We have yet another live mike mishap. While reporters were waiting to hear from President Obama on his reform of the military, a C-Span mike picked up on reporters saying “See this room? Two-thirds of us laid off when Ron Paul is president.” It is a far point. How can Paul claim to be serious about creating jobs when fewer wars mean fewer war correspondents? In the meantime, President Obama should be credited with taking an unpopular step in calling for a reexamination of our long-standing “two-war” strategy of maintaining an army ready to fight two conventional wars.
Here is the tape:
Obama’s reform of the military calls for stripping down the size based on his view that “the tide of war is receding.” It is a pretty daring move during an election year and would move our military beyond the Cold War assumptions to make it more efficient and tailored to current threats.
Source: NY Daily News
“Interesting reading, e.g. our military budget is more than the next 15 countries combined and many of them are allies.” -bettykath
And some seriously ugly stuff that’s going on domestically, but for now the lid is pretty firmly in place…
BK —
THX for the follow up
Dave S,
What’s that saying about having two ears and one mouth…? (corrected)
Dave S,
http://jonathanturley.org/2011/12/19/turley-on-c-span/
Listen carefully:
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/PrivacyIssues4
What’s that’s saying about having two ears and one mouth…?
Oro Lee,
From the WRL page:
“The figures are federal funds, which do not include trust funds — such as Social Security — that are raised and spent separately from income taxes. What you pay (or don’t pay) by April 15, 2008, goes to the federal funds portion of the budget.”
The source is the 2009 federal budget: There is an addition which is highlighted in red in the side bar which explains what’s included in each category.
Interesting reading, e.g. our military budget is more than the next 15 countries combined and many of them are allies.
Anon, I think it is all of the above. Also, it is the least sexy plane in the inventory. About as sleek as a set of car keys.
When you need a mudfighter to put ordnance on a target less than fifty meters from your own guys, what good is a Mach 2 airplane? If I am a grunt on the ground, I would much rather be supported by slow and ugly than a fast mover going over at a substantial percentage of a Mach number.
Gotta love the A-10
“Strange, because the USAF got way more bang for the buck fighting a guerrilla and anti-tank war out of the A-10 Warthog, which costs about $12 million apiece.”
Does the Air Force hate them because they are slow, or because they are cheap?
“It is a pretty daring move during an election year and would move our military beyond the Cold War assumptions to make it more efficient and tailored to current threats.”
Maybe we’ll finally get that peace dividend the politicians and armed forces have been careful to deny us for 20 years.
BIG FAT YAWN —
Obama’s Defense Cuts Fall Far Short of Budget Goals: “[T]he plan doesn’t meet the $650 billion in defense savings that will be part of the $1.3 trillion of federal spending cuts scheduled to start in 2013, under last year’s Budget Control Act.”
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2012/01/06/Obamas-Defense-Cuts-Fall-Far-Short-of-Budget-Goals.aspx#page1
So the spending slows a little — it’s still way damn too much. Military and military-related spending exceeds 50% of the federal budget (cannot tell if this is just discretionary spending or the whole enchilada):
http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm
The premise is that spending can decrease with the Iraq/Afghanistan pull-out is not reality based. We know boys and their toys — if you build them, they will be used.
As they say, a decrease in the rate of increase . . .
More air war. More sanitary, less US blood (though not less blood), less nasty visability on US teevee.
Optics. Not less warfare. Just a different type.
Almost begging the repubs and dem neolibs to engage in a shadow fight which can belligerantly be countered by the admin.
Mike S., Obama and anyone that supports him even half – heartedly have been ripped apart here. I thought this site was part of the Ron Paul forum at times lol
“Obama and anyone that supports him even half – heartedly have been ripped apart here. I thought this site was part of the Ron Paul forum at times lol”
SwM,
Hush don’t you realize that we are talking about the WORST President we’ve EVER had. He can do nothing right. A communist, a fascist, a Kenyan, Muslim and a man whose civil liberties policies make Bush/Cheney
look like Democrats. Even a announcement to cut back defense spending is denounced as not being good enough on the Left and appeasement on the Right. Hell hath no fury like a Progressive scorned, even if they have to screw the rest of us to gain satisfaction.
I didn’t like Bill Clinton, or his policies and I think Obama is a better President than Clinton. Since Reagan the problem has always been that not only are there no alternatives from the Republicans, but the Left demands
total purity. What bugs me is that they know the media is controlled by the Right Wing and stacks the deck. The courts are 75% conservative based on the judgeship’s and congress is controlled by money o both ends. Yet these obstacles are forgotten when the opportunity arises to bash someone who hasn’t lived up to their lofty expectations.
I really get the disappointment in Obama, but did people really expect he could have done much better with these odds stacked against him? Among the other problems that he had, which we knew before his election, was that Bush/Cheney had stocked places like the DOJ and DOD with party-line ringers who couldn’t be fired. I know bureaucracy from top to bottom ad I know what obstruction can be done by a Civil Servant. I did it in my career from the other side of the aisle, think Guiliani, Dinkins and Koch. People that head these Agencies have little to do with the day to day operations and it is amazing how much can be done before they get wise. This doesn’t justify many of the Obama miscues, but it puts them in a context many are aware of, but somehow expected him to magically overcome.
To add one more thing to this mix, does nobody have suspicions as to the timing of the fiscal crisis occurring just before the poll-leading Obama was about to be elected? Talk about a handicap going in? In that vein really did all of us who wanted to see Bush/Cheney prosecuted really believe it had a chance of happening? Was Harding prosecuted for “Teapot Dome” and who prosecuted Nixon for the crimes only hinted at in the Watergate hearings? I’ve stated over and over again here that Obama has performed way below my expectations, but then so has every President in my lifetime after FDR and he died shortly after I was born. We live in a loosely structured Oligarchy, run by ever-changing coalitions among the 1%. That is the innate problem this country has always had.
Knowing this I can be cynical and say politicians all stink, which is 95% true, or I can do what little I can to minimize the damage they do to the average person. Having been in the 60’s Movement and an activist in the most radical Union in the country in its time, I see this all from both sides of the coin. My commenting here is one thing I’m involved with, as is my phone calling, petition signing and use of my real name to make a statement where I personally stand. I also have voted in every election that I’ve been able to and no I never once threw my vote away on some minor party person to express my displeasure with the system. I do that openly and personally.
It is obvious from my recent arguments about Paul with Tony C., that he is so committed to his tunnel-vision perspective of what’s important that he is even willing to have pain in the short run and a racist/bigot in the WH, who he assures us he trusts to do the right thing.People like Tony probably could ride out such a thing without too much pain, but I didn’t spend my whole damn life and career fighting for people who were getting screwed to sit back on the purity of my principles and tsk, tsk their pain, suffering and deaths, as being in the service of a higher cause.
To be truthful though if Social Security, Medicare and my pension disappeared I might have to move in with my children, my not being the successful businessman Tony claims to be. I also know for a fact that without Medicare I would be dead and/or now impoverished by the cost of drugs needed to keep me alive. In my humble opinion there is a difference in the two admittedly corporate parties. Up until now that difference has helped many, many people. So all who claim empathy for the downtrodden as their rationale to hate Obama, I would suggest you really miss the logical consequences of your actions.
If you want to change this country for the better and destroy the movement towards Feudal Corporatism I’m right there with you. That isn’t going to happen that quickly though even with the wonderful start made by OWS. To me the name of the game is buying time until we can become powerful enough to make our move to overthrow Corporate Rule. That doesn’t mean being silent in the face of evil being done, but it does mean staving off evils chance to make our future opposition moot.
I’m sorry for this long rant SwM and everyone, but sometimes I see some people on my side recklessly disregarding the real consequences of their actions.
Reduction and Reallocation are synonymous in political lingo….
Frankly, I would crawl on broken glass to get to fly an A-10. You could not make me get into the cockpit of an F-35 at gunpoint. ’nuff said.
“I’m increasingly frustrated by this sites flag waving for this obvious slick talking Bush 2.0. I thought Mr. Turley was great during the Bush years making me a fan of this site.”
Dave S,
Are you serious? The posts on this site dealing with the Presidency have been overwhelmingly negative about Obama’s policies. Is this tunnel vision, or a failure to do any research?
JT, Obama said he doesn’t believe in less war, he believes in a different kind of war–the war using robots and other technology. This is not a brave stance on his part.
His donors are the makers of drones, space weapon and all manner of truly expensive robot warriors. This is propaganda aimed at people who do not realize that Obama actually said he was going to put MORE money into the Pentagon budget and who think he is the candidate of peace. Obama often generates headlines which are the exact opposite of reality. It is his stock and trade. (Just recently he was going to be a good guy and veto the NDAA. The devil is always in the details but it’s the headlines his supporters see and believe.)
As to the reporters, it is appalling that they would be concerned about jobs at the expense of people not being killed/maimed/tortured, etc. But this seems to reflect current ethics–a complete lack of concern for others.
OS – don’t forget about the F35, even more expensive and a complete bust so far. Nobody in the world has anything close to previous generation of fighter craft but we are pissing away billions to replace the current unchallenged gen with the next.
BTW – we fought two wars at the same time for the last 10 years even though we didn’t need to. I have personal knowledge that the Pentagon failed at this, resources that could have finished Afghanistan were not available because they were sent to the war of choice in Iraq. This was largely because the two wars prepared for were WWII instead of what we are actually facing.
From what I have read there is no cuts to Obamas buget. http://news.antiwar.com/2012/01/05/obama-spins-new-global-military-strategy-as-massive-change/
I’m increasingly frustrated by this sites flag waving for this obvious slick talking Bush 2.0. I thought Mr. Turley was great during the Bush years making me a fan of this site. However since Obama’s election there is far less of a case being made for his draconian policies as there was for Bush’s.
It is interesting to me that the military is always ready to fight the last war. They “need” the latest toys. The F-22 Raptor, for example, costs about $150 Million “flyaway cost” apiece. The entire run of 167 aircraft cost $66.7 Billion, which included R&D. How many dogfights are they going to get into with an F-22, when what they really need is a low and slow tank and bunker busting airplane with an performance envelope more similar to that of the P-47 and P-51 of WW-II? Last I heard, al Qaeda did not have any Mig-35 fighters.
Strange, because the USAF got way more bang for the buck fighting a guerrilla and anti-tank war out of the A-10 Warthog, which costs about $12 million apiece. Compare that with the current LearJet 60 business aircraft which comes in at a little over $13.3 million apiece. Warthogs are just not sexy enough, I suppose.
Here is one of the ‘outdated’ butt-ugly low and slow A-10s hard at work in Afghanistan. The straight green line visible in the video is the laser pointer showing the pilot where the sniper who is shooting at the US troops is hiding. The reaction of the US soldier taking the video is interesting, to say the least.
Note: the bullets fly at three times the speed of sound, so you see the rounds impact before you hear the roar of the GAU-8/A Avenger “Gatling gun” of the A-10.
It’s a modernized and mature idea, and as you stated, quite bold in its timing. But it’s a smart way to help crunch spending a bit without sacrificing security. Ron Paul’s crackpot, isolationist dystopia would be as dangerous as it would be foolish.