I don’t see a problem. Pull the guys back to the US territory. Refuse to engage in any conflict that doesn’t directly affect us. And just tell the media we don’t humanitarian missions.
It is on Drudge as well.
Not surprised. The surrender admin wants to build up its civilian corps.
Hagel is a disgusting Obama Butt-wiper.
He and Obama will have a place in history for gutting the military and screwing veterans.
We always hear from democrats and RINOs that there isn’t enough money for our own military.
But not once do we hear that there isn’t enough money to expand welfare, food stamps, free medical for illegals or money for Obama and Kerry to hand out a billion dollars here and a billion dollars there to foreigners.
Rand Paul voted to confirm him.
No worries. I'm sure everything will end up just dandy.
Gotta pay for them social programs.
>> that will leave it capable of waging war, but unable to carry out protracted occupations of foreign territory, as in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Good! We’re great at waging war and we suck at being occupiers. It’s not the military that sucks at it, it’s the American people who are afraid to call for what is necessary to occupy hostile territory. Bring the troops home. Drill for oil here. Muzzies and ex-commies don’t want our brand of freedom anyway. They know that if they start moving that direction, then we’ll give them money and free stuff.
Not that I trust Obama or his cronies to do it but I’m sure there is plenty of fat that could be trimmed off the military budget. I know I’ll get a lot of replies from “budget hawks” saying we need to spend trillions more on the military but at some point we have to look at places to cut. We are fighting against a foe that can only attack us if we let them into the country.
If there is one remaining shred of conservatism left in the House of Representatives, this proposed budget would be DOA.
whew.. good thing we didn’t elect Romney...
At this time of Worldly chaos I cannot think of a more treasonous move by an administration.
Of course they USE Hagel as the point guy, but we all know it’s the Socialist/Democrat war room pulling the strings of their head marionette repeating dialogue “make it so #1”.
The core of the problem here is that the quality or capability of our entire military will be negatively affected by our leftist leaders actions. In short, China or Russia will be able to whip us.
Major General McMaster is on CSAN now
he says that we need land forces...
Sorry, he was my local rep for years.
GENERAL JAMES MATTOON SCOTT: WHERE ARE YOU NOW THAT WE NEED YOU?
It is a truism of planning that you never cut your resources first, although one sees this in staffing all the time in industry and now we see it here. A military sized to pre-WWII status should have pre-WWII commitments FIRST.
That turns out to be strategically difficult (huge discussion number one), but more to the point it is politically difficult, and so what happens in practice is that the pressure is off the politicians who are paid to take the heat and on the troopers who are not, who are faced with impossible expectations. It's a cheat.
This is horrible and also typical of the military hating Obama and his admin.
I can’t stand Hagel, but I don’t really have a problem with reducing the size of the military in the abstract. We don’t need a $700+ billion/year military establishment to protect us from the threats we face globally. We only need that level of spending if we plan to continue pretending that we’re “Team America: World Police” going forward. We can’t reduce “defense” spending and expect to do the whole simultaneous middle eastern occupation thing again.