Skip to main content

View Diary: You won't cut Pentagon budget by targeting troops (90 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  the MIC as hydra-headed budget beast (12+ / 0-)
    But the last thing you do if you are seriously about cutting the defense budget is force our troops to bear the burden of those cuts. It's obnoxious, wrong-headed, idiotic, and a political dead-ender guaranteed to keep the Pentagon budget as bloated as ever.

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013 (@eState4Column5).

    by annieli on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 01:02:48 PM PST

    •  So (9+ / 0-)

      more food stamps for our military?

      The food stamps that were just cut of course.

      Close one runway at Area 51 and would could avoid some of this.

      •  They're only serious about cutting... (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Lava20, GAKeynesian, ER Doc, annieli

        ...the defense budget when they start canceling their latest batch of toys. I deeply love Kos for mentioning that damned F-35 program, the vampire defense program from hell's depths.

        The thing about soldiers, unglamorous things like transport planes and helicopters, they can do more than just kill people. The F-35, the aircraft carriers, the many other toys, they can't do this:

        Air crews from 4th Combat Aviation Brigade, 4th Infantry Division, Fort Carson, Colorado, assist with rescue and recovery operations due to massive flooding near Boulder, Colo., in support of the Colorado National Guard
        ...or this...can a cruise missile do this?

        Join Essa in a revolt against the gods. Continue the fight, Causality.

        by rbird on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 03:55:43 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  will this cutback allow private armies (Xe) (5+ / 0-)

      instead of our troops?  When say you want to invade Iran?    Or fulfill one of Netanyahu's other wet dreams?

      How can we be sure that this is a premptive step towards privatizing more of our military?

      This is the sleight of hand that the Bush Regime pulled in Iraq, with all their propaganda of "going in with a small force" while using contractors who were paid much more than our grunts and since they had a reduced force they had to use the likes of Halliburton to perform support functions.

      All of which cost far more than supporting and training and keeping in place a reasonably paid military.  And you had private mercenaries running amok in war zones and gouging our service people.

      How can we be sure that by reducing the troop numbers, that another door isn't opened to use private contractors like the infamous Blackwater/Xi/or whatever the hell it calls itself now?  

      How can we find out if this might happen?

      We must not only protect our military, but also those who serve in the military.

      "The corporate state’s repression, now on the brink of totalitarianism, would with the help of Christie, his corporate backers ... become a full-blown corporate fascism.'

      by SeaTurtle on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 02:22:58 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I'm sure it's dawned on others, but (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Calamity Jean

      I don't believe this DOD budget is meant to cut costs.  The cost-cutting measures taken against the troops will never fly in congress, and even if the bill passes, I think Hagel knows the cuts will be restored in future legislative action.  In fact all the cuts in the bill will be loudly opposed by the constituencies affected, and attempts will also be made to restore them as soon as legislatively possible.

      "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

      by SueDe on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 05:12:43 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site