Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Share

    Vladimir79
    Grand Marshal
    Grand Marshal

    Posts : 2193
    Points : 3099
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Post  Vladimir79 on Tue Aug 25, 2009 3:09 pm

    To defend the U.S. military budget will be difficult
    25/08/2009

    With the escalation of the war in Afghanistan, increasing the number of U.S. ground forces and large-scale internal programs Obama administration will be difficult to achieve the adoption of the military budget.

    Obama Administration recently again hit the headlines when lifted some costly program of the Pentagon, such as long-term program to create complex weapons and equipment the U.S. Army Future Combat Systems and the development of the F-22 fighter for the Air Force. But those who hoped to reduce the U.S. military budget, will be disappointed if you look at Obama's budget request for 2010 fiscal year. There he continues the line of his predecessor, requiring a substantial increase in defense spending.

    This may seem surprising, given that the president made on the domestic front, making health insurance program, worth a trillion dollars. But the Obama administration is going in real terms to spend more on defense than at any period of four years of American history after the Second World War.

    This increase in spending (3.4 per cent compared with last year - to 668 billion dollars) due to two major and interrelated factors, both of whom were born yet when George Bush, and Obama is their only approved and accelerated.

    The first factor - that the escalation of the war in Afghanistan. The budget for 2010 in this theater of operations required to spend 65 billion dollars. Afghan costs for the first time since the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 exceeded the Iraqi (61 billion dollars). Obama has clearly stated that the Afghan war is his war, and he intends by the end of this year, double the number of persons where the American troops.

    The second factor - it increases the number of U.S. ground forces. The number of Army and Marine Corps increased by 92,000 troops, which will cost 14 billion dollars a year. This increase was initiated in 2007 under Bush, when the U.S. military switched their attention to the troops on counterinsurgency operations and other non-standard properties.

    Actions of this kind require a large number of personnel to slowly comb the densely populated urban areas, as well as special forces to destroy pockets of resistance in remote locations. Ramsfeldovskaya concept of a small, highly mobile and equipped with the latest technology army banish.

    According to the expert from the Washington-based Center for Strategic and Budgetary Analysis (Center for Strategic and Budgetary Analysis) Todd Harrison (Todd Harrison), who wrote an analytical report on the application for the military budget in 2010, an increase in troop strength would have implications for the entire defense budget of the United States.

    All recruited soldiers need weapons, housing, ranges and shooting range, as well as the allowance, medical care, pensions and other benefits. "The increase in the number of troops will have a lasting impact on the budget", - said Harrison ISN Security Watch.

    More development costs, less procurement

    Military health care is one article that the budget to be significantly increased. According to the budget request of Obama in 2010, expenses under this heading should be 47 billion dollars, and according to Harrison, every 10 years they will have doubled. The health system covers the U.S. armed services for its more than nine million soldiers on active military service, as well as their families and retired military.

    "If you allow this, the costs of personnel will begin to crowd out other budget items, such as procurement and research and development", - says Harrison.

    Increased expenditure on personnel has led to a significant load on the rest of the U.S. military budget. Costs of research and development budget request to Obama in 2010 decreased by 2,1 percent, but still they are close to last year's record. The volume of purchases increased by 6.7 per cent, and yet, it is significantly below historic highs of 1985. According to Harrison, 70 th and 80 th years, the ratio of procurement and research and development was 3 to 1, and today the difference is only 1.4 per cent.

    "This means that the United States spends more money on developing advanced weapons systems, but their purchase money does not remain," - he says.

    According to Harrison, in the coming years in research and development there will be changes, and the bulk of the effort will shift from basic and applied research in the direction already ongoing and rapid development. Harrison predicts that the new programs will be less, and the money allocated to research, will be redirected to the already existing programs.

    It will also have an impact on those weapons systems that the United States will be able to acquire in the coming years.

    "In recent years, requests are often based on such techniques, which were inaccessible by the standards of existing technologies - said Harrison, who - now the Pentagon is in the long term switch from some exceptional for its novelty decisions on less ambitious and less expensive program."

    Regarding strategy, it is quite possible that in the doctrine and concepts of the U.S. military decades away position on the simultaneous conduct of the wars in the two theaters of war.

    "We may see a provision stating that the United States must be prepared for a major war and one regional conflict", - said Harrison. According to him, is now preparing "four-year military review, which will set out the expected changes in the military-strategic doctrine and concepts.

    And the future needs taken into account?

    The more important question that arises in connection with the budget request, is considered at all in future budget needs. The application sets out the forecast for expenditure on the war in Iraq and Afghanistan in the coming years. It provides a significant reduction in funding these wars - from $ 130 billion in 2010 fiscal year to just $ 50 billion in each subsequent year. The application is also provided to keep in perspective changes the total amount of the military budget, beginning in 2011.

    Conclusion combat troops from Iraq will give a savings in the military budget. But as in Afghanistan in 2010 provided $ 65 billion, and the conflict in that country only intensifies, the projected in 2011 and then figure the costs of the Iraq and Afghanistan within the $ 50 billion is unlikely to seem credible.

    "The figure of 50 billion dollars does not seem plausible to me, - said Harrison, who - this year the number of American troops in Afghanistan will grow by two times. According to expert estimates, Afghanistan in 10 years will cost us 580 billion dollars. There is no doubt that administration will come back and ask for additional money. "

    As a higher level - the total U.S. budget, the budget committee of the Congress for the next 10 years, it predicts a deficit of $ 4.7 trillion. During this same period, spending on personnel will increase by half. Obama administration will have to create some sort of miracle to sustain the burden of military spending, especially in circumstances where it simultaneously promotes the ambitious plans for domestic policy.

    "If military forces remain at current levels, it will still exist long-term costs for the next 10, 20 and 30 years - said Harrison - and because the Pentagon has decided to increase the number of troops, the big question - where will set the money."

    Living in Washington, a freelance journalist Peter Baksbaum for 15 years wrote on defense, security, business and technology. His articles were published such publications as Fortune, Forbes, Chief Executive, Information Week, Defense Technology International, Homeland Security and Computerworld.

    Peter Baksbaum, "ISN", Switzerland

    Права на данный материал принадлежат ИноСМИ

    Pervius
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 259
    Points : 287
    Join date : 2011-03-08

    Baby Boomers killed US Military

    Post  Pervius on Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:55 pm

    There are +70 million Baby Boomers in the US now old enough they are starting to get Social Security.


    All those Baby Boomers who were ALSO military Reserves/National Guard.....are also getting into their 60's and now the Pentagon has to pay them a military retirement. Mega-Millions of them!

    www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/08/15/eveningnews/main20092652.shtml

    So looks like now the Pentagon will have to end...paying their Active Duty military retirements after 20 years of service.......so there is money to pay allllllll those mega-millions of Reservists who only did weekend duty every month...and nothing more.


    Imagine the repercussions that will have on the Active Duty US Military. They're getting robbed....because the weekend warrior Baby Boomer Generation is robbing the piggy bank.


    Either Obama need a Boxer Rebellion Part II........or the US military won't be able to fight anymore....leaving Europe.....Israel...Japan....Philippines....Australia......... defenseless.


    Smart move on Russia parts getting rid of their....'Liabilities"...during their "Re-organization". United States poured BILLIONS into former Soviet Territories trying to buy them off as new US Friends....expending US Funds....while Russia spent none.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15445
    Points : 16152
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 17, 2011 3:57 am

    Russia has shed a lot of dead weight with the loss of the Warsaw Pact and Soviet republics, but a bit of meat was lost too.

    It has lost its military market.

    And the US Military has been over fed for decades... just look at the British forces in comparison regarding "defence cuts".

    NationalRus
    Senior Lieutenant
    Senior Lieutenant

    Posts : 637
    Points : 650
    Join date : 2010-04-11

    Re: US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Post  NationalRus on Wed Aug 17, 2011 3:11 pm

    oh please even with huge cuts in the middel fo recesion ther military budget is still redicules high, they have all the money to pay the retirements with no problems, its only the greed who pisens it, like "yeah we can pay them no problem at all but still the thought that we should't pay is sweet"

    ahmedfire
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 711
    Points : 885
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Pentagon Struggles to Keep Ships Sailing, Planes Flying As Budget Cuts Loom

    Post  ahmedfire on Sat Aug 20, 2011 3:36 pm

    Nice article :

    http://www.defencetalk.com/pentagon-struggles-to-keep-ships-sailing-planes-flying-as-budget-cuts-loom-35757/



    Last edited by ahmedfire on Sat Aug 20, 2011 3:38 pm; edited 1 time in total

    ahmedfire
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 711
    Points : 885
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Post  ahmedfire on Sat Aug 20, 2011 3:37 pm


    Inside the Debt Deal: Who Won, Who Lost

    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/08/inside-the-debt-deal-who-won-who-lost/242859/

    Pervius
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 259
    Points : 287
    Join date : 2011-03-08

    Re: US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Post  Pervius on Thu Aug 25, 2011 1:23 pm

    What makes you think what the United States says it spends on its military every year is true?


    There is a reason they were spraying contrails from airplanes over the US to hide it from spy satellites.

    Since the Chinese figured out how to use microwaves to part the clouds/ or punch holes in them...their spy satellites can see everything. And now you don't see all those contrails over the United States trying to hide its secret.

    The only place the US has been spending money, is over seas. Not in its military.

    B-52's are older than Russian Bear bombers.
    KC-135 tankers are just as old.
    Aircraft carriers aren't new either.

    Sure there's a few new pieces of military hardware....but they brought in H-x Visa workers from India to design them, illegal alien labor to assemble them...and the few new military hardware was built on the hyper cheap. Do the Virgina Class subs have a diving restriction from the illegal alien welders using the wrong welding rods?

    Don't believe the numbers. Why do you think Sarah Palin quit being Alaska's Governor? General in charge of Elmendorf Air Base killed himself? They somehow got illegal aliens up there to build cheapo new hangars for F-22's? At almost no cost.

    Did Canada ever ask how those foreigners got past them? ha ha ha! Likely flown up there on Air Force planes...hence why General killed himself.

    Which was silly...he killed himself for nothing. American people don't care illegal aliens are taking their jobs.

    Russian Patriot
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1168
    Points : 2062
    Join date : 2009-07-20
    Age : 25
    Location : USA- although I am Russian

    U.S. to cut armed forces – Obama

    Post  Russian Patriot on Thu Jan 05, 2012 11:38 pm

    U.S. to cut armed forces – Obama

    The U.S. President Barack Obama unveiled on Thursday a new defense strategy that seeks to cut the country’s armed forces as a part of major cuts to the U.S. defense budget by almost $500 billion, RIA Novosti reported.

    "Our military will be leaner but the world must know – the United States is going to maintain our military superiority with Armed Forces that are agile, flexible and ready for the full range of contingencies and threats," Obama told a press conference at the Pentagon.

    The U.S president said that the country would dismiss Cold War-era systems in order to invest into “intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, counter-terrorism, countering weapons of mass destruction and the ability to operate in environments where adversaries try to deny us access.”

    The defense strategy, released on Thursday, however neither elaborates on the number of troops to be reduced nor explains any budgetary issues of the reform.

    Speaking before the press conference at the Pentagon, administration officials said that Army and Marine Corps personnel may be reduced by up to 15 percent in the next ten years what means the reduction of tens of thousands of troops.

    The United States may also cut the number of ground forces in Europe by another combat brigade, a group of about 4,000 people.

    The document also puts focus on Asia since Pentagon has already voiced concerns about China's rapidly growing military potential that could make it harder for the United States Navy and Air Force to project power to the Far East.

    Obama also reiterated that the United States will maintain its efforts to ensure stability in the Middle East and halt Iranian and North Korean nuclear programs.

    "U.S. policy will emphasize Gulf security, in collaboration with the Gulf Cooperation Council countries when appropriate, to prevent Iran's development of a nuclear weapon capability and counter its destabilizing policies," the document reads.

    http://www.en.ria.ru/mlitary_news/20120105/170633581.html

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15445
    Points : 16152
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jan 06, 2012 4:40 am

    Lobby groups will be foaming at the mouth... this is of course a necessary thing, but it might cost Obama the election, and the person getting into power because of this will of course "owe" their position to the US MIC lobby groups... and I don't think they will reward them with large but necessary cuts to the US military.

    SACvet
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 3
    Points : 5
    Join date : 2012-04-07
    Location : United States

    Re: US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Post  SACvet on Sun Apr 08, 2012 5:33 pm

    Gentlemen,

    Basically, since 1932, the U.S. incrementally increased the number of social programs such as Social Security, Welfare, Medicare, Medic-ade etc. All these programs are favored by the Democratic Party in an effort to increase the number of people dependent on the government (e.g Democratic voters). Also, legislation favored the Labor Unions by passing laws that give the worker more power over the employer. So, today 49% of workers do not pay taxes ( or are given refunds exceeding their tax liability). Private corporations ( General Motors ) are forced to pay pensions on ever increasing number of retirees to the point where GM no longer earns a taxable profit (government take over). What is happening today is an increasing financial burden on the remaining 51%of workers and corporations that choose to stay in the U.S.(corporate tax rate the highest in the world.) Approximately 70% of the U.S. GDP is for these social programs and most of that never sees the dependent citizen as the number of bureaucrats increase. The U.S. military budget will always be first on the chopping block. Reagan was the last president to make sure the military had what it needed.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15445
    Points : 16152
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Post  GarryB on Mon Apr 09, 2012 12:22 am

    So, today 49% of workers do not pay taxes ( or are given refunds exceeding their tax liability).

    Are those the workers that are unemployed?

    The real problem of taz evasion is in big business and the rich.

    The concept of trickle down where having excessively rich people is considered good because they have to spend their money so the poorer people benefit when they do.

    Total hogwash of course, because they simply use their wealth to generate more wealth and use their money to keep themselves separated from the poor with gates and fences and guards.

    Just look at the recent so called financial crisis... I say so called because the banks didn't suffer even though they were the problem. Being too big to fail contradicts the whole concept of using market forces to "balance" the economy. The correct action should have been to let those banks and companies fail... split them up to destroy the monopolies they use to make the system unfair in their favour.

    They need to roll back some stupid laws... 20 years ago to get a loan from a bank you pretty much needed to prove that you could afford to pay it back. In other words the whole concept of getting a loan was about speed... we give you the money now to do what you want to do now and you pay us back over ten years with lots of interest. If you had the patience you could save up those 10 years and then just buy what you want to buy outright without paying a bank interest but you don't want to wait 10 years.

    5 Years ago however if you wanted a loan to buy a house you couldn't really afford they were happy to sign you up because house prices were going up all the time and if you found you couldn't pay back the loan they could take the house and as prices were going up they could wait a year and then sell it for much more than your loan was worth.

    Worked fine for a while but pretty soon no one could afford new houses, or to buy old ones and the house prices stopped going up and started going down.

    All of a sudden a family that had a half million dollar mortgage on a house that was now worth a quarter of a million were in trouble... they couldn't afford the loan payments but even if they sold the house they would still have a debt but they would also have no where to live... and they would be no better off because the reduction in debt payments wouldn't cover the extra cost of rent...

    The bankers didn't see it coming because they were just interested in how much money they were making on stupid enormous loans...

    Reagan was the last president to make sure the military had what it needed.

    Reagan was a fool that gave tax cuts to the rich and taught the US MIC that revolutionary designed earned more cash than evolutionary designs that improved existing material incrementally.

    The US needs to take a step back and really think about what it wants to be because if it continues to be a global colonial power it will lose influence as other parts of the world that are not white skinned and western gain their positions in the world of the future.

    The BRICS organisation is just one example of the reaction to Eurocentric western dominated world organisations like the so called world bank and IMF.

    No disrespect to the American people, but for two decades now the US government has had the chance to walk the walk, and it has certainly talked the talk, but it is not practising what it preaches.

    nemrod
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 806
    Points : 1309
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    US Army to eliminate 10 brigades...14% budget cut at least now

    Post  nemrod on Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:05 pm

    http://news.yahoo.com/army-eliminate-10-brigades-u-bases-drawdown-odierno-231710869.html

    Happy news !
    After removing 500 aircrafts, now US army is going to reduce at least 14% -if not more...- of its budget. However, as we already discussed previously, these are the first steps of a far larger dramatic reduction of US defence. US army looks like Soviet red army in 1992. They are at only first steps.
    We will witnessed a fantastic shift of global chessboard this year, from unipolar world, we are going toward a multipolar world. In this context I doubt about the F-22, JSF F-355 fighters, beside B2, and many aircraft carriers will be in recycle bin. In a near future no war for US Army is foreseen.




    BTRfan
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 437
    Points : 477
    Join date : 2010-09-30
    Location : USA

    Re: US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Post  BTRfan on Wed Aug 14, 2013 5:53 pm

    I would like to see the Army reduced to less than 50,000 full-time personnel, with perhaps 5-10 million reservists/state militia/guard/etc.

    As for the Navy, I believe it should be reduced to five aircraft carrier groups, 1 for the Gulf of Mexico, 2 for the Pacific, and 2 for the Atlantic, the rest of the ships should be stored and maintained with skeleton crews to keep the ships ready for service on several weeks/months notice.



    I believe that a law should be passed prohibiting the military from giving away its old equipment to other nations. They should be required to sell their equipment to American citizens.


    The end result would be that American patriots would wind up with M16A2 rifles, M-60 medium machine guns, M113 APCs, and stuff from the 1970s-1990s, instead of such stuff being given away. They would be able to form local defense units.


    Citizens should be encouraged to train on their own and given access to military firing ranges. Indeed they might even develop a program whereby any citizen who joins an organized local militia/reserve unit and agrees to take part in one or two days of training each month is given 500 rounds of rifle ammunition which they can use to further their marksmanship on military ranges.



    That would be a force for NATIONAL DEFENSE, but America's masters are only interested in a force for imperial misadventures.

    NationalRus
    Senior Lieutenant
    Senior Lieutenant

    Posts : 637
    Points : 650
    Join date : 2010-04-11

    Re: US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Post  NationalRus on Wed Aug 14, 2013 6:21 pm

    the army need a cut, when a budged goes out of reasonable proportions its get conterproductiv, eats the national budged and breads corruption, a smaller budged doesnt mean a weak army or national defence

    i also favour a swiss model, also for russia, maybe 700k prefessional soldiers, a 150-350k national guard for conscripts who want to serve in the army for a year or more and then go to a several million strong reserve force + a national wide militia, no budged of any army in the world in the moment have to surpass 200+ billions

    SOC
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 595
    Points : 650
    Join date : 2011-09-13
    Age : 38
    Location : Indianapolis

    Re: US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Post  SOC on Wed Aug 14, 2013 8:05 pm

    nemrod wrote:After removing 500 aircrafts, now US army is going to reduce at least  14% -if not more...- of its budget. However, as we already discussed previously, these are the first steps of a far larger dramatic reduction of US defence.
    I'm all for reduction provided two things: 1) we really do agree to stop getting involved in crap that doesn't matter to us, and 2) STRATCOM expands and becomes the go-to problem solver.

    nemrod wrote:In this context I doubt about the F-22, JSF F-355 fighters, beside B2, and many aircraft carriers will be in recycle bin.
    F-22 is going nowhere. We're not intelligent enough to cancel the F-35, which should be done for reasons that have no budgetary basis anyway. And the B-2 will remain until the next bomber is around.

    nemrod wrote:In a near future no war for US Army is foreseen.
    There is no credible threat requiring the US Army's involvement in the near future. Unless, of course, Europe does something stupid again!

    BTRfan wrote:As for the Navy, I believe it should be reduced to five aircraft carrier groups, 1 for the Gulf of Mexico, 2 for the Pacific, and 2 for the Atlantic
    5 carriers is a bit low. You need 1 for training, say two each for Atlantic, Pacific (one is out, one is in port)...that's already five. Then I'd add four more. Two would be for cycling in to replace the others as they need refits or whatever, or for deployment to places like the Indian Ocean or wherever something needs added focus. The other two would be tasked to the Gulf of Mexico/Caribbean region with the express purpose of maintaining 24/7 coverage to blow up anything drug-related.

    BTRfan wrote:I believe that a law should be passed prohibiting the military from giving away its old equipment to other nations.
    How the hell we can justify even giving anyone foreign aid when we are supposedly in such a huge financial crisis is another question.

    BTRfan wrote:They should be required to sell their equipment to American citizens.
    Yeah, that's never going to happen. Not that it's a bad idea in principle, but giving a bunch of people around here access to tanks and guns is going to cause way more problems than it'd solve. Although on the other hand this might be the perfect kind of social Darwinism.

    Now, if you wanted to sell them to people in TX, NM, and AZ and declare the southern border a free-fire zone, I'd buy that.

    BTRfan wrote:I would like to see the Army reduced to less than 50,000 full-time personnel
    Like I said, give me a much looser policy regarding letting STRATCOM solve our problems, and that's fine. Never going to happen though, there are too many people in power that think China and Russia are actually a threat.

    BTRfan
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 437
    Points : 477
    Join date : 2010-09-30
    Location : USA

    US Dept of Defense and Pentagon Cannot Account For 8.6 TRILLION Dollars

    Post  BTRfan on Tue Nov 19, 2013 5:18 pm

    Approximately 8.6 TRILLION dollars from 1996 to 2012 cannot be accounted for, the Pentagon spent the money but they cannot detail how they spent the money.


    http://news.yahoo.com/special-report-pentagons-doctored-ledgers-conceal-epic-waste-144950858--business.html



    By Scot J. Paltrow

    LETTERKENNY ARMY DEPOT, Chambersburg, Pennsylvania (Reuters) - Linda Woodford spent the last 15 years of her career inserting phony numbers in the U.S. Department of Defense's accounts.

    Every month until she retired in 2011, she says, the day came when the Navy would start dumping numbers on the Cleveland, Ohio, office of the Defense Finance and Accounting Service, the Pentagon's main accounting agency. Using the data they received, Woodford and her fellow DFAS accountants there set about preparing monthly reports to square the Navy's books with the U.S. Treasury's - a balancing-the-checkbook maneuver required of all the military services and other Pentagon agencies.

    And every month, they encountered the same problem. Numbers were missing. Numbers were clearly wrong. Numbers came with no explanation of how the money had been spent or which congressional appropriation it came from. "A lot of times there were issues of numbers being inaccurate," Woodford says. "We didn't have the detail … for a lot of it."

    The data flooded in just two days before deadline. As the clock ticked down, Woodford says, staff were able to resolve a lot of the false entries through hurried calls and emails to Navy personnel, but many mystery numbers remained. For those, Woodford and her colleagues were told by superiors to take "unsubstantiated change actions" - in other words, enter false numbers, commonly called "plugs," to make the Navy's totals match the Treasury's.


    ...
    ...

    *much more at link*


    IceGeneral
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 7
    Points : 9
    Join date : 2014-04-14

    Re: US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Post  IceGeneral on Wed Apr 16, 2014 7:33 am

    Hi. I remember reading that some where.

    nemrod
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 806
    Points : 1309
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    US cut military budget, reduce armed forces

    Post  nemrod on Mon Oct 13, 2014 10:13 am

    http://news.antiwar.com/2014/10/08/obama-congress-must-stop-draconian-cuts-to-military-spending/

    Battalion0415
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 145
    Points : 152
    Join date : 2015-01-07
    Age : 30

    United States military cuts

    Post  Battalion0415 on Wed Jan 07, 2015 1:49 am

    Which are planned after 2018?

    1- Army are going down from 494,000 to 450,000 or 420,000 but never happens in my planned.

    2- First I willing no Air Force and now I willing F-35 to only outside USA.

    3- And no more newest plane before F-35 this F-22 then F-16 ad F-15 to awake with those three.

    4- And goverment in U.S. defence will go after Super Hornets.

    5- I willing 400 instead for 600 Super Hornets in around 2020's.

    6- I will say 20+20 in two division for the Marin Corps. No more needs in Southern.

    7- I saying that's Navy needs 200 Super Hornets in 6 carriers and Air Force 200.

    8- I saying smaller size in first size then one million reserves.

    9- I willing 150,000 Marin Corps in Southern USA.

    10- I willing 350,000 soldiers in Army. 3 front war at home land.

    11- Then coast patrull defence will be 30000 seeman and soldiers.

    12- And Navy will goes down to 70000 and Air Force goes down to 100,000.

    13- It been 700,000 in U.S. Armed Forces first size.

    14- After Iraq war it's newtime war against terrorist.

    15- This time new war in Iraq USA/NATO/Iraq/Kurdistan against IS.

    16- And in Afghanistan still are war and in Syria and in Yemen.

    17- Special forces from United States in Yemen. To kill new Al Qaida leaders.

    18- Succesfully operation even have no seen the war or read in news.

    19- I only belief right if there are right with succesfull war in Yemen for special forces for USA.


    I am likers of USA. No more anti USA. They are powerful Army Group.


    Off Topic


    Battalion0415
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 145
    Points : 152
    Join date : 2015-01-07
    Age : 30

    Re: US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Post  Battalion0415 on Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:04 am

    Or todays 850,000 soldiers in reserve force of new size I am will.

    Europe go down with sizes and U.S. can do the same.

    Air Force soldiers can war fight against terrorist.


    Last edited by Battalion0415 on Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:06 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Remember not my third letter...)

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Post  Mike E on Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:26 am

    I couldn't say, but the US armed forces will be downsizing in the next couple decades due to newer more expensive projects and a ever decreasing budget.

    nemrod
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 806
    Points : 1309
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Post  nemrod on Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:56 am

    Battalion0415 wrote:Which are planned after 2018?

    Noone knows exactly what will happen in the comming weeks, months. In spite of what we were said, american's economy is slowly crashed. The next big crash will simply spell the end of US empire and especially US military. US military lobby is slowed the cuts, nevertheless, they will have to accept the evidence. For that reason US will have no choice other than a world war against Russia and China, that they know they could not win, but just winning time.
    The real next cuts for US military will look like Soviet cuts during the 90's, far the from seeten cuts that we saw untill now.

    Battalion0415
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 145
    Points : 152
    Join date : 2015-01-07
    Age : 30

    Re: US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Post  Battalion0415 on Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:37 am

    I say 631,000 now in United States of America.

    Smaller troops that's Russia.

    Cool Cool Cool

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9422
    Points : 9914
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Post  George1 on Wed Jan 07, 2015 12:10 pm

    Battalion0415 wrote:I say 631,000 now in United States of America.

    Smaller troops that's Russia.

    Cool   Cool   Cool

    +200.000 of US Marine Corps (it is like 2nd army branch Smile )

    Battalion0415
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 145
    Points : 152
    Join date : 2015-01-07
    Age : 30

    Re: US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Post  Battalion0415 on Wed Jan 07, 2015 12:14 pm

    Marines is allready deal in this size of 150,000 man. Wink

    Sponsored content

    Re: US Military Budget: Cuts and reductions

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 9:33 am


      Current date/time is Sat Dec 03, 2016 9:33 am