Obama administration's plan to shrink US military faces sharp resistance in Congress

  • Article by: BRADLEY KLAPPER , Associated Press
  • Updated: February 25, 2014 - 5:45 AM

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration's push for a smaller, nimbler military must now face the scrutiny of a Congress that has spent years battling the Pentagon's vision for a new security strategy.

  • 13
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
comment229Feb. 25, 14 5:13 AM

"They have resisted cutting tanks and aircraft the military doesn't even want, or accepting base closings that would be poison in their home districts. " Pretty much sums it up, now, doesn't it? I would welcome a survey/poll of the American public about what they think about the number of bases we have around the world, how much military might we should have, and when we should become involved in other country's civil wars. Then send those results to McCain.

20
2
comment229Feb. 25, 14 5:16 AM

PS.... I just shook my head a few months ago, when McCain advocated that we NOT put troops on the ground in Syria, and instead, supply arms to the rebels, many who have been described in rather unglowing terms. A gop friend of mine, stated simply, that if McCain got his way, we would send massive arms to the rebels, and guess what the Russians would do in response? Yeah, that would balance it all out and all the killing would end (sarcasm at its best).

20
4
JsaVetFeb. 25, 14 6:30 AM

Do we really need a 3 Billion dollar plane to fly from MO to Afghanistan to drop a 2 million dollar smart bomb on a insurgent position ?

18
4
mobydick1Feb. 25, 14 6:41 AM

Members of Congress are going to fight the efforts to reduce the military installations in their states. They will be willing to cut benefits to soldiers and veterans, but their chances of being reelected would be virtually nil if they closed bases in their state. They are far more interested in their tenure than the over-all welfare of the citizenry.

20
2
rms316Feb. 25, 14 6:49 AM

"Solving our financial problems on the backs of the military". GOP has been trying to do it on the backs of poor people for quite some time. Can't tell me there isn't plenty of wasteful and unneeded spending that can't be scaled back without diminishing this country's ability to defend itself. And, at the same time, strategically keeping bases around the world.

17
3
owatonnabillFeb. 25, 14 6:57 AM

What do we need the military for? According to the Preamble to the Constitution the Federal Government has the duty to "provide for the common defense". But it is what the Preamble DOESN'T say that is instructive. It DOESN'T say "be the world's policeman. It DOESN'T say "prop up this or that despot down in BFE because it gives America a perceived economic advantage". Maybe a fundamental rethink of purpose is in order, and if we do that, then a smaller, more efficient military is definitely the way to go. If history proves anything it is that America wins wars not by overwhelming numbers of marching feet but by economic power back home. Let's get rid of those superfluous marching feet and concentrate on what is REALLY important.

13
2
comment229Feb. 25, 14 7:14 AM

From the posts so far, it will show you how out of touch congress really is with the American public as a whole. From what I can see, it doesn't matter much if you are an independent, dem, or repub to have the same point of view.... the military, is bloated.

16
2
pitythefoolsFeb. 25, 14 7:28 AM

We are about to see who are the real leaders in Congress, and who are there to support the military-industrial complex and pork for their Districts. There is simply no justification for a Military budget that is twice the size it was just 10 years ago. Cut the Military in half immediately, then start doing real cutting. Wind down Iraq and Afghanistan-leave them completely. Iraq never was a threat, and let Afghanistan know that if they let the Taliban take charge again, we'll drone the h3ll out of them. Then, since we are no longer dependent on middle eastern oil, get out of the Middle East - ALL of it, including Israel. Let them fight each other back to the stone ages if they like, it's not our problem. Then start cutting unneeded bases in Europe, Asia Pacific and the US. Just for starters.

15
2
macrostelesFeb. 25, 14 9:12 AM

Providing for the common defense is much different from protecting corporate interests for the American Empire. The truth is we've been fighting the current "wars" with private armies - we don't even use our own troops to protect our bases overseas. We've privatized war and made it very profitable.

6
1
sbuzz16Feb. 25, 14 9:43 AM

They never seem to talk about the funding of military contracting company's such as - what was formerly know as Blackwater etc... which are funded at a much higher rates than our regular military is.

7
1

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT