Obama's military budget

[darrels joy]

SecDef Gates: Appeasing Barney Frank

<DIV class=entry-content>

Even before the 2008 elections, Reprehensible Barney Frank was calling for 25% cuts in the DoD Budget. Reprehensible Murtha joined in following the accension to absolute power by his party. The new CinC claimed to be the voice of moderation. Supporters of the Military breathed a sigh of relief that Secretary of Defense Gates was kept on the job.

Obama claimed he would demonstrate transparency by including the budgets for Afghan and Iraq budgets in the DoD budget, rather than as supplementals. Little did we know then that this was a ruse to slash the DoD budget by all metrics: real dollars, inflated dollars, overt dollars, and covert dollars as well as a percentage of GDP.

"If approved, these recommendations will profoundly reform how this department does business. .... I have also consulted closely with the president." SecDef Gates Prepared Speech on the 2010 budget. 4/6/2009, Arlington, VA

No Doubt about that. We are going back to September 10, 2001 without regard for the increased threat from China recognized by the Department of Defense, without regard for the increased threat from Iran, and without the increased threat from North Korea, including the missile launch last. The new CinC and SecDef and SecState have responded only with rhetoric and now the

<DIV class=entry-more>weakening of the US Military.

"Under this budget request, we will reduce the number of support service contractors from our current 39 percent of the workforce to the pre-2001 level of 26 percent and replace them with full-time government employees." ibid

Oh yeah, we're going to increase the bureaucracy of the DoD while decreasing the future tools available to our warfighters. But that is not the end of it.

"We will stop the growth of Army Brigade Combat Teams (BCT) at 45 versus 48 " ibid

So, even as the new CinC increases the demand for Troops in Combat, he is decreasing the planned growth of the number of Troops available, specifically the number of Brigades available to serve in the Combat rotations. This is what the SecDef will "recommend" to the CinC following "close consultation" with him.
There are multiple quotes I should use from the DoD report on China this year, that preceded these recommendations but the bottom line is that DoD recognizes China is growing its spending, its capabilities, and its abilities to project power at double digit rates even as it focuses on an ability to defeat a distant and technologically advanced enemy. DoD Report on Chinese Military Power - 2009 The low estimates out pace the amount Russia is spending.
Gates correctly realizes that true analysis will result in the recognition that he is going about this in the wrong direction:

" Some will say I am too focused on the wars we are in and not enough on future threats. " ibid

Perhaps, he has been reading this publication. That is hardly a difficult prediction. He is correct in this: he is demonstrating an astounding degree of short-sightedness, both in his political aspirations and in his kow-towing to the extreme left during a time of war.
His proposed budget includes cutting the jobs of 10,000 to 100,000 jobs in only one item of it and countless others in the rest of what he's reported, not to mention the parts he won't comment on:

"We will end production of the F-22 fighter at 187 " .."So these are the principal recommendations I will make to the president. There are a number of others that I have not mentioned" ibid

The entire Defense budget is less than the CEO Bailout Bill, individually, less than the Debt Stimulus Bill, by itself, less than the reported cost of the Iraq Wars, cumulatively. It slashes technological advances, slashes our ability to protect the high seas, scraps advances in US Army Armored capabilities, scraps the entire Army technological advance program:

"We will end production of the F-22 fighter at 187 – representing 183 planes plus four recommended for inclusion in the FY 2009 supplemental."
"We will not pursue a development program for a follow-on Air Force bomber "
"slow production of several major surface combatants and other maritime programs."
"We will shift the Navy Aircraft Carrier program to a five-year build cycle "
"We will delay the Navy CG-X next generation cruiser program"
" We will delay amphibious ship and sea-basing programs "
"Our analysis concludes that we have enough C-17s with the 205 "
"my decisions act on this principle by terminating a number of programs "
"First, I recommend that we terminate the VH-71 presidential helicopter"
"we will terminate the Air Force Combat Search and Rescue X (CSAR-X) helicopter "
"we will terminate the $26 billion Transformational Satellite (TSAT) program"
"We will cancel the second airborne laser (ABL) prototype aircraft."
"We will terminate the Multiple Kill Vehicle (MKV) program "
"the Missile Defense Agency program will be reduced by $1.4 billion."
"DDG-1000 program would end with the third ship "
"it would unfortunately reduce our overall procurement of ships and cut workload in both shipyards. "
" I will recommend that we cancel the vehicle component of the current FCS program"
" There are a number of others that I have not mentioned" ibid.

And the F-22 program alone being scrapped will cause the layoffs of at least the 10,000 direct employees of it, and up to 90,000 MORE jobs that support it.
Meanwhile he unnecessarily increases costs by delaying implementation of the KC-X contract, desperately needed and previously awarded. The KC-135 of Northrup-Grumman is already operational and already been selected, and due to political pandering to Boeing is now being extended for bids:

"To replace the Air Force’s aging tanker fleet, we will maintain the KC-X aerial re-fueling tanker schedule and funding, with the intent to solicit bids this summer."

Then again, those tens of thousands of potential employees in Alabama voted against the new CinC and the great work of Governor Riley to keep his state low in unemployment numbers flies in the face of the new ruling party of the CinC and his lackey.
But this budget proposal by SecDef Gates is for

"Accomplishing this will require a nearly $11 billion increase above the FY09 budget level." ibid.

After lumping in the two current conflicts and other unnamed operations into the DoD budget that have been previously listed outside of it. But with the targeted increases in just a few programs, that means cuts in nearly all actual combat budgets while more troops are committed to combat operations:

"growth in medical research and development by requesting $400 million more "
"Recognize the critical and permanent nature of wounded, ill and injured, traumatic brain injury, and psychological health programs. This means institutionalizing and properly funding these efforts in the base budget and increasing overall spending by $300 million."
"Increase funding by $200 million for improvements in child care, spousal support, lodging, and education.Many of these programs have been funded in the past by supplementals. We must move away from ad hoc funding of long-term commitments. Thus, we have added money to each of these areas and all will be permanently and properly carried in the base defense budget. Together they represent an increase in base budget funding of $13 billion from last year."

These are needed increases in the budget, but by adding them to the DoD Budget, they represent an overall decrease in actual spending. They represent a dramatic decrease in warfighting budgets while increasing warfighting activities, particularly when when one realizes that this overall budget also includes the Current Conflicts, that have increased in deployments rather than decreased under the new CinC and SecDef.

"Army's $160 billion Future Combat Systems modernization program would lose its armored vehicles. Plans to build a shield to defend against missile attacks by rogue states would also be scaled back." AP, April 06, 2009

In dollars, unadjusted for inflation, President Clinton requested a peacetime DoD budget of $568.6 Billion for 2001.

"Gates said his $534 billion budget proposal represents a "fundamental overhaul" in defense acquisition "

Talk about going back in time and slashing budgets. In 2000, under Clinton, we had a smaller military and no wars to fund out of it. His "peace-keeping operation" in Kosovo may not have been "finished" until 2008, but that does not justify these massive slashes of our warfighting capabilites today.
In 2000, the House Armed Services Committee found that:
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">"the Pentagon is facing annual budget shortfalls of, at least, $ 100 billion during the next five years (FY 2001 – 2005)... Our comparison revealed that the Pentagon will fall $ 88 billion short in FY 2001"

"

<SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'">History reminds us all too well about the human consequences of the lack of American military preparedness, hollow forces and military surprise. The twentieth century offers us three vivid reminders: