About time, although if Gates suddenly ends up a two-to-the-head ‘suicide,’ will anyone be surprised given the profits so many will lose because of him? Now if only he has the balls to cut unneeded, make-work weapons systems that exist only to get votes for Congressmen and Senators, then some real reductions can happen. That would be change we could believe in!
Facing growing pressure to cut military spending, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates on Monday ordered the closing of a major Pentagon headquarters, restrictions on the use of contractors and reductions in the number of generals and admirals.
The belt-tightening moves were aimed at eliminating duplication and reducing overhead, Gates said at a Pentagon news conference.
[...]
Pentagon officials would not supply estimates of the cost savings from the steps announced Monday. They admitted that the savings were a minuscule part of the $712 billion in defense spending that the Obama administration has requested for fiscal year 2011. After a decade of rapidly increasing defense spending, the Pentagon is facing growing calls from outside commissions and some members of Congress for cuts in its budget.
[...]
In inflation-adjusted dollars, the administration defense budget request for fiscal year 2011 is at the highest level since World War II. Gates has warned for the last year that the era of ever-increasing defense budgets that began after 2001 is coming to an end. But he has also said that fighting ongoing wars and purchasing needed weapons systems will require annual growth of 2% to 3% in defense spending, more than many analysts think is likely in coming years.
Jesus that tank in the picture is well camouflaged. It looks just like a guy.
Wait…. what? Oooooooooohhh.
Incidentally, the UK only has 435,500 soldiers total. Which doesn’t sound much, but do bare in mind we spend less time shooting each other by accident.
19,
it USED to be that our military did most of their OWN work. Storage and materials we at the ready ALL the time..NOW they depend on Corps.
Our military should NOT be Controlled by the WHIMS of the corps.
The Shortages were report in the NEWS.
WE HAD CONTRACTORS, building things..NOT the military to do the job. 1 contractor MESSED up a Bathroom Shower and was electrocuting out SOLDIERS..
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/63407-400gallon-gas-another-cost-of-war-in-afghanistan-
http://archive.arabnews.com/?page=4§ion=0&article=118869&d=4&m=2&y=2009
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2010/031310a.html
A good read, on how this all started.
We should cut the military by half.
Ironically, reduced military capacity would make America safer because we would be less inclined to use it for stupid wars like Iraq.
23, Greg.
To a point.
BUT, why not just GET OUR SOLDIERS OUT OF..
Japan,
Korea,
Vietnam,
China,
Philippines,
…
WE have more bases around the world, then any other country. WHY?
Why are MOST of our wars based on CORPORATION PROTECTION and OIL countries..
There has been WARS, in countries that had NO major corps or OIL, that we could have HELPED protect people…we didnt do ANYTHING. from Tibet to S. Africa. BOTH were having a Genocidal wars.
#20. It would be much more informative if you talked about the ability to project military power beyond a country’s borders. Cuba with 1 million troops who cannot get off their Island are a much smaller threat than say Canada. China has a large army that has very large internal security responsibilities. Veitnam has a very large army because China does and they do not trust China. Pakistan has large difficulties dealing with the much smaller Taliban in their own country. Iran has an extremely large military but would have major difficulties beyond their immediate neighbors.
Raw number of men alone is a very poor indicator of military strength or effectiveness.
Payouts for this system are in simple terms, pay per click. Ever legitimate click an advert receives you will be eligible to earn a % of the advertising cost.