You raise good points, but that was not what I was responding to. Mr. Paul is wrong when he says no actual cuts in equipment or people. The fact is, we will take cuts. In bombers, fighters, helos and people in the USAF, and other things in the Navy and Army.
To minimize future cuts as holding the line or simply eliminating the standard 1.8% inflation amount (DoD standard for the last two budget builds) is factually incorrect. Nothing more, nothing less.
The viability of the F-35 (A CTOL version, B VTOL version and C Naval variant) littoral ship and P-8A are for others to argue. And sadly, I agree we will bankrupt if massive changes are not made. If cutting 25% of the DoD budget would do it, I’d recommend it myself. That isn’t going to cut it, and we both know that. Cutting 25% across the board in all US expenditures and eliminating or changing our future obligations are the only chance for a solution. In other words, a balanced budget.
I’m afraid we have to cut even more than 25%. Right now we overspend by about 40%. Even when the economy recovers, we can’t plan for the high revenue days of 2000 or 2007 (which is what the CBO assumes). I think we need to cut 20% from the military alone and more than that in other areas.