Budget hawks question Pentagon's doomsday scenarios

Washington Examiner ^ | February 21, 2013 | Byron York

[vbmoneyspender]

See Link

But perhaps the biggest example of the Washington Monument maneuver is coming from the Defense Department, where it goes by another name. Over many decades of defense budget battles, the Pentagon has often used a tactic known as a "gold watch." It means to answer a budget cut proposal by selecting for elimination a program so important and valued -- a gold watch -- that Pentagon chiefs know political leaders will restore funding rather than go through with the cut.

So now, with sequestration approaching, the Pentagon has announced that the possibility of budget cuts has forced the Navy to delay deployment of the carrier USS Harry S. Truman to the Persian Gulf. With tensions with Iran as high as they've ever been, that would leave the U.S. with just one carrier, instead of the preferred two, in that deeply troubled region.

"Already, the threat of these cuts has forced the Navy to delay an aircraft carrier that was supposed to deploy to the Persian Gulf," Obama said at a White House appearance on Tuesday, in case anyone missed the news.

Some military analysts were immediately suspicious. "A total gold watch," said one retired general officer who asked not to be named. Military commentator and retired Army Lt. Col. Ralph Peters called the Navy's move "ostentatious," comparing it to "Donald Trump claiming he can't afford a cab."

And Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., a Marine veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan, is worried not only about the Truman decision but also the Navy's announcement that it cannot afford to refuel another carrier, the USS Abraham Lincoln. "I am concerned that these decisions are being made for the purpose of adding drama to the sequestration debate," Hunter wrote in a Feb. 12 letter to the Pentagon, "given the continuation of other programs that are worthy of cost-cuts or even elimination."

[SkyPilot]

I’m not saying these cuts are acceptable or that they should happen. I am saying that for political reasons, this administration is making them hurt more than is necessary for it’s own political purposes.

OK - let's step back for just a second and approach this rationally.

The US military is under a triple fiscal assault.

It began in 2011 with a $487 Billion cut over 10 years - we are now 2 years into that cut. Thousands of jobs were lost. The Army cut, the Air Force cut, the Navy cut.

The Continuing Resolution has frozen funds at last year's levels. All the BS you hear spouted by Rush about this being a "cut to the increase" is only partially correct. He is dead on with certain issues, but he is dead wrong on this one. He won't admit it when he is wrong either.

Sequestration is the final knife to the military.

It is a 13.5% cut this year.

I saw you comment about contracting. You are no fool. You told me things that I didn't know. So I know you can deal with facts.

800,000 dedicated DoD civilians just got furlough notices.

Read the above line again.

In the greatest nation on earth, we don't have enough money to pay those who go out and earn it by contributing to a Constitutional enterprise?

The administration is late to the ballgame. Obama is evil. He is a homosexual Marxist. But even a broken watch is correct twice a day. Sequestration is a horrible idea, and the ax is about to fall.

After Sequestration, A Shocking Proportion Of Government Spending Will Be On Entitlements

Do you know that seven current 4 star Generals wrote a letter to the Chairmam of the House Armed Services Committe ("Buck" McKeon R-CA) warning him of the impending disaster about to strike the military? This isn't akin to a local town threatening layoffs of police and firefighters because they can't get their way.

This is real.

[SkyPilot]

I'll admit to my sins, but I am not "sick and confused" on this issue.

To my amazement, I seem to be in a the great minority on this website stating the obvious danger to our nation that we are about to inflict on the greatest institution we have - the United States military.

The "takers" of this nation have won ansel12.

If you support this, then take a bow.

[ansel12]

Your insults against freepers and freerepublic were sick and confused.

I am sick and tired of the entitlement takers on this website who hide behind their keyboards to protect their Direct Deposit checks at the expense of better men and women who serve in the military.

Idiotic, childish, and far beyond merely ignorant.

[SkyPilot]

Idiotic, childish, and far beyond merely ignorant.

And you accuse me of being insulting?

Wow. Just wow.

Would you like a mirror?

And if I am so wrong on this issue, then I have seven current 4-star Generals who wrote a letter to the House Armed Services Committee Chairman who backs me up. Read it.

http://www.federalnewsradio.com/pdfs/JCS_28star_letter.pdf

[Fightin Whitey]

Right.

But as much as the supposed “meat-cleaver” approach of sequestration distresses and disgusts you, you are well aware of the explosion (and political destruction) awaiting any conservative who steps forth to “reform” entitlements.

It’s like someone asking how we are to achieve this miracle, and another telling him to wave a magic wand.

I simply don’t believe it can happen.

[ansel12]

I pointed out that you insulted all freerepublic and freepers, especially retired military, disabled vets, and those of the most conservative voting age group in America, and in fact, insulted every freeper who is not currently on active duty.

I called you on it, you deserve to be insulted as an individual.

You seem disconnected from reality when it comes to freerepublic and voters and conservatism.

[SkyPilot]

Unbelievable.

Really.

I have been a member here since 1998. I contribute to this website. I am a retired officer.

Sequestration is an abortion.

I am defending the military, the disabled, vets, and those who will be affected by this horrific cut.

Even the military healthcare system (TRICARE) is going to suffer great harm due to sequestration.

Sequester could leave Tricare $3B short

The great majority here on the forum are off the reservation on this one. They "want cuts" as long as it isn't aimed at them.

Those who have given the most for this nation are being sacrficed on the altar - and it is wrong.

It is immoral.

Did you read that pdf letter I posted to you?

Tell me where these seven 4 star Generals are wrong?

[ansel12]

I am sick and tired of the entitlement takers on this website who hide behind their keyboards to protect their Direct Deposit checks at the expense of better men and women who serve in the military.

Unbelievable.

[trisham]

Obama is using this tactic to frighten anyone who wants to cut his budget. Insulting FReepers who believe in budget cuts may make sense to you, but the belief that our taxes are already high enough is hardly an entitlement mentality, nor is it evidence of a lack of respect for those who have served our country.

[SkyPilot]

If it is "insulting" to point out the immorality of our current government policies, then too bad. What is anyone doing on this website in the first place if that is the case?

The only faux "insults" perceived should be the consciouses of those who need to have them pricked with reality.

What is "insulting?"

That 47 million in the nation are accepting Food Stamps, and yet we are cutting the military budget and entitlements are exempt?

That is an insult to every veteran who ever served this nation.

The GOP has betrayed the military. They are cheer leading these cuts now.

They turned their back on the military and its veterans, not the other way around.

[trisham]

I am not certain that you read my post. If you did, then I have to wonder if you understood what I said.

[DugwayDuke]

“It is a 13.5% cut this year.”

It has the effect of cutting some things by 13.5% but it’s not really a 13.5% cut. It’s about half that on an annual basis but since it is applied to the last six months of the fiscal year it’s effect is much larger. Back to my points about planning. This cut could have been applied over 12 months with far less impact.

“800,000 dedicated DoD civilians just got furlough notices.”

And many of those furloughs are unnecessary. Read the transcript from last Wednesday’s presser. It included the following points:
1. O&M accounts are hard hit and must maximize the savings from furloughs, ie 22 days.
2. Investment accounts are in better shape and have much more flexibility in allocating the cuts. (the investment accounts can slow spending on contracts for example.)
3. Those exempted from the furloughs will be minimized.
4. All furloughs will be of the same duration.

All of this amounts to the following. Since the O&M accounts will have to furlough the maximum possible days, the investment accounts will have to match the O&M furloughs regardless of whether they have the funds to pay their personnel. IOW, many of the furloughs are not necessary and are inflicting unnecessary pain and suffering on DoD personnel. The only explanation for this is the administration wants to maximize the pain in order to maximize the pressure on Congress to raise taxes.

Therefore, it must be concluded that this administration is manipulating this sequester to gain the most advantage over raising taxes at least in some cases. Once that point is conceded all other arguments advanced by the administration are suspect.

[RFEngineer]

“Want to seem my medals?
I have plenty of them.”

Did you get a medal for not knowing what you are talking about?

How about one for having your head up your arse?

Did you also get one for exaggeration? Hyperbole?

Did you get one for Distinction in Accounting?

[Sarajevo]

Sequestration is a dagger to the Department of Defense.
It is reeling from a $487 Billion cut that began in 2011.

It isn't reeling from squat.....
With enactment of the sixth FY2011 Continuing Resolution through March 18, 2011, (H.J.Res. 48/P.L. 112-6) Congress has approved a total of $1.283 trillion for military operations, base security, reconstruction, foreign aid, embassy costs, and veterans’ health care for the three operations initiated since the 9/11 attacks: Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) Afghanistan and other counter terror operations; Operation Noble Eagle (ONE), providing enhanced security at military bases; and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). This estimate assumes that the current CR level continues through the rest of the year and that agencies allocate reductions proportionately. Of this $1.283 trillion total, CRS estimates that Iraq will receive about $806 billion (63%), OEF $444 billion (35%) and enhanced base security about $29 billion (2%), with about $5 billion that CRS cannot allocate (1/2%). About 94% of the funds are for DOD, 5% for foreign aid programs and diplomatic operations, and 1% for medical care for veterans.

It sounds to me like the funds for the Iraq operations are finally being pulled, and some little bureaucrat doesn't like the fact that his kingdom is falling apart.
We have a defense budget that is 6x higher than the 2nd place country (China). There is no reason for this. We aren't the worlds policeman.