the McMahon line that are in dispute.

[spookyturtle 9,466]

Just remember that the military made it possible for wankers like BY to sit around and criticize and complain while contributing nothing to society. Shame on you.