Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Report: Hagel plans to reduce size of Army to pre-WWII levels
The Hill ^ | February 24, 2014 | Rebecca Shabad

Posted on 02/24/2014 5:16:15 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel plans to reduce the size of the United States Army to its smallest force since before World War II, according to The New York Times.

Hagel reportedly will unveil the plan Monday in his 2015 budget for the Pentagon, which will also call for an entire class of Air Force attack jets to be retired.

After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the Army peaked at 570,000 troops, the Times reports. Hagel wants to shrink the force to between 440,000 and 450,000. That would mark the Army’s smallest force since 1940.

Several Pentagon officials confirmed the budget plan to the Times on condition of anonymity. They say it would be large enough for the U.S. to defeat any enemy, but too small to carry out longer-term foreign occupations.

"You have to always keep your institution prepared, but you can't carry a large land-war Defense Department when there is no large land war," a senior Pentagon official told the newspaper.

The budget comes as the Obama administration prepares to pull out most American troops from Afghanistan by the end of the year. The U.S. has been considering a complete withdrawal if Afghan President Hamid Karzai refuses to sign a bilateral security agreement that would outline how many residual forces would remain after 2014.


TOPICS: Government; Military/Veterans; Politics; Society
KEYWORDS: 3rdthread; military; nationalsecurity; searcharmy
This administration is making the United States a sitting duck.
1 posted on 02/24/2014 5:16:15 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Hagel is doing what he is told to do...typical Odungo bootlicking appointment


2 posted on 02/24/2014 5:18:11 AM PST by Doogle (USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Why not?

The borders are open, even as
al Qaeda and Islamic terrorists and narcoterrorists
were invited in, and ARMED by the DO”J”.

The docile EXEMPT Congress, led by Issa and Cummings
busy with themselves and their brothels and drugs,
has done absolutely NOTHING to protect Americans.


3 posted on 02/24/2014 5:21:05 AM PST by Diogenesis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
"You have to always keep your institution prepared....."

Oh right! We heard that one not so many years ago here in Sweden when our pols decided to cut our defence budgets. Now we are definitely incapable of defending our country against foreign aggression.

4 posted on 02/24/2014 5:21:50 AM PST by ScaniaBoy (Part of the Right Wing Research & Attack Machine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Oh, that’s not at all unreasonable. Obama has made the world a far safer place in just 5 years, and we’re much more loved and respected by other countries and their peoples than we have ever been.

[/sarc][/irony]

(In case it wasn’t apparent...)


5 posted on 02/24/2014 5:22:53 AM PST by DJ Frisat ((optional, printed after my name on post))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DJ Frisat
Obama has made the world a far safer place in just 5 years

The "Peace Dividend".

6 posted on 02/24/2014 5:25:49 AM PST by grobdriver (Where is Wilson Blair when you need him?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

I for one would be glad to see this regime with less power in the world. We still have enough thermonuclear devices both on land and out at sea to prevent a rogue attack by the Norts, Iran or even China from happening.

I will wait for a government of AMERICANS to be in place before we start re-militarizing.


7 posted on 02/24/2014 5:35:07 AM PST by Vaquero (Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doogle
White House Science [and Technology] Czar Says He Would Use ‘Free Market’ to ‘De-Develop the United States’ "September 16, 2010 - "In a video interview this week, White House Office of Science and Technology Director John P. Holdren told CNSNews.com that he would use the “free market economy” to implement the “massive campaign” he advocated along with Paul Ehrlich [co-authors of "The Population Bomb and other publications over the last 45 years] to “de-develop the United States.”...
8 posted on 02/24/2014 5:37:07 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
Yes we all know how well that worked out. The United States was caught under attack from three nations with little means to fight. The huge difference is this. In the era between WW1 & WW2 we were an industrialized nation with lots of factories and mines to process raw materials into finished defense products. All such assets were within the Continental United States. Our infrastructure allowed us by a very huge effort including rationing of many items to households to rebuild our military fast.

Today thanks to the Traitors & Tyrants in Washington and their donor Free Traders in the market putting their profits before national sovereignty and security especially we are in deep crap. Trade Deals for example with their most beloved Communist China Trade Partner we have made us extremely vulnerable. The DEMs did it as well as the GOP. They sold us out likely for some perverted promise they would be in the ruling class in their NWO. It's not just Obama. Da Bushes and Da Clintons families made their deals as well.

9 posted on 02/24/2014 5:37:22 AM PST by cva66snipe ((Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

The smaller the army, the less likely the US will get involved in foolish adventures such as Iraq and Afghanistan. Tired of young brave Americans making the ultimate sacrifice that does absolutely nothing to enhance the security of the United States.


10 posted on 02/24/2014 5:39:50 AM PST by allendale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

He wants to disarm us. Our enemies are taking note of this decline and you can be certain that they are planning to exploit this weakness.

Weakness invites aggression. Always has, always will.

Our so-called congress is complict and they are enabling the destruction of our military readiness. There’s a word for that.


11 posted on 02/24/2014 5:42:17 AM PST by Starboard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero; All
I wonder [well, not really) if the TSA will be downsized. Wow! I was right, they're taking applications.

Meanwhile:

Branstad to Obama: Don't cut National Guard

"Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad (R-Iowa) hopes to deliver a message to President Obama on Monday on behalf of all governors: don’t cut the size of the National Guard.

“The message from all the governors of both parties is don’t cut the National Guard,” Branstad said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”

The Republican said he understands the Obama administration plans to scale back the size of the United States Army after building it up post-9/11.

“Now, the Army is recommending major reductions in the National Guard instead of the regular Army, and we think that’s a big mistake,” he said. “That’s the message I’m going to bring to the president if I get an opportunity to ask a question.”

Branstad’s request comes as Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel prepares to unveil the Pentagon’s 2015 budget.

The New York Times reported on Monday the proposal will call for a reduction in the size of the Army to pre-World War II levels.

Obama held a dinner for governors on Sunday night at the White House, and will deliver remarks to the National Governor’s Association on Monday. He will also meet with governors of Western states to discuss the droughts and wildfires plaguing their states."

12 posted on 02/24/2014 5:46:18 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
The Republican said he understands the Obama administration plans to scale back the size of the United States Army after building it up post-9/11.

Hells Bells what build up? There was none!!!! ZERO NONE WHATSOEVER! There was no post 911 increase. We actually declined in some services.

The End Troop Strengths set by congress which is the number of allowed active duty and reserves has remained the same give or take about 10K.

7 . National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate)[H.R.1588.ENR]

SEC. 401. END STRENGTHS FOR ACTIVE FORCES.

The Armed Forces are authorized strengths for active duty personnel as of September 30, 2004, as follows:
(1) The Army, 482,400.
(2) The Navy, 373,800. currently Active Duty: 381,135
(3) The Marine Corps, 175,000.
(4) The Air Force, 359,300

Subtitle B--Reserve Forces

SEC. 411. END STRENGTHS FOR SELECTED RESERVE.

(a) IN GENERAL- The Armed Forces are authorized strengths for Selected Reserve personnel of the reserve components as of September 30, 2004, as follows:
(1) The Army National Guard of the United States, 350,000.
(2) The Army Reserve, 205,000.
(3) The Naval Reserve, 85,900.
(4) The Marine Corps Reserve, 39,600.
(5) The Air National Guard of the United States, 107,030.
(6) The Air Force Reserve, 75,800.
(7) The Coast Guard Reserve, 10,000.

SEC. 412. END STRENGTHS FOR RESERVES ON ACTIVE DUTY IN SUPPORT OF THE RESERVES.

Within the end strengths prescribed in section 411(a), the reserve components of the Armed Forces are authorized, as of September 30, 2004, the following number of Reserves to be serving on full-time active duty or full-time duty, in the case of members of the National Guard, for the purpose of organizing, administering, recruiting, instructing, or training the reserve components:

(1) The Army National Guard of the United States, 25,599.
(2) The Army Reserve, 14,374.
(3) The Naval Reserve, 14,384.
(4) The Marine Corps Reserve, 2,261.
(5) The Air National Guard of the United States, 12,191.
(6) The Air Force Reserve, 1,660.

SEC. 1012. ENHANCEMENT OF AUTHORITY RELATING TO USE FOR EXPERIMENTAL PURPOSES OF VESSELS STRICKEN FROM NAVAL VESSEL REGISTER. (a) ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION- Paragraph (1) of subsection (b) of section 7306a of title 10, United States Code, is amended-- (1) by inserting `AND ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION OF' in the subsection heading after `STRIPPING'; and (2) by inserting before the period at the end the following: `and such environmental remediation of the vessel as is required for the use of the vessel for experimental purposes'. (b) SALE OF MATERIAL AND EQUIPMENT STRIPPED FROM VESSEL- Subsection (b) of such section is further amended-- (1) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3); (2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new paragraph (2): `(2) Material and equipment stripped from a vessel under paragraph (1) may be sold by the contractor or by a sales agent approved by the Secretary.'; and (3) in paragraph (3), as redesignated by paragraph (1), by striking `scrapping services' and all that follows through the end of such subsection and inserting `services needed for such stripping and for environmental remediation required for the use of the vessel for experimental purposes. Amounts received in excess of amounts needed for reimbursement of those costs shall be deposited into the account from which the stripping and environmental remediation expenses were incurred and shall be available for stripping and environmental remediation of other vessels to be used for experimental purposes.'. (c) CLARIFICATION OF COVERED EXPERIMENTAL PURPOSES- Such section is further amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: `(c) USE FOR EXPERIMENTAL PURPOSES DEFINED- In this section, the term `use for experimental purposes', with respect to a vessel, includes use of the vessel in a Navy sink exercise or for target purposes.'. SEC. 1013. TRANSFER OF VESSELS STRICKEN FROM THE NAVAL VESSEL REGISTER FOR USE AS ARTIFICIAL REEFS. (a) AUTHORITY TO MAKE TRANSFER- Chapter 633 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 7306a the following new section: `Sec. 7306b. Vessels stricken from Naval Vessel Register: transfer by gift or otherwise for use as artificial reefs `(a) AUTHORITY TO MAKE TRANSFER- The Secretary of the Navy may transfer, by gift or otherwise, any vessel stricken from the Naval Vessel Register to any State, Commonwealth, or possession of the United States, or any municipal corporation or political subdivision thereof, for use as provided in subsection (b). `(b) VESSEL TO BE USED AS ARTIFICIAL REEF- An agreement for the transfer of a vessel under subsection (a) shall require that-- `(1) the recipient use, site, construct, monitor, and manage the vessel only as an artificial reef in accordance with the requirements of the National Fishing Enhancement Act of 1984 (33 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.), except that the recipient may use the artificial reef to enhance diving opportunities if that use does not have an adverse effect on fishery resources (as that term is defined in section 2(14) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1802(14)); and `(2) the recipient obtain, and bear all responsibility for complying with, applicable Federal, State, interstate, and local permits for using, siting, constructing, monitoring, and managing the vessel as an artificial reef. `(c) PREPARATION OF VESSEL FOR USE AS ARTIFICIAL REEF- The Secretary shall ensure that the preparation of a vessel transferred under subsection (a) for use as an artificial reef is conducted in accordance with-- `(1) the environmental best management practices developed pursuant to section 3504(b) of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107-314; 16 U.S.C. 1220 note); and `(2) any applicable environmental laws. `(d) COST SHARING- The Secretary may share with the recipient of a vessel transferred under subsection (a) any costs associated with transferring the vessel under that subsection, including costs of the preparation of the vessel under subsection (c). `(e) NO LIMITATION ON NUMBER OF VESSELS TRANSFERABLE TO PARTICULAR RECIPIENT- A State, Commonwealth, or possession of the United States, or any municipal corporation or political subdivision thereof, may be the recipient of more than one vessel transferred under subsection (a). `(f) ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS- The Secretary may require such additional terms and conditions in connection with a transfer authorized by subsection (a) as the Secretary considers appropriate. `(g) CONSTRUCTION- Nothing in this section shall be construed to establish a preference for the use as artificial reefs of vessels stricken from the Naval Vessel Register in lieu of other authorized uses of such vessels, including the domestic scrapping of such vessels, or other disposals of such vessels, under this chapter or other applicable authority.'. (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT- The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 7306a the following new item: `7306b. Vessels stricken from Naval Vessel Register: transfer by gift or otherwise for use as artificial reefs.'. SEC. 401. END STRENGTHS FOR ACTIVE FORCES.

The Armed Forces are authorized strengths for active duty personnel as of September 30, 2002, as follows:
(1) The Army, 480,000.
(2) The Navy, 376,000.
(3) The Marine Corps, 172,600.
(4) The Air Force, 358,800.
SEC. 411. END STRENGTHS FOR SELECTED RESERVE.

(a) IN GENERAL- The Armed Forces are authorized strengths for Selected Reserve personnel of the reserve components as of September 30, 2002, as follows:

(1) The Army National Guard of the United States, 350,000.
(2) The Army Reserve, 205,000.
(3) The Naval Reserve, 87,000.
(4) The Marine Corps Reserve, 39,558.
(5) The Air National Guard of the United States, 108,400.
(6) The Air Force Reserve, 74,700.
(7) The Coast Guard Reserve, 8,000.

End strengths for active forces (sec. 401) The House bill contained a provision (sec. 401) that would authorize end strengths for the active forces, as indicated in the table below: Service Fiscal year 1998-- Request Recommendation

Army 495,000 495,000
Navy 390,802 395,000
Marine Corps 174,000 174,000
Air Force 371,577 381,000
Total 1,431,379 1,445,000

The Senate amendment contained a provision (sec. 401) that would authorize active duty end strengths for fiscal year 1998, as shown below: Fiscal year-- 1997 authorization 1998 request 1998 recommendation

Army: 495,000 495,000 485,000
Navy: 407,318 390,802 390,802
Marine Corps: 174,000 174,000 174,000
Air Force: 381,000 371,577 371,577
The House recedes with an amendment that would authorize active duty end strengths for fiscal year 1998 as shown below: Fiscal year-- 1997 authorization 1998 request 1998 authorization

Army 495,000 495,000 495,000
Navy 407,318 390,802 390,802
Marine Corps 174,000 174,000 174,000
Air Force 381,100 371,577 371,577
Total 1,457,418 1,431,379 1,431,379

1998 authorization for end strength active duty

Army 495,000
Navy 390,802
Marines 174,000
Air Force 371,577

1998 authorization for end strength reserves

ARNG 366,516
USAR 208,000
USNR 94,294
USMCR 42,000
ANG 107,377
USAFR 73,431
USCGR 8000

Now let's look at 2008 actualluy May 2009 numbers which were set in 2007-2008. Army 548,000

13 posted on 02/24/2014 5:53:27 AM PST by cva66snipe ((Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: allendale

The smaller the army, the less likely the US will get involved in foolish adventures such as Iraq and Afghanistan. Tired of young brave Americans making the ultimate sacrifice that does absolutely nothing to enhance the security of the United States.


I could not agree more.

Keep our nose out of fights that are not ours. If a corporation wants to develop it’s business in another country, let it pay for it’s own protection.


14 posted on 02/24/2014 5:54:57 AM PST by maine yankee (I got my Governor at 'Marden's')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Democrats have done this throughout our history, causing the US to appear weak to its enemies, who then attack. They use the defense cuts to buy votes from the Taker Class. When war comes, and it always does, thousands of soldier die because of the lack of preparedness. Exhibit A: FDR and WW II.


15 posted on 02/24/2014 5:56:46 AM PST by txrefugee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: txrefugee

no one is going to attack us...not at home...except terrorists. islam does not care that we can still destroy the world in a few hours.

but none of the major nations will attack because we still have enough nukes in our arsenal to vaporize the Norts, Iran, and to make a shambles of the rest of the world.

this is not 1941.

and I am glad he is cutting the military....less for him to have. lets wait till Americans are once in charge of America again....


16 posted on 02/24/2014 6:24:48 AM PST by Vaquero (Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: txrefugee

Yes.


17 posted on 02/24/2014 6:28:41 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Doogle

Libs who threw a hissy fit about Iraq are gonna make darned sure we can NEVER EVER EVER do that again.


18 posted on 02/24/2014 6:36:35 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero
islam does not care that we can still destroy the world in a few hours.

We need to blow something up in Mecca to teach them that they SHOULD care.


19 posted on 02/24/2014 6:37:49 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

if Bush wouldn’t do it...zer0’s regime sure won’t....he is one of them.

currently the islamics are demanding to be allowed to return to spain after they were kicked out so many centuries ago...the Europeans are bending over backward for these scum and we have a resident of the White Hut who is one of them....

people of European descent have turned into little sissy Marys


20 posted on 02/24/2014 6:43:01 AM PST by Vaquero (Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

..his mooslim advisers in the WH are getting what they want...from RoE to surrender


21 posted on 02/24/2014 12:15:43 PM PST by Doogle (USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson