Tag Archives: defense cuts

Undefending America

Posted on by
The MIRV U.S. Peacekeeper missile, with the re...

Image via Wikipedia

Bill Gertz is well known for his books and articles on national defense. He posted an article yesterday at the Washington Free Beacon yesterday about the impact of President Obama’s policies on national security.

The article states:

President Obama has ordered the Pentagon to consider cutting U.S. strategic nuclear forces to as low as 300 deployed warheads—below the number believed to be in China’s arsenal and far fewer than current Russian strategic warhead stocks.

Pentagon and military planners were asked to develop three force levels for the U.S. arsenal of deployed strategic nuclear warheads: a force of 1,100 to 1,000 warheads; a second scenario of between 700 and 800 warheads; and the lowest level of between 300 and 400 warheads.

A congressional official said no president in the past ever told the Pentagon to conduct a review based on specific numbers of warheads.

This review is not based on world conditions, as in the past, but simply on numbers. According the the article, the drastic cuts have come under fire from senior military leaders, but there have been no public comments.

One retired Air Force General commented:

Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney said even considering such deep strategic cuts is irrational.

“No sane military leader would condone 300 to 400 warheads for an effective nuclear deterrent strategy,” McInerney (Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney) told the Washington Free Beacon.

“Going down to 1000 to 1,100 is risky enough and frankly in today’s world, very risky. The purpose of our nuclear force structure is to deter any adversary from even thinking that they could minimize our attack options. Such thinking is very dangerous and will only encourage our adversaries to make bold decisions.”

A congressional official and former administration official familiar with the ongoing review said the bottom level warhead levels raise serious questions about whether a nuclear force that size would deter adversaries. It also would raise questions about so-called “extended deterrence,” the threat to use nuclear weapons against states like North Korea on behalf of allies like Japan.

The new strategic review reflects the president’s 2009 speech in Prague when he said the United States would pursue peace and security in a world “without nuclear weapons.”

I too would like to see a world without nuclear weapons, but I would also like to see a world where America is ready and able to defend herself and her friends.

The article concludes with the following comment:

Kenneth deGraffenreid, a former Reagan administration National Security Council official, said in an interview that the plans for sharp nuclear cuts are “part of the administration’s purposeful decline of American military power.”

The damage to nuclear forces is compounded by “massive reductions across the board in defense spending on conventional forces,” he said.

“Defense is the only part of government this administration is reducing,” he said. “There wasn’t a single dollar of stimulus money spent on defense.”

It’s time to elect a President who will defend America–both verbally and physically.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Upside Down Priorities

Posted on by

Yesterday the Washington Examiner pointed out the lack of logic in two of President Obama’s recent decisions. Last week, President Obama announced drastic cuts to the military budget–cutting the number of troops and cutting the spending on new weapons and weapon systems.

The article reminds us:

First, Obama claimed that “even as our troops continue to fight in Afghanistan, the tide of war is receding.” What logically should have followed such an assertion was something about the surrender of an enemy and assurance that his defeat was so total and comprehensive that decades, if not centuries, will pass before he might again threaten the safety and security of the American people.

Obama could say nothing like that because no such surrender has been tendered, and it is clear to anybody with open eyes that the aggressors in the War on Terror are — Osama bin Laden’s death notwithstanding — planning lethal new attacks on Americans here at home and American interests around the world. It is as though FDR had said in April 1943 that the tide of World War II was receding and therefore it was time to slash American defense spending because American pilots had shot down a plane carrying Japanese Adm. Isoroku Yamamoto, chief planner behind the attack on Pearl Harbor. No matter that Japanese troops still occupied half of the Pacific and would continue to wage war against the U.S.

The world is as dangerous (or more dangerous) as it was the day President Obama took office. Cutting our defense as Iran spreads its influence into Latin America and works to develop nuclear weapons is simply not smart.

At the same time he was cutting the jobs for thousands of our military, President Obama promised pay raises for federal employees. The raise is only a half-percent, but it is still a raise.

The article reminds us of a series of reports in USA Today by Dennis Cauchon in 2010. The article at the Washington Examiner states:

“The compensation gap between federal and private workers has doubled in the past decade,” Cauchon found. “Federal civil servants earned average pay and benefits of $123,049 in 2009, while private workers made $61,051 in total compensation, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The data are the latest available.” If anything, Obama should freeze federal pay indefinitely so private-sector employees can catch up with the bureaucrats.
 
It’s an election year, this is only the beginning.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Refusing To Fund The Defense Of America

Posted on by
The Joint Chiefs of Staff, photographed in the...

Image via Wikipedia

Foolishness begins at the top.

Section 8 of the U. S. Constitution states:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and
Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general
Welfare of the United States;

The budget cuts in the defense the President is enacting combined with the move to turn Afghanistan back over to the Taliban will make this nation more vulnerable to attack than we were before 9/11.

Investors.com posted an article on the defense cuts today.

The article reports:

In an unusual appearance at the Pentagon on Thursday, President Obama laid out his plans for a “leaner” military based on the need “to renew our economic strength here at home, which is the foundation of our strength in the world.”

In other words, failed domestic policies require us to cut our military in a dangerous world.

The article concludes:

As a chart produced by the committee shows, the cumulative cuts are real cuts, both in spending levels and in military capability. The Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, said in written statements released during his recent confirmation hearings, “National security didn’t cause the debt crisis, nor will it solve it.”

We would note that defense is a constitutional imperative — not an optional budget item — and that the question should be what do we need to defend ourselves and our interests, not simply what we can afford as the result of failed administration policies.

This is another move toward turning America into a European socialist country. The reason Europe has been able to spend the amount of money it spends on welfare programs is that America has always been the big guy on the block who would come to their rescue if needed. With America essentially stepping down from her role as a world leader, there is now no one able to protect the freedom of the free countries throughout the world. We may not like to role of defender of freedom in the world, but it was a role put on us because of the blessings we have been given. It’s amazing to me that the people who are always demanding more from the ‘rich’ don’t seem to understand that America is a rich country and has a responsibility to use a part of that wealth to defend freedom.

This is simply foolishness on the part of the President.

Enhanced by Zemanta