Skip to comments.Rumsfeld: Attack Imminent If Congress Cuts Defense
Posted on 09/10/2011 12:00:30 PM PDT by Clairity
click here to read article
I’m on your side 100%. This Captain Kirk fellow sounds like he’s spaced out.
No, I do not. Defense is vitally important and it is constitutionally mandated. I would cut other programs before Defense.
However, all large programs have waste. I know enough about DoD to say that they could cut a fair amount without weakening our defense. I would be willing to support cuts of that nature in return for large cuts in other areas (Education, Energy, etc. etc. etc.).
As a simple political matter, I don't think anyone can expect success if they say "Let's cut your stuff, and leave my stuff alone". That's why I say that Defense cuts are unavoidable -- but I insist that the Left recognize that their stuff -- even their favorite stuff -- must be seen as ripe for chopping.
As another poster said, his idea of national security is not what yours or mine might be.
That said, sure. We can find ways to spend our military budget better. We have to. But I will be DAMNED if I support it in the absence of MIND BOGGLING WASTE AND CORRUPTION IN OTHER PARTS OF THIS GOVERNMENT.
At least if my tax dollars are being wasted on defense, I have a better chance of getting something out of that than I do if $600,000,000 is handed to corrupt liberal weenies like Solyndra, and far more to Fannie Mae and the like.
they didn’t listen to him when he was secstate. Why would they listen now
they didn’t listen to him when he was secdef. Why would they listen now
The world wide serfdom the progressives desire so strongly can only be attained if this nation and its Constitution no longer exist.
Having him serve as SECEF for 911 and thereafter was a blessing for this nation. I hope history is objective in its interpretation of events.
For him, this was his last hura. There were no political ambitions post SECDEF and that was known. He did what he knew was right regardless of political interests and peoples feelings. Highly competent, he was demanding of people and this too was known albeit resented by some that found themselves getting grilled. His goal was to reform the government bureaucracy and push the transformation of the DoD (talked about for years but never done) ahead. Along this path he ended up stepping on the turf of some when he personally got involved in killing the Crusader and Comanche programs, decisions that in hindsight make complete sense. He pushed for the Brigade Unit of Action and large-scale restructuring of the Army which had become top heavy. To this end he brought in a retired general to become the Chief of Staff (Shoomaker) bumping those in the cue waiting. He made many decisions that were frowned upon by various politicians or senior military leaders (Some like Shinseki with political ambitions and also falling into the administrations back), but it cannot be said that he lacked vision, that those visions were in-congruent with the needs of where the DoD needs to head, or that he lacked resolve and organizational competence to push things through. He was a mover and shaker and if you were hoping for an easy ride, life would be hell under him.
(About Shinseki) Heralded by the liberals he simply offered unrealistic solutions of 300,000 troops in Iraq (where were they to come from?) in Congressional testimony intended to make the administration look bad. These troop levels are only maintainable for a short time of about one year, after which trying to maintain these levels is impossible if troops aren't to stay deployed on a continual basis for over 18 months with a one year reconstitution time. His letter of resignation is a class act, juvenile one expects better from a Lieutenant that gets canned and asks for a release from active duty (If you can find his resignation letter it's worth reading). Of course after Obama gets elected in 2008 he finds himself immediately heading the Department of Veterans Affairs. This of course isn't news worthy material. So goes the politics of those in the most senior ranks and it must be noted that Shinseki’s actions in hindsight unlike those of Rumsfeld were obviously self serving, shortsighted and did not consider what the best course of action for this nation.
Given Democratic control of the Senate, your ideal is a non-starter. Whether you like it it or not, you will be presented with two choices. (1) higher taxes (which will of course also mean higher deficits in the long-term) or (2) the automatic triggers which will mean deeper Pentagon cuts than the first choice. Which will you choose when the time comes?
Rums is right.
I will not agree to either. I’m angry about it, and I’m going to let more Congressmen than my own know about it.
Frankly, I think it’s time 50 million U.S. Citizens show up on Congress’ doorstep, and tell it the Leftist drivel has come to the end of it’s road in the U.S.
The Republicans signed on to this nonsense. We can’t blame it all on the Democrats.
Excellent post, much appreciated.
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.