Posted on 03/05/2014 3:32:19 PM PST by SkyPilot
The nation’s top military commander painted a dark picture Tuesday of future U.S. defense capabilities clouded by shrinking Pentagon budgets and adversaries’ technological advances that he said would erode American battlefield superiority.
Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, provided his sobering views as part of the Quadrennial Defense Review, a congressionally mandated evaluation of U.S. military strength issued every four years.
Dempsey predicted that it would become increasingly difficult to balance the competing demands of protecting allies abroad, securing Americans at home and deterring future wars.
“The smaller and less capable military outlined in the QDR makes meeting these obligations more difficult,” he said. “Most of our platforms and equipment will be older, and our advantages in some domains will have eroded. Our loss of depth across the force could reduce our ability to intimidate opponents from escalating conflicts.”
Dempsey added: “Moreover, many of our most capable allies will lose key capabilities. The situation will be exacerbated given our current readiness concerns, which will worsen over the next three or four years.”
Dempsey’s perspective was more pessimistic than that of Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel.
“As we move off the longest continuous war footing in our nation’s history, this QDR explains how we will adapt, reshape and rebalance our military for the challenges and opportunities of the future,” Hagel said in a statement.
Dempsey issued his warnings as President Barack Obama sent Congress a 2015 budget for the entire government on Tuesday that provides the Pentagon just over $600 billion.
That’s $13 billion less than current funding, but $26 billion more than provided in a budget deal that Congress approved in December by large bipartisan majorities.
(Excerpt) Read more at mcclatchydc.com ...
We have no such mission/doctrine. We do have treaty obligations--bilateral and multilateral.
You need to define facility and base. The Base Structure Report (BSR) lists real property assets. These so-called bases are buildings and other real property.
Display Criteria : To qualify for individual entry in the BSR, a DoD site located in the United States must be larger than 10 acres AND have a Plant Replacement Value (PRV) greater than $10 million. If the site is located in a foreign country, it must be large r t han 10 acres OR have a PRV greater than $10 million to be shown as a separate entry. Sites that do not meet these criteria are aggregated as an “Other” location within each state or country. Since Army National Guard State sites tend to be smaller, the c riteria were adjusted so that sites larger than five acres AND have a PRV greater than $5 million are shown. Army National Guard sites not meeting this criteria are aggregated as “Other” for each state.
"The DoD manages a worldwide real property portfolio that spans all 50 states, seven U.S. territories, and 40 foreign countrie s. The majority of the foreign sites are located in Germany (179 sites), Japan (109 sites), and South Korea (83 sites).
ROTFLMAO!!!
Exactly. IMO, many countries will develop nuclear deterrents even if not presently threatened by nukes themselves, but by powerful “conventional” forces that are deterred by OUR conventional forces. It’s Pandora’s box...
Oh, good grief. Most times, that's just political fluff to convince some fence sitters. The fundamentals do not change.
“The fundamentals do not change. “
They most certainly do. The fundamental concept of “Victory” was tossed out the window for Iraq and Afghanistan.
You can’t get much more fundamental than that.
“We have no such mission/doctrine. “
Of course we do. The Monroe Doctrine is one.
It’s the deployments that suffer a lack of mission/doctrine that really cost a lot of money.
IMHO, it is one thing for granny to collect the SS she and/or grandpa paid into, another for Don' Juan Nojob to slip across the border and cash in.
Most of our platforms and equipment will be older, and our advantages in some domains will have eroded. Our loss of depth across the force could reduce our ability to intimidate opponents from escalating conflicts
We did not defeat the Germans in WWII because we had superior equipment or “platforms”. The Germans and the Japanese had excellent war equipment. We defeated them because we fought to win. We had leaders both Political and Military that made the hard decisions and did what was necessary to win. We do not have any leaders like that anymore...........
I absolutely agree. There are earned, and there are UNearned entitlements. Someone who paid their Social Security payroll taxes for 55 years is not akin to the Somali or Mexican illegal who has been here 4 months and is collecting from seven to ten welfare programs. Nearly $900 Billion a year spent on "poverty prevention" programs, and they are exploding under Obama.
I am looking for Jesus return and feel bad for those who don't want Jesus on the throne of their life. Their loss and our gain.
Gonna get real interesting when Putin and the Gang of Chinese lay aside their age old differences and form the next big co-prosperity sphere.
Would it help if we paid our soldiers in bitcoins?
That’s budget growth. Let’s wring out the waste in our military. We’re being played by the MI Complex.
LOL. I think you need to get better informed about the Monroe Doctrine.
We do have basic foreign policy principles as embodied in the Department of State's Mission statement
Mission Statement
Create a more secure, democratic, and prosperous world for the benefit of the American people and the international community.
American diplomacy in the 21st century is based on fundamental beliefs: our freedom is best protected by ensuring that others are free; our prosperity depends on the prosperity of others; and our security relies on a global effort to secure the rights of all. The history of the American people is the chronicle of our efforts to live up to our ideals. In this moment in history, we recognize that the United States has an immense responsibility to use its power constructively to advance security, democracy, and prosperity around the globe. We will pursue these interests and remain faithful to our beliefs.
Globalization is compressing distances and creating new opportunities for economic growth. It is expanding the exchange of ideas, providing an impetus for political freedoms. Millions of the world's poor, however, have not yet benefited from globalization, increasing their risk of alienation. Furthermore, transnational threats have emerged from globalization, enabling the creation of deadly global terror networks, spurring crime that reaches beyond borders, and spreading disease via the most mobile population in history. The spread of unconventional weapon technology risks giving tyrants and terrorists unprecedented power to harm the United States, our allies, and our friends. At the same time, famines and civil conflicts have erupted in countries steeped in poverty or constrained by autocratic rulers, creating waves of refugees and swelling the ranks of internally displaced populations. Traditional conflicts between and within states harm the innocent, with regional instabilities transmitting shock waves throughout our interconnected world.
In the coming years, the principal aims of the Department of State and USAID are clear. These aims are anchored in the President's National Security Strategy and its three underlying and interdependent components - diplomacy, development, and defense.
First, we will strive to build and maintain strong bilateral and multilateral relationships in pursuit of our mission. There is the prospect for a durable peace among the great powers based on alignment against common threats. We will strive to strengthen traditional alliances and build new relationships to achieve a peace that brings security, but when necessary, we will act alone to face the challenges, provide assistance, and seize the opportunities of this era. U.S. leadership is essential for promoting this vision, but others must share the responsibility. The history of American foreign policy suggests that we will increase our chances of success abroad by exerting principled leadership while seeking to work with others to achieve our goals.
Second, we must protect our nation, our allies, and our friends against the transnational dangers and enduring threats arising from tyranny, poverty, and disease. Global terrorism, international crime, and the spread of weapons of mass destruction are new challenges born of traditional ambitions. Urban and rural poverty reflects the failure of statist policies, an absence of the rule of law, and poor governance. Radical ideologies are nurtured in societies deprived of the legitimate means of dissent, free markets, economic opportunity, and the free flow of ideas. A world in which half of humanity lives on less than $2 per day is neither just nor stable. HIV/AIDS is not simply a health issue. This pandemic is destroying precious lives, undermining economies, and threatening to destabilize entire regions. Environmental degradation and deforestation threaten human health and sustainable development. Confronting these threats effectively is beyond the means of any one country, and calls for principled American leadership aimed at achieving effective coalitions that magnify our efforts to respond to these critical challenges.
Third, in confronting the intersection of traditional and transnational challenges, we will combine our diplomatic skills and development assistance to act boldly to foster a more democratic and prosperous world integrated into the global economy. We will not waver in our belief that all human beings deserve lives of dignity and the opportunity to achieve their aspirations. We will promote freedom of speech, conscience, and religion, the rule of law, and economic freedom. In concert with civil society organizations, we will speak out against human rights abuses and the trafficking of human beings.
Amen. America the stupid. Americans are not going to vote for defense if it means cutting all those free checks while abled bodied men sit on their collective butts at home watching reality TV, smoking dope, drinking booze, etc. They want free stuff. Screw he rest of the world. We stay home. I get my free checks. Protect Israel???? Are you crazy??? I need my free check to buy my drugs. Yup. That is what Amerika wants. Land of the Free has gone to “the Land of Sit on Butt Lazy.”
Right, right, right!
bttt
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.
