February 24th, 2014
01:34 PM ET

Get real, Hagel tells nation in proposing military cuts

By Tom Cohen

Get real, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told America on Monday in proposing a scaled back, modern military that would cut the Army to its pre-World War II size, retire the A-10 "Warthog" attack jet and reduce some benefits for fighting forces.

"This is a budget that recognizes the reality of the magnitude of our fiscal challenges, the dangerous world we live in, and the American military's unique and indispensable role in the security of this country and in today's volatile world," Hagel said in unveiling the Defense Department spending plan for 2015 and beyond.

"There are difficult decisions ahead," he added. "That is the reality we're living with."

Downsizing due to modernization and budget constraints began under Hagel's predecessor, Robert Gates, and the proposal outlined on Monday described a new phase in the transition.

"Not a war-footing budget"

"For the first time in 13 years we will be presenting a budget to the Congress of the United States that's not a war-footing budget," Hagel said in response to reporters' questions. "That's a defining budget because it starts to reset and reshape."

Under it, the former senator from Nebraska said the military would become a smaller, more tactical force capable of fighting on one war front and maintaining effective defenses for a second while shifting to more specialized capabilities.

"Our analysis showed that this force would be capable of decisively defeating aggression in one major combat theater - as it must be - while also defending the homeland and supporting air and naval forces engaged in another theater against an adversary," he said.

The proposal endorsed Monday by Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey, who appeared with Hagel at the Pentagon news conference, is certain to face strong opposition in Congress - especially with midterm elections coming up in November.

Hagel's budget will be formally proposed next week and legislators from states or districts with major military bases or a heavy presence of contractors are expected to rail against it.

In recent years, Republican hawks have battled military force reductions under President Barack Obama's attempts to reduce defense spending as part of overall deficit reduction.

Conservative Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, a possible GOP presidential contender in 2016, questioned the planned cuts in forces at a time of varying threats and a U.S. shift in emphasis to the Asia-Pacific region, saying it "does not make strategic sense."

"It's going to be a far slimmer military," noted CNN Military Analyst and retired Maj. Gen. James "Spider" Marks, predicting a rough reception in Washington. "This is the toughest part - the political part."

Retired NATO commander: It's necessary

Retired Army Gen. George Joulwan, a former NATO supreme allied commander in Europe, said he thought the changes were necessary.

"Whether it's smart or not is yet to be seen. But I think it's necessary to do, given the constraints that we face fiscally within the United States," he told CNN.

For now, the Pentagon budget for the rest of this fiscal year and for 2015 is about $500 billion for each, as set by a congressional compromise in December.

Hagel acknowledged the changes he proposed mean assuming more risk, but said the military would be better situated to respond to the evolving security challenges facing the country.

The recommendations in the budget plan for 2015 and ensuing years "favor a smaller and more capable force - putting a premium on rapidly deployable, self-sustaining platforms that can defeat more technologically advanced adversaries," Hagel said.

He added that the proposal includes "important investments to preserve a safe, secure, reliable, and effective nuclear force."

All military forces, both active and reserve, would be cut under the budget plan.

It calls for reducing the Army to a level of 440,000 to 450,000 troops, which would be the lowest total in more than 70 years. At its height, the Army had 570,000 troops after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and currently has about 520,000.

According to Hagel, the budget proposal protects funding for cyberwarfare and special operations, and preserves money for the controversial and costly F-35 fighter jet.

Warthogs retired?

His plan would retire the A-10, which Hagel called a 40-year-old, single-purpose aircraft designed for Cold War operations, at a cost savings of $3.5 billion over five years.

Separately, Hagel said 900 additional Marines would be assigned to bolster security at embassies around the world under his proposal.

Diplomatic security has received close scrutiny since a terror attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, in 2012 killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.

Also, Hagel said the plan envisions increasing special operations forces from 66,000 today to 69,700 in the future to better meet tactical needs of a modern military requiring counterterrorism and crisis response.

Other provisions would reduce some benefits for military personnel, resulting in them having to shoulder more of their housing and medical costs. Reducing the federal subsidy to commissaries would mean smaller discounts for groceries on U.S. bases.

Through his remarks, Hagel warned that if Congress fails to eliminate planned across-the-board spending cuts beyond 2016, the military reductions would be on a greater scale and significant enough to compromise U.S. national security.

Some of those forced cuts, known as sequestration, were eased for this year and next under the budget deal worked out by Congress in December.

CNN's Halimah Abdullah and CNNMoney's Jennifer Liberto contributed to this report.

Post by:
Filed under: Hagel • Military
soundoff (1,807 Responses)
  1. Jim Rome

    The Pentagon has never been audited.

    February 25, 2014 at 1:34 am | Reply
  2. Obama's Scandal Czar

    Gut the military and arm EVERY FEDERAL REGULATORY agency ,AND LE agency with military grade weapons coming from overseas and BILLIONS of rounds of ammo. Presto, you now have Obama's domestic military. DHS is building a de facto domestic military, with the purchase of military-grade equipment and the execution of military-style training exercises. Even the die hard Obama martyrs cant ignore it.

    “We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. … We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded.” – Barack Obama.

    February 25, 2014 at 1:33 am | Reply
    • tommy mack

      Wow, the tinfoil must be a little tight for you. Here's that Obama quote IN CONTEXT:

      We will enlist our veterans to find jobs and support for other vets, and to be there for our military families. And we’re going to grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy. We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set.

      We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded. We need to use technology to connect people to service. We’ll expand USA Freedom Corps to create online networks where American can browse opportunities to volunteer. You’ll be able to search by category, time commitment and skill sets. You’ll be able to rate service opportunities, build service networks, and create your own service pages to track your hours and activities.

      February 25, 2014 at 1:43 am | Reply
  3. Big Grey Grump

    As a disabled vet and an amateur historian, I believe we need to take a greater look at what is our true objective as a nation. If all we hope to do is keep the party going, we will fall through the cracks and fade fade from memory as all the great nations and empires of the past. If we want to lead the world, then we need to decide which area we want to become the leader in. We can't do it all. It's impossible. Is it medicine we want to excel in, is it space exploration, is it food production, what? Where do we want to go? If we want to be the world's biggest, most powerful military nation, then we will always find ways to convince ourselves that there are more enemies out there that must be subdued, but we risk becoming a bully and then finding the world aligned against us. The world hates bullies, we really don't need tobe one, the bully's future is limited. No one has ever attacked a nation because it had a truly remarkable education system, or because it could provide food for itself and millions of others, or because they found ways to expand the base of human knowledge. "He that lives by the sword, dies by the sword."

    February 25, 2014 at 1:32 am | Reply
  4. generali

    when the military begins to actually protect America from its enemies both foreign and domestic I may actually show some concern

    February 25, 2014 at 1:31 am | Reply
    • Nick

      Sorry but how many countries have attacked us since the American Revolution? Oh yea, not a single one.

      February 25, 2014 at 1:51 am | Reply
      • Troy

        "Sorry but how many countries have attacked us since the American Revolution? Oh yea, not a single one."

        You're forgetting about the American Indian Wars (Native Americans, up until the early 20th century), the War of 1812 (Britain), Thronton (Mexico, 1846), Mexican-American War, Battle of Columbus (Mexico, 1918), attack on New Orleans (Germany, 1918), Ambos Nogales (Mexico, 1918), Jersey City (Germany, 1916), multiple attacks during WW II (including a little place called Pearl Harbor), and Wounded Knee (Lakota Nation, 1973). That also doesn't include terrorist attacks and attacks on US territories.

        February 25, 2014 at 2:07 am |
    • notredamegirl

      LOL! Where have you been?! That is what the military is doing stupid! Name a one country that has declared war on the US and attacked us in our own backyard since WW2! ZERO!

      February 25, 2014 at 1:55 am | Reply
      • Rick

        Gosh brainiac aka notredamegirl, what was 9/11 if not an attack on American soil?

        Is it remotely possible there is a direct correlation to nations not attacking the United States and the defense budget per chance?

        February 25, 2014 at 2:05 am |
      • Rick

        Oops. My apologies notredamegirl. I reread your posting and agree with you. Please accept my apologies.

        February 25, 2014 at 2:12 am |
  5. polkovnik

    This is not "real," Mr. Secretary. This is just expedient, and a huge disservice to the American people. I had hoped that as a Soldier and veteran you'd do better than this.

    February 25, 2014 at 1:20 am | Reply
    • jaysthename

      It's time that We The People stop throwing billions of dollars into these very questionable military and political coffers, all to assuage our exaggerated fears. At long last, now that we have unquestionable might in terms of armed forces, exactly who are we so afraid of that we need to outspend everyone tenfold or one hundredfold? I sincerely hope and believe that we as a nation are stronger than that.

      February 25, 2014 at 1:41 am | Reply
      • Sergeant Van

        The problem with your line of thinking is it isn't the weapon programs that are being cut, it's the people. A majority of military spending is on people and their benefits, such as housing, health care, food, etc. Our force is an all volunteer force, unlike most of the other large standing armies in the world. We keep it that way because we are able to encourage voluntary enlistment through education benefits, health coverage for servicemembers and their families, etc. Other nations don't do that with their conscripts, so they don't need to spend anywhere near as much. The cuts that are coming down the road are cuts to pay, housing allowances, commissary subsidies, education benefits, and the scrapping of paid-for but proven weapon systems simply because they are old. And they're drawing troop strength down to lower than it was pre-World War II. Considering the United States Army got its teeth kicked in during the beginning of its involvement in World War II precisely because we had a small professional force augmented by conscripts, I'd say that making this move is setting us up for failure in the long term.

        February 25, 2014 at 1:52 am |
      • notredamegirl

        If the US does that, be prepared to be manhandle by other countries, especially from China! You would beg to have a bigger military! That's why the US hasn't been attacked in our own background since WW2!

        February 25, 2014 at 2:00 am |
  6. dumbamerican

    Hmm...crush the military, disarm the populace. I have a much better idea for our president. Let us just stand there drop our pants and let the world come do us. Why even bother being a country. Actually an even better for our professor president. Let mexico come take us over. After all they are not our real enemy. Its the gays that we should be worried about.

    February 25, 2014 at 1:18 am | Reply
    • DrivenB4U

      You certainly live up to your name.

      February 25, 2014 at 2:02 am | Reply
  7. Hillary 2016

    Slash the military and the corrupt border enforcement goons, and open our southern border in the name of humanity and dignity. The Catholic church agrees on this. OPEN OUR BORDERS NOW, stop the inhumane death and suffering. WE are ALL immigrants. Stop the hate. This is wealthy nation, national debt or no, it's time to share and share alike.

    The Catholic church is correct. So are Native Americans. Stop racist open hostility to our neighbors to the south, we are all ONE HUMAN FAMILY.

    February 25, 2014 at 1:18 am | Reply
    • Rebecca

      Shut the border down and allow our southern neighbor to clean up its own mess while we clean up ours. Just a thought.

      February 25, 2014 at 1:22 am | Reply
    • Rick

      Hillary Clinton earned a 2008 rating of "D-" from Americans for Better Immigration, an immigration skeptic organization

      February 25, 2014 at 1:34 am | Reply
    • GO!!

      I agree, this whole secure borders thing is racism with a different word. Those that talk about secureing the border never mention the border we have with Canada. Ever wonder why? Maybe it is because most Canadians are white? Open the border, decriminalize drugs and reduce our prison populations of non-violent drug offenders. Invest in drug rehab instead, it is way cheaper. Then raise the minimum wage gradually to $15 and index it to inflation. All of these moves will go towards reducing stress on budgets and help our economy.

      February 25, 2014 at 1:37 am | Reply
    • Sergeant Van

      Would that be the same Catholic Church that denied the Holocaust until after the war? Yeah, I won't take my country's marching orders from them, thank you very much.

      February 25, 2014 at 1:53 am | Reply
    • Jim

      If you want to open the border with Mexico, first please explain how many (formerly) illegal aliens you will PERSONNALY fund - school ($10K each), welfare, medical insurance, etc. Or is it (as usual) that you expect OTHER PEOPLE to pay for them?

      February 25, 2014 at 2:18 am | Reply
  8. Teriander

    Congress will bring back the P-51 Mustang to use for close air support before they take a cut in their salary. Believe me when I say they are more than the problem then the A-10 is.

    February 25, 2014 at 1:09 am | Reply
  9. BO

    What better way to destroy America than decimate her military strength.

    February 25, 2014 at 1:07 am | Reply
    • Me

      If you look at the ten nations spending the largest amounts on their navies, we are #1. This is not surprising. What is surprising is that we, at #1, are larger than #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, and #10 all put together.

      Why do we need to spend more than the next nine largest navies all combined? There are plenty of opportunities for cuts without sacrificing our ability to protect our territorial waters.

      February 25, 2014 at 1:13 am | Reply
      • JimfromBham

        But the protection of territorial waters is only one part of the Navy's mission. Force projection outside the territorial waters is another large component.

        February 25, 2014 at 1:19 am |
      • Sergeant Van

        Because our military is an all volunteer force, that's why, while most of the other 10 nations are conscripts. We pay more because most of that money goes to the troops in the form of pay, housing, education benefits, and health care for them and their families. Conscripted services don't need to worry about that sort of thing, so they get off on the cheap.

        February 25, 2014 at 1:55 am |
      • notredamegirl

        That's because we have a volunteer force! If we didn't, the draft would be put in place, and troops would be making minimum wage! Other countries aren't volunteer forces! I was stationed in Belgium and worked at their Air Force base, which is non-volunteer! Belgium and a few other countries are unionized military!

        February 25, 2014 at 2:06 am |
    • Rebecca

      What better way to destroy America than to transfer control of her military to Halliburton? We can no longer deploy without Halliburton's permission. Think. Once. It will not end your lide. Promise.

      February 25, 2014 at 1:20 am | Reply
    • mattk

      The US military has turned into an employment agency for the country spending $668,000,000,000 in 2011
      That is not sustainable with the incredibly weakened economy. Governments are not there to give people work, that is what private enterprise is for. The department of defense alone employs more people than Wal-mart by over 1,000,000 people. Keep in mind that the DoD doesn't rake in money like walmart does, so that 600billion is a taxpayer burden to carry. I am not saying to eliminate the military but no one is going to attack the US just because the DoD scales back a little.

      February 25, 2014 at 1:29 am | Reply
  10. Ton of Dirt

    Why does CNN keep this ancient comment section but keeps the rest of their site up-to-date? This is stupid.

    February 25, 2014 at 1:05 am | Reply
    • Self Reliant

      They like this for stories where they need more control over the comments.

      February 25, 2014 at 1:31 am | Reply
  11. JimfromBham

    The A-10? What a great weapon, and one of the few Air Force planes that flies close air support for the Army. Sad day.

    February 25, 2014 at 1:03 am | Reply
    • ppouncey

      Hagel says the A-10 is a cold war weapon? In what way? As one who has supported that fine aircraft, the A-10 is extremely important and less costly than helicopters at close air support. Ask the Army how effective it is; the last time the A-10 was threatened to be retired, the Army proposed taking over that program, and they probably should. They could modernize the aircraft with just a fraction of the cost of the F-35 program, which will far overrun it's budget projections, and is a plane none of the services even want.

      February 25, 2014 at 1:27 am | Reply
      • JimfromBham

        Good points. Instead of encouraging more interaction and integration among the services, a decision like this separates them.

        February 25, 2014 at 6:11 am |
  12. nc1965

    Next to do.

    Cut the 5 billion/yr. susidies to big oil.

    February 25, 2014 at 1:02 am | Reply
    • Zerohedgehog

      $5 billion, is that the best you can come up with? That's the equivalent of making $5,000 per month and saying hey, I just cashed in 5 aluminum cans for a quarter, gee, now I'm really making progress. Next......

      February 25, 2014 at 1:07 am | Reply
  13. Semper Cogitatus

    Just cutting the programs that the military doesn't need or want but that Congress has forced on them would take care of the budget cuts. No need at all to cut anything useful.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:57 am | Reply
  14. Doug J

    Foreign aid is not the problem. For every dollar we spend, less than one cent goes to foreign aid. One the other hand, we spend about 21 cents of every dollar on the military.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:56 am | Reply
    • Rebecca

      We spend over 75 cents on the dollar on the military if you include the programs hidden in other department budgets. No can do... we are looking bankruptcy in the face just like all military powers in the past. Ahhhh the glory of Rome.

      February 25, 2014 at 1:28 am | Reply
      • Sergeant Van

        Not true in the slightest. Well over half the federal budget is spent on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, federal unemployment and welfare. With the funding in other areas of the budget that is actually spent on the military included, the total military spending comes in at around 25% of the total federal budget.

        February 25, 2014 at 1:58 am |
  15. woccis

    For "Michael Smith" claiming soldiers are living in the lap of luxury:
    You are quite the practical joker. I have yet to see regular married soldier with $9.000 housing allowance (I'm not talking about high ranking officer here). The highest allowances are in general Hawaii, San Diego, Alaska, Washington, NY. So lets take Hawaii: married PV2 gets $1952. Good luck finding something more than a tiny apartment in a bad neighborhood in that price range that would include utilities. Most people pay out of their pockets and for housing that is in Hawaii in not so great shape (think some places roaches, rats, mold and outdated fixtures) is waiting list up to a year or more for some ranks. Pay for the very same soldier will be $1,644.90 a month pretax and before they deduct Tricare and dental. Try to make it on that income for three to four people in Hawaii or anywhere else for that matter and then talk. You also forgot one important piece of the puzzle – most military spouses don't work, so the family has only one income. Not because spouses don't want to work, but because no one wants them – they frequently move, they lack certifications – almost every state wants you to re-certify – from dental hygienists, to teachers, nurses, Xray technicians to accountants or even lawyers, which places additional burden on the families and then there is the thing with child care – whole family is in an unfamiliar place without family to rely on for help, your soldier goes to exercises at days notice and if you work shifts, good luck finding childcare that you could afford. So "Michael" next time really double check. Assuming you are able.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:53 am | Reply
    • Michael smith

      Google "basic allowance for housing 2014" and see the FACTS for yourselves about these RUNAWAY $21 billion per year tax free handouts! Upwards of $3,000 for singles and $9,000, yes $9,000 another for dual married couple volunteers.

      Ludicrous

      February 25, 2014 at 1:00 am | Reply
      • woccis

        Then there is real life. Must be nice to be able to sit there and say "google says so" as your own personal moral default function. What are you, 10 or something? Grow a pair and show you are mature by exercising simple common sense and pragmatic virtues. In other words, stop being a moron.

        February 25, 2014 at 1:05 am |
      • Josh

        Housing allowances are not handouts. Military members earn them through their service and it help supplements their basic pay which is quite low. There are no handouts to service members. There is only hard earned pay and benefits. You must be thinking of corporations when it comes to handouts.

        February 25, 2014 at 1:15 am |
      • Glen

        HEY JERK WAD, U EVER SERVED,,BEEN IN BATTLE? IF NOT ,,,SHUT UP

        February 25, 2014 at 1:40 am |
      • notredamegirl

        So it is safe to say you get handouts from your employer as well!

        February 25, 2014 at 2:09 am |
      • AFRealist

        Michael, Im really curious as to where youre getting your numbers from. Even if a four-star General were married to another four-star General and they lived in Honolulu, they would get $7902. When I first joined years ago I was initially stationed in Las Vegas (another high cost of living area). Care to guess what my housing allowance was then? About $800. What is that same allowance now? $888. Your numbers are off. Way off...

        February 25, 2014 at 2:14 am |
    • wocis

      Nice to copy my work, but next time you could choose a different nick 😉 I'm afraid you're now confusing the sugar honey iced tea out of Michael who is who.

      February 25, 2014 at 1:12 am | Reply
  16. mckinney_man

    The last part of the American Empire has started. We have been moral decline for 100 years, the financial decline started 40 years. And the last piece of the decline is the military. Soon we will be overrun by our enemies and wiped out and then be a footnote just like all the empires of the past.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:52 am | Reply
    • Me

      England was once a great world empire, and it faded without the barbarian hordes sacking London. Spain was the leading colonial power in the new world whose empire was the envy of all Europe, yet Madrid still stood when it fell. Yes, Rome was sacked, Constantinople was sacked, etc. However, more recent events give hope that we aren't going to get pillaged anytime soon, even if we decline from being the pedagogue of the world.

      February 25, 2014 at 1:01 am | Reply
    • notredamegirl

      The US needs to stop helping and getting into other countries conflict and take care of our own country.

      February 25, 2014 at 2:12 am | Reply
  17. Aaron

    Modernization tends to necessitate change. Deal with it.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:42 am | Reply
    • bursted bitcoin bubble ouch

      So does not having the ability to dig yourself out of debt any longer.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:45 am | Reply
  18. Jim

    As long as Congress allows the military to float their astronomically ridiculous budgets through for approval we are all suffering at the expense of these lunatics. Eisenhower was a prophet when he warned future presidents and congress about the need to keep the military industrial complex in check. Hagel makes sense, but he's barely scratching the surface of the cuts that can and should be made. These budgets are crafted by generals who want to build empires and passed by a congress that wants to provide an ongoing jobs program for their districts. And make no mistake about it, the servicemen and women of this country aren't the beneficiaries of these monster budgets, They are the pawns sent to foreign lands to get their arms and legs blown off so they can come home to inadequate medical benefits and a foreclosed home. Big manufacturing, logistcis firms, and the like reap the enormous corporate benefits of the greatest fear-mongering play in the history of the US.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:42 am | Reply
  19. Hillary 2016

    Slash the military and the corrupt border enforcement goons, and open our southern border in the name of humanity and dignity. The Catholic church agrees on this. OPEN OUR BORDERS NOW, stop the inhumane death and suffering. WE are ALL immigrants. Stop the hate. This is wealthy nation, national debt or no, it's time to share and share alike.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:39 am | Reply
    • bursted bitcoin bubble ouch

      Assuming you are female, how about you share your body, with me and any other guy. After all it's only fair, right? And the right thing to do?

      February 25, 2014 at 12:50 am | Reply
      • Sailtime

        Typical ignorance of the right.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:59 am |
    • Rick

      Yes open the borders! Rome did that. Oh wait Rome was destroyed by the same immigrants it let in. Bummer.

      February 25, 2014 at 1:07 am | Reply
      • Me

        What defines a nation is its borders. With no borders, there is nothing to define it whatsoever.

        I don't hear the Chinese screaming "open the borders." Nor do I hear it from the Brits, Australians, or anywhere else.

        Immigration reform so there is a valid legal option for people to become citizens, assuming they follow the law in their home country and ours, yes. Having a decades long backlog on citizenship applications is ridiculous. Allowing anyone and everyone who wants to come in do so with no oversight is ridiculous.

        February 25, 2014 at 1:10 am |
      • Rick

        Me thinks my sarcasm is lost on Me.

        February 25, 2014 at 1:12 am |
    • Peedro

      We are not all immigrants. The Mexican invasion has brought street gangs to my once safe community. How about you go live in the ghetto and then come back and tell us about humanity. Typical liberal loves blacks and Hispanics as long as they're in someone else's neighborhood.

      February 25, 2014 at 1:09 am | Reply
      • Rebecca

        Typical bagger cannot tell a "liberal" from an illegal alien. Also cannot read the dictionary and has confused the term liberal with the great Satan. look closer to home for that bad boy... Sick Cheney perhaps? Cocaine Brothers?

        February 25, 2014 at 1:39 am |
  20. trivenic

    As technologies advance, so do industries. Technology is rapidly outdating many of the conventional means of warfare. Much more can be done with much less.

    This is a good thing. A smaller, more capable army means fewer human casualties and less likely that a draft will never need to be implemented again. Our defense budget is larger than the next ten biggest defense spending countries combined. I have no worries and I am sure that our Armed Forces will remain capable and vigilant with much less.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:32 am | Reply
    • North Star

      Yes, let add to that 17 trillion dollar credit card payment shall we?

      February 25, 2014 at 12:52 am | Reply
  21. Aformersoldier

    As a former finance tech I have seen first hand the wastefulness of the military. End of fiscal year emails flying abiut saying we have $20 mil left over, email us your wish list so we can get the money spent. Then being commanded to buy Oakleys and ATV and bs that we dont need. How about doing away with the balanced budget….why cant the funds roll over from year to year??? Or the training missions for the reserve pilots to go to Hawaii or Alaska or wherever so they can get their hours in. Millions of dollars in jet fuel to keep someone qualified who will never go to war.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:30 am | Reply
    • jdf

      They need those hours to stay proficient. If you were a pilot you would understand.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:35 am | Reply
      • Aformersoldier

        Yeah they have to fly to Hawaii for an all expenses paid trip to stay proficient. How about you come to base, stay in the barracks and fly local VFR/IFT routes. Oh I was Air Traffic Control too.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:41 am |
    • Steph

      Some agencies have no year or multi year funds that do roll over from year to year (or in the case of no-year, they roll over forever until they are either fully expensed or rescinded by Congress)

      February 25, 2014 at 12:37 am | Reply
    • Michael smith

      Budgeting and federal financial management in the hyper inbred DOD is a JOKE!

      From a prior Section Chief in the IRS's CFO Office

      February 25, 2014 at 12:37 am | Reply
      • Glenn

        You are the joke. And the insult. Now go consult your i-pad some more.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:40 am |
  22. Robert Mott

    It's about time to stop the insanity. There is so much waste and corruption in the military its ridiculous. All this crap that you're not patriotic if you "don't support our troops." STOP wasting money!!! But that's what the USA is all about ..... making money and screw the right thing to do.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:28 am | Reply
    • renejian

      The real problem is efficiency. I'm sure if the pentagon spend its money efficiently, I'm sure they will find themselves with surplus. The military spending dropped from almost $700B in 2010 down to $527B in 2014, without much decrease in capacity. Can the Pentagon cut more without jeopardizing their capability? Probably yes.

      Also, shut down those oversea bases. Is there a need to maintain military presence in Germany? No. Over 30,000 troops, certainly not necessary. It's not like the Germans are going to surprise us with another Hitler. Bases in Italy, unnecessary. The combined strength of British, French and Italian forces are more than sufficient for handling any situation. Around some 30% of our forces are deployed overseas, while only 10-20% are absolutely necessary. Stationing troops overseas cost A LOT of money. Instead of trying to find tiny cuts, start big. I'm sure withdrawing oversea troops will result in instant savings in tens of billions.

      I'm in favor of keeping the current size of air force and navy while chopping the army. Our Navy and Air Force can stop any potential adversary before they can reach us, while the 1 million strong army (including reserve and national guard) is much of an overkill. Realistically, do we need that huge of an army? When is the last time we had to commit one million ground troops? Since WW2...

      PS: I thought the Congress already demanded that the pentagon cannot retire the A-10s.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:29 am | Reply
    • jdf

      usly not a military background. Not to mention this is adding over 150,000 newly unemployed people to the workforce. Sounds great, right? Dummy.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:32 am | Reply
      • Retired officer

        So everyone who is out of work or needs a job should join the military and we will all will pay for them to stay off the streets. A welfare program. Who's the dummy... idiot!

        February 25, 2014 at 12:42 am |
    • notredamegirl

      So that's the troops and their dependents fault! You sound bitter because your not doing anything worth to talking about! So your civilian wage should be lowered as well!

      February 25, 2014 at 2:17 am | Reply
  23. Beavis

    Get rid of Hagel too. How about putting this clown in the desert so his blood can spill instead of our own.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:27 am | Reply
  24. Robert Mott

    IT'S ABOUT TIME.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:23 am | Reply
    • notredamegirl

      So it is about time to take away troops health care, BAH and education benefits? BS! If that is the case, then bring back the draft and pay the troops minimum wage!

      February 25, 2014 at 2:21 am | Reply
  25. dudley

    Get rid of a few squadrons of F-16s and keep the Wart. F-35 won't take this mission. Nothing else can handle this mission. We just rebuilt them. Remove the A-10 and armor will start showing back up.

    The US military is only 1/8 of the overall budget, which mean 7/8 of other stuff needs to be examined before we remove our put our fists in mothballs.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:17 am | Reply
    • Renton

      The AH64 Apache helicopter can do everything the A-10 does and more. The A-10 was great for what it was–a tank destroyer. The days of mass armored battles on open ground are over, though.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:29 am | Reply
      • ppouncey

        Apaches are far more costly to build and fly than the A-10, and I daresay less battleworthy.

        February 25, 2014 at 1:36 am |
      • Sergeant Van

        The AH-64 series is a HIGHLY overrated aircraft. It doesn't have the range of the A-10, nor does it have the loiter capability (the A-10 can refule mid-air and remain on station, the Apache has to return to a FARP). It's a heck of a lot more expensive to fly, and doesn't have the survivability that the A-10 has, either. It also only carries a fraction of the firepower. The Apache looks cool in video games, sure, but there is no replacement for what the A-10 has brought to the battlefield again and again over the last two and a half decades.

        February 25, 2014 at 2:04 am |
  26. mike from iowa

    End the stupid War on Drugs. It is only there to make control-freak anti-freedom Republicans feel good about themselves. Started with Nixon, end it with Obama.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:16 am | Reply
    • Beavis

      It started with Johnson, you ignorant tool.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:28 am | Reply
      • S. Jones

        The term was popularized by the media shortly after a press conference given on June 18, 1971, by United States president Richard Nixon—the day after publication of a special message from president Nixon to the Congress on Drug Abuse Prevention and Control—during which he declared drug abuse "public enemy number one". That message to the Congress included text about devoting more federal resources to the "prevention of new addicts, and the rehabilitation of those who are addicted", but that part did not received the same public attention as the term "war on drugs". You ignorant tool.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:47 am |
      • JustTheFacts

        The term "War on drugs" was first applied by the media to a Nixon initiative. Here is a quote from wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Drugs): " ...The term (war on drugs) was popularized by the media shortly after a press conference given on June 18, 1971, by United States president Richard Nixon—the day after publication of a special message from president Nixon to the Congress on Drug Abuse Prevention and Control—during which he declared drug abuse "public enemy number one".

        February 25, 2014 at 12:57 am |
  27. mike from iowa

    These cuts wouldn't be necessary if Bankers and Corporatins and the Top 1% didn't horde all of the wealth, short-pay their taxes, and result in deficits that threaten our National Security. You can't have massive spending on military and at the same time have massive tax breaks for the wealthy. In order to stop the escalting debt ($15 trillion and climbing) it is necessary to cut spending across the board.

    Of course the Obama haters will blame him for cutting the military, but it simply must be done. Blame GW Bush for tanking the economy and starting the trillion dollar Bank Bailouts and escalating expenses for Medicare ($400 billion per year). Obamacare brings the medical expense under control, staves off a disaster pending in another 10 years when the Baby Boomers start needing Medicare – the greedy Baby Boomers who are so scared of dying would bankrupt the entire country in order to stay alove 6 more months.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:14 am | Reply
    • bursted bitcoin bubble ouch

      Grow up, your Mom called and said you need to start paying rent and figure out your way in life and stop living off of others for once.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:17 am | Reply
  28. Lusitan

    It's about time! Party is over for the defense industry.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:07 am | Reply
  29. Elsie

    Can we be honest for a brief moment?

    If we Cease & Desist paying RUSSIA et al., Military Aid / Foreign Aid billions per year in Military/Economic Aid $126,769,695 (estimate year to date for RUSSIA alone SEE: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/spc/multimedia/military-spending/) like we have for the past 20 years on record guess what? United States would recognize we would never be in such dangerous PREDICAMENT. END OF STORY!

    WHAT NOW MY LOVE? United States plans to CUT military forces? Nice, Sweet and if/when an emergency crisis arises Plan B then to would be to bring on the drones for air strikes?

    Almost believable.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:06 am | Reply
    • Ted Tedson

      We spend 6 times more than China, 11 times more than Russia, 27 times more than Iran and 33 times more than Israel on our military.

      What are you whining about again?

      February 25, 2014 at 12:09 am | Reply
      • Sergeant Van

        China, Russia, Iran, etc. all have conscripted military forces and don't have to entice an all-volunteer force to enlist. They don't pay for their troops education, their families' health care, etc. The give their troops crap food, give them crap clothing, and put them in crap housing. An all-volunteer force costs money. What would you rather do? Go back to conscription so we could save a few dollars?

        February 25, 2014 at 2:07 am |
    • Zerohedgehog

      Elthee, that money was agreed upon for Russia to dismantle thousands of nuclear warheads and chemical weapons as agree upon by treaty, are you saying that was a bad investment? Or didn't wikipedia tell you that?

      February 25, 2014 at 12:19 am | Reply
    • ryan

      We give 3 billion to Israel, the 6th richest nation on the planet, not to mention all the black budget funds given to mossad, and the money they get selling our tech. Oh and their dual citizen congressman writes your homeland security legislation and they helped the nsa develop it's spy program. but don't point it out or you're anti-semetic.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:22 am | Reply
      • Glenn

        Good. They should get $10 billion, printed straight from the Fairy Fed Mother Yellen. It would help thwart the spread of sharia law and islamic extremism, and if you don't like it you are free to move to Tehran.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:30 am |
    • badlobbysit

      Check where that aid goes. I don't know about Russia, but a number I read was that 80% of the "aid" that went t Egypt was already spent on American made weapons. Much of it is actually a subsidy for the "Defense" industry that is just funneled through other countries. Sure they get the military hardware, but we the money actually goes to our companies.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:24 am | Reply
      • Rick

        The inventory of the Egyptian armed forces includes equipment from the United States, France, Brazil, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, and the People's Republic of China. Equipment from the Soviet Union is being progressively replaced by more modern U.S., French, and British equipment, a significant portion of which is built under license in Egypt, not by American defense contractors.

        February 25, 2014 at 1:42 am |
  30. Joel

    This is wonderful. Our focus on Western Asia has been a hindrance! I hope our Navy makes the entire USA proud eventually by simply working to support the intelligent half of the continent, that non evil, industriousness thereby rubbing into our American culture a little more every day. West Asia is a desert because God decided to pack his bags and get out eons ago. In God we trust. Fanatical craziness won't lead you to the land of Milk and Honey. Milk and Honey is a album co-produced by YOKO ONO. STILL ROCKING AT 81.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:05 am | Reply
  31. Good night Irene

    while we're at it ...86 the drug war!

    February 25, 2014 at 12:04 am | Reply
    • Ted Tedson

      Republicans could save us money if the stopped the war on women too.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:05 am | Reply
    • no one in particular

      cut government wages and see how they like it

      February 25, 2014 at 12:14 am | Reply
  32. rangerwife

    As the wife of a Special Operations soldier, I agree that force reduction is a fantastic idea. Start with the soldiers who can't pass PT. If you are over weight, can't run, can't fight, won't fight...CUT!! That specific group of service members would account for all of the personnel overages. The one thing that every service member is expected to do is be fit. They go into work every morning and exercise and yet I drive down the streets on post and it's one overweight soldiers after another after another after another. Can't meet the standard?? Sorry, we can't afford to keep you on.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:02 am | Reply
    • bob johnson

      You are an Army wife. You hold no rank. You are part of the problem. Your opinion means nothing.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:22 am | Reply
      • Mateo

        You are a Johnson, you are rank, and you are a "very small" part of the problem.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:31 am |
    • Grahamman

      AWESOME POINT!!! I'd like to add to it though. Cut the welfare to the people that are a burden on civilian society and give raises to the military personnel that CAN pass PT.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:29 am | Reply
    • Mortar Maggot

      As someone who has been in combat, the Army weight program has little to no baring on a soldiers ability to fight. The PT test has a lot but is still outmoded for the type of fighting our troops do these days. Unless a soldier is truly, disgustingly, obese, chances are they are passing their PT tests and they do bring value to the fight. Unfortunately you cannot demand operator level fitness in an organization that gives out wal mart level pay.

      February 25, 2014 at 2:09 am | Reply
  33. Fred Fredson

    We have 4.5% of the world's population and yet we are responsible for 40% of the worlds military spending.

    Stop the madness!

    Cut the military budget!

    February 25, 2014 at 12:00 am | Reply
    • Adam

      Where are we going to send all those newly unemployed people in the defense industry?? Are we going to have them work all those Shovel ready jobs that never existed?

      February 25, 2014 at 12:04 am | Reply
      • Ted Tedson

        We can start by investing the money we save in infrastructure here at home.

        We can also invest in training our workforce for the jobs of the future.

        At least with infrastructure and education, we get a return on our investment.

        A bomb blows up and that's it.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:08 am |
      • Lusitan

        They can go fix the pot holes in our highways, and fix our falling bridges...

        February 25, 2014 at 12:10 am |
      • badlobbysit

        That is the joy of free market capitalism. Creative destruction. This will free them up to pursue products that are in more demand.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:14 am |
      • deathrace2000

        Adam, maybe you should stop believing that the government owes you a job. This is America, pal. We operate under a Capitalistic, free-market economy. People make their own jobs, the Government doesn't hand them to you.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:16 am |
      • S. Jones

        Ever heard of buggy whip makers.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:52 am |
  34. styxhexenhammer666

    This will only have a discernible positive effect if 100% of the saved cash is put directly into infrastructure and similar projects to expand industry.

    And the US must continue to pack a punch in this world.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:00 am | Reply
  35. Melanie

    The radical left does not like military spending, they want it all re-directed into their own personal ideas of utopia. They want everyone to be taxed, and to work towards what they think you should, the radical leftist is the last guy who should be talking about some sort of fiscal restraint. Under Bush, the national debt doubled. Obama's answer to that? Double it again. What many of you don't get is that the point of no return has already passed. Now what's left is for the radical liberal elite to dictate how you should live, where you should work etc. and then blame the results on someone else. Perfect.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:00 am | Reply
    • Fred Fredson

      Are you nuts?

      Republicans have been content to spend 6 times more than China, 11 times more than Russia, 27 times more than Iran and 33 times more than Israel on our military, while our roads, bridges, and schools crumble here at home.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:01 am | Reply
      • Adam

        I don't know where you have been but the Democrats took control of BOTH houses of Congress in >>2007<< and had a Super Majority from 2009-2010 and to this day still control half of Congress and the White House. In other words Einstein the Democrats have kept the war machine up just fine WITHOUT Republican help.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:05 am |
      • Rhodeislander

        What happened to all those billions "stimulus" funds for your roads and all, fella? You mean it's ALREADY GONE? DId the favored contractors already spend it out? You know, contractors are corporations. They need more, right? It would never be enough.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:06 am |
    • Burstbubble

      I agree with what you have said for the most part. Plus, the government should cut the spending for the New F-35 that isn't even combat ready and has gone way over budget. Might as well through the inflated US dollars into a black hole.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:05 am | Reply
    • badlobbyist

      Well Melanie...
      Under Bush, the national debt doubled
      At least you understand where the problem starts. The rest...not so much.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:26 am | Reply
      • Rick

        What cost to avoid a repeat of 9/11 and another attack on American soil? More than three thousand lives were lost in that attack. If the Democrats didn't want to go to war, aka Hillary who voted for it, why didn't they vote it down?

        February 25, 2014 at 12:59 am |
  36. Rick

    Worst administration in the history of this country. History has taught us one main tenet, you don't cut back on defense if you want to avoid wars and conflicts. Apparently this administration has studied the Neville Chamberlain textbook on how to invite war and be a loser. God help us.

    Too bad Obama wasted two billion dollars on Solyndra, Fisker and Obama Care instead of using it for defense.

    February 25, 2014 at 12:00 am | Reply
    • Torrente

      Tagged bin laden though

      February 25, 2014 at 12:11 am | Reply
      • Rick

        US Navy Seals and defense dollars "tagged Bin Laden" not this administration.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:13 am |
      • Torrente

        Exactly the kind of targeted defense/offense that is not the result of bloated spending.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:19 am |
      • Rick

        Not exactly. Do you know how much in cost in support, logistics and training to accomplish that task? Don't even expect a repeat but do expect failed attempts in special operations as when the Carter administration bungled the attempt to free the hostages in Iran.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:26 am |
      • Torrente

        Ah I see, so the "US Navy Seals and defense dollars "tagged Bin Laden" not this administration" but the Carter adminstration bungled things up in Iran? Can't have it both ways.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:29 pm |
    • badlobbysit

      But where do you stop if you never cut back on military spending? you were at 2% of gdp. Now 3. Now 4. Now 5%. somehow we have to justify this. Do you create a war for your army to justify it?

      February 25, 2014 at 12:18 am | Reply
      • Rick

        Do you realize how much World War 2 cost this nation in dollars and lives let alone the world? Do you want to risk a repeat?

        February 25, 2014 at 12:23 am |
      • badlobbyist

        No, I don't want to risk a repeat. That's why I don't want to force an unnecessary arms race with any other country. We have to have the most powerful military in the world. I agree. However just how powerful does it need to be? The answer just can't be "more powerful than it is now."
        Our biggest threat is not a military confrontation. It is an economic collapse. There is a reason that many of our military leaders list economic collapse as our number one threat.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:31 am |
      • Rick

        Try studying some history. Read it, understand it and believe it. Otherwise I am not drinking your koolaid.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:33 am |
      • Rick

        Oh as for the economic collapse. This administration is helping that along quite nicely by raising taxes, introducing Obama Care during a recession, and handing out billions to now bankrupt companies that have been bought by the Chinese and Koreans for pennies on the dollar. Italy is learning the hard way what to do. They're lowering taxes in an effort to end their recession and high unemployment.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:36 am |
  37. LouAZ

    Why don't we just buy one airplane and let the pilots take turns flying it.— Calvin Coolidge, 35th US President, complaining about a War Department request to buy more aircraft.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:57 pm | Reply
  38. Michael smith

    Reasoned readers:

    Google " basic allowance for housing 2014" and search these tax free handout tables. Those riding on this $21 billion per year tax free gravy train would prefer to keep you uninformed . Upwards of $3,000 a month for singles and $9,000 a month for two married volunteer couples. They get two of these handouts.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:56 pm | Reply
    • Michael smith

      Can you imagine your emoter HANDING you $3,000 a month tax free ( if you are single) or $9,000 a month tax free ( if both you and your spouse were with the same company) ABOVE AND BEYOND YOUR ALREADY VERY GENEROUS SALARY) for your surmised "housing" expenses?

      Preposterous but 100% TRUE IN OUR NATION'S ALL VOLUNTEER MILITARY NOWADAYS!

      February 25, 2014 at 12:01 am | Reply
      • Chris

        Consider they are being forced to live in an area and not by choice... and also the hours they put in... Many Soldier's Sailors, Airmen and Marines work the equivalent of two fulltime jobs. They get less than minimum wage for their efforts, in the name of serving for a greater purpose. Pride and Tradition do not ay the bills my friend. And before you say they are uneducated and chose the wrong line of work... Many are college educated, and all are high school graduates. Many of the negative posts on here are by people who couldn't serve if they wanted to. While not all service members serve blemish free careers, while an overwhelming number do! They are highly sought after and coveted by the private sector for their morals, dedication and work ethic.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:33 am |
      • wocis

        You are quite the practical joker. I have yet to see regular married soldier with $9.000 housing allowance (I'm not talking about high ranking officer here). The highest allowances are in general Hawaii, San Diego, Alaska, Washington, NY. So lets take Hawaii: married PV2 gets $1952. Good luck finding something more than a tiny apartment in a bad neighborhood in that price range that would include utilities. Most people pay out of their pockets and for housing that is in Hawaii in not so great shape (think some places roaches, rats, mold and outdated fixtures) is waiting list up to a year or more for some ranks. Pay for the very same soldier will be $1,644.90 a month pretax and before they deduct Tricare and dental. Try to make it on that income for three to four people in Hawaii or anywhere else for that matter and then talk. You also forgot one important piece of the puzzle – most military spouses don't work, so the family has only one income. Not because spouses don't want to work, but because no one wants them – they frequently move, they lack certifications – almost every state wants you to re-certify – from dental hygienists, to teachers, nurses, Xray technicians to accountants or even lawyers, which places additional burden on the families and then there is the thing with child care – whole family is in an unfamiliar place without family to rely on for help, your soldier goes to exercises at days notice and if you work shifts, good luck finding childcare that you could afford. So please dear Michael, next time really double check.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:37 am |
      • Michael smith

        Dual married volunteer couples get TWO, repeat TWO handouts. Many get from $3,000-$9,000 depending on ranks and locations. These are FACTS! Why are you cowards afraid of these FACTS?

        February 25, 2014 at 12:47 am |
      • wocis

        Lol yes Michael, lets get back to the Hawaii:

        CAPTAIN can get there $ 3750.00 for dependent rate if he is married and his spouse can get the single rate, if they are dual military. That comes to $ 2952.00. Now lets count together: that is $6702.00. Where is the $9.000? And this is CAPTAIN. Not a regular soldier, but a college educated officer. I don't see many of the higher rankings being dual military and we are certainly seeing diminishing numbers of officers due to cuts. Higher the rank, higher the allowance, especially for officers. Climbing up the ladder means as well that officers represent from their homes; I don't see an ltc a general for work dinner at his place or any other "voluntarily" hosted event in a hourly motel. And next – they are college educated, without that help of BAH to level the field with civilian job they could get with their education, many might decide not to stay/join.

        February 25, 2014 at 1:03 am |
      • wocis

        $6702.00 total. Sorry, typo

        February 25, 2014 at 1:05 am |
      • Nick

        Really? Show me the sources that say we recieve $3000 on housing expenses? I live overseas and I sure as hell don't get nowhere near $3000.

        February 25, 2014 at 1:09 am |
      • wocis

        Btw Michael, I made for you another count, since you really LOVE to use the 9.000 number for married couples.

        Lets get back to Hawaii, shall we (yes I do love Hawaii)
        O7 – that is GENERAL's housing allowance for married rate is $ 4218.00, if he would be married to another general (who gets again the single rate) gets $ 3684.00. It comes together to $7902.00 for two highest ranking officers bundled together BAH. Lets repeat it with me: $7902.00 for two generals living together. (Maybe next time I should try to calculate what are the odds of that happening.)

        WHERE IS YOUR $9.000.00?

        I'm really really trying hard, but somehow, I can't see it. Maybe the military is full of generals who live in Washington DC next to the White House. (In that case we all should have joined, just for sake of that allowance)

        February 25, 2014 at 1:31 am |
    • sabersimon

      Yes lets talk about it. How much do you think a person E-4 in the military makes without the housing pay? Just a thought its not much. It is approximately 2000 to 2400 per month. My guess is that you probably make more than that. Also, look at the housing prices in places like san diego. Just food for thought.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:02 am | Reply
      • Michael smith

        E-4s should be living on their ships and bases!

        February 25, 2014 at 12:08 am |
      • Michael smith

        You got very quite.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:14 am |
      • Rollin24

        I was an e-4 in the Air Force living off base. This idea that military personnel are living in poverty is ridiculous. Sure some do, just like the rest of the nation but honestly Military Personnel make good money.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:55 am |
      • Rollin24

        And lets not forget the free housing and meals they get if they don't make BAH or BAS.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:56 am |
    • rangerwife

      My husband is an E7 and his BAH is 1400.00...When we move this summer it will drop to 1300.00.
      The reason BAH is not taxed is because ONLY taxable income is considered in the retirement calculation.
      If my husband retired today as an E7 with 20 years of service, his monthly retirement check would be 2150.00 before taxes. After 6 deployments and a broken body...is 25,000.00 per year really an unreasonable amount?

      February 25, 2014 at 12:14 am | Reply
      • Michael smith

        BAH depends on rank, location, and dependent status. Many if NOT MOST are OBSCENE!

        $21 billion and growing each year FLUSHED DOWN THE TOILET!

        February 25, 2014 at 12:17 am |
      • Michael smith

        Upwards of $3,000 a month for singles and $9,000, YES $9,000 a month for dual marrieds.

        Ludicrous
        Absurd
        Preposterous

        February 25, 2014 at 12:19 am |
      • leftist lies and distorttions

        Good for you Ranger Wife. The "Michael Smith" vermin types purely rely upon google, their ipad, tmz or whatever else, blissfully unaware of the real world. Colones, commanders, admirals etc. are highly paid, just as a CEO is in a large outfit like Solyndra. Actually, the ratio is not even close..... but don't tell "Michael Smith" that.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:26 am |
      • Michael smith

        Again, the BAH tables speak for themselves. Upwards of $3,000 tax free for singles and $9,000, yes $9,000 a month for dual marrieds.

        ABSOLUTELY PREPOSTEROUS -A WASTE OF $21 BILLION PWR YEAR AND GROWING!

        February 25, 2014 at 12:34 am |
    • Jennifer Davis

      Yes google BAH for 2014 and see what you come up with. I will tell you right now my husband is an e6 with more than 12 yrs in and where we are located we get a little more than 1300 a month. now for his pay after it gets taxed and whatnot we are lucky to pull 2400 a month. So please tell me how a family is expected to survive on 2400 a month with rent (if we didnt get bah) pay for food, medical (if we had reduced military paid medical) and childcare? Even in the military childcare is not cheap which is why i chose to stay home because i would just be working to pay for childcare costs.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:25 am | Reply
      • Michael smith

        Did you even READ what I said? And if you or your hubby does not like the needed changes, then GET OUT OF TGE ALL VOLUNTEER MIL!

        February 25, 2014 at 12:28 am |
      • notredamegirl

        That Michael is an idiot! I only made 800 dollars a month! This fool is bitter sounding and advocates taking food out the troops and their dependents mouths! No need to go back and forth with this anti-military scab!!!

        February 25, 2014 at 2:31 am |
  39. LouAZ

    A-10s ? F-35s? We need some P-47s, P-51s, and A1Es to shoot up the "enemy" in their pickup trucks with a 50 Cal. mounted in the bed.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:55 pm | Reply
  40. Jeb

    Republicans have been content to spend 6 times more than China, 11 times more than Russia, 27 times more than Iran and 33 times more than Israel on our military, while our roads, bridges, and schools crumble here at home.

    Enough!

    Cut military spending and put that money into things that make our lives better here at home.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:55 pm | Reply
    • nomad

      amen!

      February 25, 2014 at 12:00 am | Reply
    • Adam

      I don't know where you have been but the Democrats took control of BOTH houses of Congress in >>2007<< and had a Super Majority from 2009-2010 and to this day still control half of Congress and the White House. In other words Einstein the Democrats have kept the war machine up just fine WITHOUT Republican help.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:01 am | Reply
    • Justin Jackson

      I understand the cuts to the force, but reducing benefits for the guys that are left over after this gutting is not only unfair to the guys in uniform but is also not politically viable. Anyone who proposes cuts to BAH, BAS, PER DIEM ext... Is commuting political suicide. You don't turn to the lowest payed people in the government and say "We are going to make the few of you who are left do twice as much work for less money. LUDICROUS.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:04 am | Reply
    • mystixa

      That not how it works. They're just not spending it, not mpving the spending to domestic issues.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:04 am | Reply
  41. Cygnus_X1

    The problem with cutting the military budget is what to do with all those out of work people, their pensions and benefits, and all the contractors that make the equipment....etc. Thanks to Reagan the military gravy train is out of control and won't be easy to stop because they won't let it stop.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:54 pm | Reply
  42. chrisx5566

    We made about $ 2.8 trillion and we spend about $ 682 billions on military 2013. Our military spending is about 39% of total world military speeding. World population is 7.146 billions and US is about 320 millions. We have 4.5% of world population but 39% military spending. Don't you think it is too much at current time when we have so many people are unemployed and suffering. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

    February 24, 2014 at 11:50 pm | Reply
    • Jeb

      Exactly.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:52 pm | Reply
      • Aformersoldier

        As a former finance tech I have seen first hand the wastefulness of the military. End of fiscal year emails flying abiut saying we have $20 mil left over, email us your wish list so we can get the money spent. Then being commanded to buy Oakleys and ATV and bs that we dont need. How about doing away with the balanced budget....why cant the funds roll over from year to year??? Or the training missions for the reserve pilots to go to Hawaii or Alaska or wherever so they can get their hours in. Millions of dollars in jet fuel to keep someone qualified who will never go to war. It is disgusting!!!

        February 25, 2014 at 12:01 am |
    • r.i.p harold ramis

      You don't "make" anything when you are tens of ttrillions in debt and can't pay your bills. How many mililtary would you put out of work, not to mention civiliians who come onto bases for work?

      February 24, 2014 at 11:54 pm | Reply
      • mystixa

        We Do pay our bills, and always have. You may not like -how- we pay our bills currently, but we haven't defaulted yet. Only the current Republicans have even come close.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:06 am |
    • Tom

      Absolutely. Sad part is this administration and our Congress do not agree. The administration has timed this new budget to ensure it won't pass because of the mid-term elections. Not a snowball's chance of it passing.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:56 pm | Reply
  43. Hillary 2016

    Slash the military and the corrupt border enforcement goons, and open our southern border in the name of humanity and dignity. The Catholic church agrees on this.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:49 pm | Reply
    • nomad

      BS!

      February 25, 2014 at 12:01 am | Reply
    • Frank

      Will you be among the first to house and feed those who come across the border?

      February 25, 2014 at 12:01 am | Reply
  44. Shangey G

    It's not a Defense Budget, it's an OFFENSE Budget.

    Show everyone some real cuts, and close the U.S.A's 1000 military bases sprinkled all over the world.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:45 pm | Reply
    • Kevin

      668 bases worldwide. What was that about thousands?

      February 24, 2014 at 11:46 pm | Reply
      • Jeb

        Why do we need 668 bases around the world?

        February 24, 2014 at 11:47 pm |
      • Kevin

        In most cases, because we defeated that country in a war or were asked to put them there to deter the Eastern bloc.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:48 pm |
      • Tom

        I think Europe is strong enough to handle their own defense issues and we should drastically cut back there. However, we should maintain strong cross training ties with our NATO allies as well as any intelligence sharing facilities.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:00 am |
      • mystixa

        Well Tom, I'm glad you think so. Your vast military prowess surely rivals the great generals of the ages.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:07 am |
      • Chris

        I always love it when people tout how much officers make. Truth is, many of these "overpaid" officers could make substantially more working in the private sector than they can on active duty, especially in the defense or aerospace industry. Many of them go on to just that, but many more stay on out of duty, love for the mission, or because they enjoy the military life.

        A Captain with 20 years in makes about $90k a year before his benefits. Might sound like a lot, but it really isn't compared to what he could do if he took his contacts into Business Dev.

        ::braces for inevitable stream of self-righteous posters who will miss the point and scream about how most people would kill for $90k a year::

        February 25, 2014 at 12:36 am |
    • agnar150

      I say the same cut all them bases. We don't need them. If you do we would have more than enough for healthcare for everyone 2 times over.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:47 pm | Reply
  45. Kevin

    To start, don't retire the A10 until you have it's role replaced. Never abandon a battlefield role entirely. The people who want to get rid of tanks live in a fantasy world.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:44 pm | Reply
    • agnar150

      Who needs that airplane? What a waist of money to kill Soviet Tank from the 50's LOL..

      February 24, 2014 at 11:49 pm | Reply
      • Kevin

        The word you wanted was 'waste' and It kills tanks made this year just as effectively. Until it ceases to kill tanks it has a role to play.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:55 pm |
      • Ron

        The role is ground support and it's actually useful for fighting armored ground forces or entrenched enemies. The reason its currently overshadowed is our missile technology.

        The only reason I'd keep it is if I really didn't want a missile to destroy a hospital by accident. I honestly can't believe we still use it/pay for the upkeep because in this day and age a a warthog would get shot down easily.

        My dad's a military buff and old army guy.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:04 am |
    • renejian

      The real problem is efficiency. I'm sure if the pentagon spend its money efficiently, I'm sure they will find themselves with surplus. The military spending dropped from almost $700B in 2010 down to $527B in 2014, without much decrease in capacity. Can the Pentagon cut more without jeopardizing their capability? Probably yes.

      Also, shut down those oversea bases. Is there a need to maintain military presence in Germany? No. Over 30,000 troops, certainly not necessary. It's not like the Germans are going to surprise us with another Hitler. Bases in Italy, unnecessary. The combined strength of British, French and Italian forces are more than sufficient for handling any situation. Around some 30% of our forces are deployed overseas, while only 10-20% are absolutely necessary. Stationing troops overseas cost A LOT of money. Instead of trying to find tiny cuts, start big. I'm sure withdrawing oversea troops will result in instant savings in tens of billions.

      I'm in favor of keeping the current size of air force and navy while chopping the army. Our Navy and Air Force can stop any potential adversary before they can reach us, while the 1 million strong army (including reserve and national guard) is much of an overkill. Realistically, do we need that huge of an army? When is the last time we had to commit one million ground troops? Since WW2...

      PS: I thought the Congress already demanded that the pentagon cannot retire the A-10s.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:28 am | Reply
  46. gustifer53

    The reason the Republic0ns and Teabaggers don't want to cut back on the military, is because they figure if they EVER get back into the White House, they won't have to start enlisting men and women to fight, for the WARS they plan on starting. Who gives a damn which countrIES they start bombing. I can't figure these warmongers out, I guess when the politicians or their children don't have to be fighting on the front lines

    February 24, 2014 at 11:43 pm | Reply
    • Adam

      Who attacked Libya out of the Blue again? The Democrats took control of BOTH houses of Congress in >>2007<< and had a Super Majority from 2009-2010 and to this day still control half of Congress and the White House. In other words Einstein the Democrats have kept the war machine up just fine WITHOUT Republican help.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:09 am | Reply
      • Rollin24

        Oh yea, that incredibly expensive war with Libya we were in is what bankrupted the nation, not invading two countries during the 2000's and one of them on faulty intelligence.

        February 25, 2014 at 1:03 am |
  47. Jeb

    We spend 6 times more than China, 11 times more than Russia, 27 times more than Iran and 33 times more than Israel on our military.

    It's insane and it has to stop.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:42 pm | Reply
    • Kevin

      There's a degree of comfort in knowing we could defeat all of those countries combined for our efforts.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:45 pm | Reply
      • Jeb

        There's no comfort in borrowing from China to continue to build a military that we can't afford to pay for.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:48 pm |
      • Kevin

        Uh, there's a lot of comfort in borrowing Chinese wooden nickels at our own currency's face value. That under-reported inflation isn't going to hurt us in the long run.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:50 pm |
      • agnar150

        At what cost? The bankruptcy of our country and families?

        February 24, 2014 at 11:50 pm |
      • Kevin

        We are still the wealthiest nation on the planet. No one's bankrupting families supporting military spending.

        You kids come talk fiscal responsibility when finances actually become a real issue and not some hypothetical ether.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:53 pm |
      • agnar150

        I pay lots of money in taxes and I don't want my money being spent on the military that we don't need. I have a friend who is an officer. Just go to his house and see how rich his is. It is an embarrassment to your country. He even has a theater in his house. I am tired of Congress stating that we don't have money and we will need to pass the debt to our children. Well I know why now. If we continue to pay the officers that much money we will be gone before they grow up. Irresponsible politicians.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:54 pm |
      • Kevin

        Officers don't make much. The difference is they're usually college grads with better money management. If you care to look up the commissioned pay grades you are absolutely free to.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:56 pm |
    • Sparrows345

      How much do those nations contribute towards military troop and dependent care, education reimbursement, medical care, education beneftis, child care and food? What percentage, since you are the numbers guy? Tell us. 10 ttimes more? Or does the US take care of their military people 22 times better, and you don't like it?

      February 24, 2014 at 11:47 pm | Reply
      • Jeb

        Why don't you answer your own question?

        If you can come up with a reason why we pay 6 times more than China, 11 times more than Russia, 27 times more than Iran and 33 times more than Israel on our military, please do.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:50 pm |
    • Cygnus_X1

      We give Israel $3 billion a year for their military so I'm not even sure you can calculate how much more we spend than them.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:49 pm | Reply
      • JohnCandy Ruled

        You do know that is about 1 day's worth added to the out of control national debt, right? Tell us about the other 364 days, and that is just for 1 year. Tell us how to cut $50 ttrillion without collapsing and having to hit reset from zero again.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:52 pm |
      • mystixa

        Also nearly 90% of that money turns right around and gets spent on U.S. hardware and programs. So its a bit iffy to say we 'give' it to them. Its a bit more like a self-subsidy then a foreign aid program. I am highly skeptical of Israel, and generally like to cut our ties with them, but that isn't really a good mark to use against them since we shoot ourselves in the foot in taking that away.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:10 am |
    • AwesomeName

      Can you provide some actual numbers and where you got them from Instead of this bs crap you keep repeating?

      February 25, 2014 at 12:25 am | Reply
    • Jim

      While I agree that some cuts should definitely be made, the comparisons to (most) other countries' defense budgets is disingenuous. We may spend far more than China (for instance), but they pay their soldiers next to nothing, worry about no environmental nor safety constraints, and actively steal technology instead of developing it. They also don't have a Congress that perpetually puts various stipulations in defense spending and ensures that EVERY contract of any size is contested, making the process more expensive. So, compariig US to Chinese spending is a bit like comparing the cost of a Starbucks coffee in NY to the cost of coffee directly ground by peasant farmers in South America.

      February 25, 2014 at 2:05 am | Reply
  48. Theseus

    Spent so much money on fascism that they can no longer afford to be fascist? What poetic justice!

    February 24, 2014 at 11:42 pm | Reply
    • Kevin

      I suppose there is solace in the fact that it's been so long people can't even define fascism anymore. Just a pretty word to throw at things you find disagreeable.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:47 pm | Reply
  49. momtina

    you can spend over 100 million a year on sports, nascar and formula one for military promotion and this is the first place you look, lets cut out nascar promotion cars and other stuff that is nonsense

    February 24, 2014 at 11:40 pm | Reply
    • Jimbo Deez

      No. Lets just cut down our obscene military.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:42 pm | Reply
    • Theseus

      You could always just stop fighting a never ending political war.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:43 pm | Reply
  50. Adam

    This has been long overdue, the US military has been a burden on the economic system for too long. We all know wars aren't fought or won with legions of soldiers, tanks, planes and boats anymore. They're fought behind the lines, and the present enemy lurks in the shadows.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:40 pm | Reply
    • Logan

      Anyone over 50 is a burden on the economic system.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:42 pm | Reply
      • Kendall

        Your parents called..........start paying your own rent.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:44 pm |
    • MilitaryAF

      Apparently you haven't watched the news in the past 10+ years?

      February 24, 2014 at 11:46 pm | Reply
    • notredamegirl

      You're stupid! Do you even watch the news or read a newspaper?!!!!! Half the world wants to attack us and your saying it is good to cut the military!! STUPID....STUPID..STUPID!

      February 25, 2014 at 1:51 am | Reply
    • notredamegirl

      A burden! LOL! Last time I looked it's not the military who is the burden! How about cutting the politicians pay and make them work for free! Half of them are multi-millionaires! That should save money!

      February 25, 2014 at 2:38 am | Reply
  51. Fubarack

    When you want to take down a nation, controlling the media, and eliminating the military is part of the plan.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:38 pm | Reply
    • Jeb

      You and your wing nut conservative friends can all volunteer to pay more taxes so that we can actual afford to have a military that is 6 times more expensive than Chinas and 11 times more expensive than Russias.

      Sound good?

      February 24, 2014 at 11:44 pm | Reply
      • Batman

        Yep I will.. Our military gives you the right to your own opinion no matter how uneducated you sound.. If your so upset about our spending move to china move to Russia and spend your taxes the way you want to..

        February 25, 2014 at 12:14 am |
    • mystixa

      Far more often the military is complicit with the takeover of the country.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:11 am | Reply
    • notredamegirl

      They don't understand our nation will be weak and more prone to attack!

      February 25, 2014 at 2:40 am | Reply
  52. Cruising56

    Americs spends such an obscene amount of money on defence (more than the rest of the world combined), that eventually it has to go to war, just to justify the rxpense.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:33 pm | Reply
    • Sparrows345

      What percentage of that goes towards military members and their dependents, tough guy? Do you even know?

      February 24, 2014 at 11:35 pm | Reply
      • Jimbo Deez

        Who cares?

        February 24, 2014 at 11:40 pm |
    • dan

      actually your wrong. becuase we have been at war for so long we have to mantain war to support our economy. but that only works for a little bit, when you maintain a war that gets the government (not the corrupt politicians and bush family) revenue, then we go into reccessions. look up some of the government contracts and how much money is wasted on the contracts

      February 24, 2014 at 11:37 pm | Reply
      • burned again

        Just like Bush and Cheney's great idea to invade Iraq when they had nothing to do with 911. Republican war profiteers including Cheney's Halliburton and KBR that made billions with their no bid contracts, then Halliburton moved their world HQ to Dubai to avoid paying US taxes. Republicans destroyed this country with their BS, hate, scams, lies and theft.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:56 pm |
  53. Joe

    What happens if a two front war breaks out or god forbid, a four front war with our country fighting on four different theaters of war? Our military will have to work fast to rebuild what we lost when it was down sized. By then it might be too late and the enemy might have a foot hold on our land.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:32 pm | Reply
    • Jimbo Deez

      chicken little.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:35 pm | Reply
    • nk

      Yeah, you're right... what if aliens land and we fight a five front war!?! You know where that line of thinking lands you? North Korea.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:37 pm | Reply
      • Joe

        No, your type of thinking lands you in North Korea. I'm just worried about the safety of this country.

        February 25, 2014 at 11:39 am |
    • Hillary 2016

      A foot hold? Good one, you still think it's 1942 or something. Ever hear of nukes, SLBM's and the like? Grow up.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:39 pm | Reply
      • Kevin

        Nonsense. If we were ever invaded you'd be lauding our military like you've never imagined possible. If you think we'd just nuke enemy beach heads on our own land you are an insane person and should be treated as thus.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:52 pm |
      • Hillary 2016

        You're not very bright, Kevin. If any nation tried to "make a foothold" on the US and invade, they would get nuked. That's been the great equalizer since 1945, preventing huge WW2 invasions, massive battles and all out wars. What don't you get about that? Are you a little slow or something?

        February 25, 2014 at 12:14 am |
      • Joe

        Hey stupid! No body wants to use nukes, because it takes one person, just one person to start a chain reaction of nukes launching and we will wind destroying each other. Nukes are a last ditch effort, not a first weapon of choice.

        February 25, 2014 at 11:47 am |
    • Jim Krugh

      Joe, what if we realized that we don't have to be everywhere in the world, trim some money from the defense budget, and create a less wasteful, more efficient, more viable military force that doesn't have to force its wishes/needs on the rest of the world.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:42 pm | Reply
      • Joe

        You have a good point there.

        February 25, 2014 at 11:51 am |
    • Steve the Goat

      What happens if it is 10, or 20, or 60, or 100, or 5 million! The sky is falling!

      February 24, 2014 at 11:46 pm | Reply
    • Jason

      Have a foothold on our land? What kind of reality do you live in? Unless Mexico and Canada are hiding something, I think a groundwar on our soil is a bit of a stretch. Actually, it's comical fear mongering.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:46 pm | Reply
      • Joe

        I look at that the fact that several countries still pose as a danger to us. Unless we can all get along and stop killing each other, there will always be a threat out their.

        February 25, 2014 at 11:44 am |
    • Akox

      What to do if a 9 front war breaks out with evil from 9 planets attacking us? JUST RUN JOE. RUN

      February 24, 2014 at 11:47 pm | Reply
    • sean

      Does not matter because someone like you would not go, you preach war and defense yet you will never enlist, you watch the war from the sideline while other fight and suffer through it.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:50 pm | Reply
    • James

      A four-front war?! You are a moron?

      No nation will come near US soil with our nuclear deterrent you paranoid fool.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:52 pm | Reply
      • mystixa

        Of course its also the explicit goal of the current administration to eliminate our nuclear weapons. Not that we'll get there, but its foolish to be too much of a 1 trick pony.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:13 am |
  54. Michael smith

    $21 billion flushed down the toilet each year with these surmised tax free " housing" handouts in the mil. Sickening!

    February 24, 2014 at 11:31 pm | Reply
    • Sparrows345

      $21 billion is a rounding error on Obamas debt. What is sickening is how you discriminate against those in the military and their families by apparently saying they should go homeless because they are not what you consider acceptable for govt. assistance. Because probably they are not close enough to your leftist ideology.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:34 pm | Reply
      • Michael smith

        You are an ignorant and fearful horse's derrière.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:47 pm |
    • mom

      ' housing handouts ' ? really. I wonder how fast you would run to Canada if you were called up to fight. There seem to be 2 sorts of people in the world – givers and takers. Not hard to guess which category you fall in.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:37 pm | Reply
      • nk

        got a kid in the military mom?

        February 24, 2014 at 11:38 pm |
      • Michael smith

        Penning as a veteran, you are certainly fearful of my accurate post.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:45 pm |
      • Michael smith

        As a vet, I am ASHAMED of you! $21 billion is wasted each year on these absurd tax free handout that can AND DO reach $3,000 a month for singles and $9,000, YES $9,000 a month TAX FREE for two married volunteer couples. LUDICROUS!

        February 24, 2014 at 11:50 pm |
    • Jeff

      Micheal – from the sound of your crap – I suspect you weren't particularly effective in the military. If you were, you would know the numbers you are throwing out are crap. There may be some places where BAH rates are excessive but that isn't the majority. I'm sorry you were such a screw up and developed so poor an opinion of the military.

      February 25, 2014 at 1:30 am | Reply
    • Jim

      The arguments about spending on military housing subsidies misses key points:
      1) This is money spent for miltary members to provide decent housing for their families. In a large percentage of cases, this is for housing in places they'd really rather not live. If your company (literally) forced you to live in a small town in the middle of nowhere, you'd most likely want some help to pay for decent housing.

      2) This money has been a large part of offsetting otherwise low relative pay.

      February 25, 2014 at 2:12 am | Reply
    • notredamegirl

      I have never had tax free housing fool! I had to pay my own rent and it was not free bitter Betty!

      February 25, 2014 at 2:44 am | Reply
  55. kebcarerra

    These cuts are way overdue , the lies that brought us to this crossroad are not about being able to keep your doctor

    February 24, 2014 at 11:29 pm | Reply
  56. loi

    even if we would cut the military spending by half– we would still have the most powerful military

    February 24, 2014 at 11:27 pm | Reply
    • Sparrows345

      And then what would you say to those millions present and future who needed assistance? Something like sorry, let me guide you to what I want you to be in and what Obama says you should do instead, why, because it fits your agenda as you discriminate against military enlisted and their families?

      February 24, 2014 at 11:31 pm | Reply
      • Jimbo Deez

        Yes. Time to get a real job.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:37 pm |
      • Akox

        Time to go to school, get some real education and job.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:51 pm |
      • notredamegirl

        LOL! The fool below is stupid!! Let him know the military is a real job and we also take college courses as well! Also let him know that we have more experience and would take is job after getting out of the military! I took someone's because I had more experience, the other guy was let go!

        February 25, 2014 at 2:49 am |
    • dan

      no we wouldnt. it cost a great deal of money to maintain technology. you dont park a 50 million dollar aircraft in a garage and excpect it to work a year later or expect the pilot to be a proficient flyer. we have relations on multiple fronts. when we start downsizing more you will see russia and china start acting up with countries near our allies or even our allies.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:34 pm | Reply
      • Sgt. Baker

        "Time to get a real job" Like you have, right creep? Must be nice to have gone through school all paid for, needing nothing but your own IQ and flush bank account vs. some 22 year old girl joining for 2 years to get enough money for a nursing degree so she can support her family later on. Yeah, you're a real champ aren't you.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:44 pm |
    • jdf

      Hey dummy, do some research. Yes, we spend the most. However, compared to GDP we are only ninth.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:29 am | Reply
  57. Edgyone

    No ONE kills the Warthog, the Warthog Kills YOU!

    February 24, 2014 at 11:27 pm | Reply
  58. Radcliff Dean

    Feeble aged people almost to their knees
    Complain about the present using memories
    Never found their pot of gold
    Wrinkled hands pound weary holes
    Each line screams out: you're old, you're old, you're old
    But nobody's buying flowers from the flower lady

    February 24, 2014 at 11:26 pm | Reply
  59. john morrow

    I believe US high command has already decided that they wont do "boots on ground" or nation building stuff again so no point keeping such large army of foot soldiers. They need more strategic force and hi tech air superiority stuff including faster and accurate drones. Strategic vision would be have ability to strike anywhere in the world without getting hands dirty with installing puppet Govts.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:26 pm | Reply
  60. MauiAl

    They just wing it, day to day. No idea of what they are doing in the Obama administration.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:25 pm | Reply
  61. Xu Xui

    American

    You have choice to make, live on your knees or die on your feet.

    China rule the world in your lifetime

    February 24, 2014 at 11:25 pm | Reply
    • Michael smith

      Keep dreaming

      February 24, 2014 at 11:32 pm | Reply
      • Eduardo, Carlos

        Where are you getting the 3000 for single and 9000 for married thing? Please tell me, because I am currently in the military, I'm married and I don't get even close to that amount. So please know what you're saying, before you say it. Of course you could say some general some where might be getting that much, but no enlisted ever even as an e-9.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:41 am |
    • Jazz

      "You cannot invade mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass."

      Good. Luck. Buddy.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:32 pm | Reply
    • Lord2FLI

      lol, China will never take us alive, you, on the other hand, should consider moving to China instead of trolling the internet from your mom's basement.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:34 pm | Reply
    • LOL

      This is very true.Americans sent everything to China to make them rich. The USA will go down in history as the dumbest country in the world because of greed.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:38 pm | Reply
    • Dan

      Did you get that adage from a fortune cookie?

      February 24, 2014 at 11:42 pm | Reply
    • mom

      ' You have choice to make, live on your knees or die on your feet. '

      Very true. And sadly I fear that too many Americans would pick living on their knees.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:43 pm | Reply
    • rotorhead1871

      put down the opium pipe...mao had a long way to go....and never did make it...just like china.......

      February 24, 2014 at 11:51 pm | Reply
    • General Tso

      I with you brother
      China Number 1
      Go back to eating hamburger fatty americans

      February 25, 2014 at 12:07 am | Reply
      • notredamegirl

        Your English sucks!

        February 25, 2014 at 2:54 am |
    • Billy Bob

      F00K YU!!

      February 25, 2014 at 12:08 am | Reply
    • Xu Xui Nope

      Nah.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:11 am | Reply
    • Adam

      What a joke your country is going to implode. You could not lead 1000 years ago and you can't do it now.

      February 25, 2014 at 12:18 am | Reply
    • notredamegirl

      China will invade us too when we cut the military! Time to learn some Chinese!

      February 25, 2014 at 2:52 am | Reply
  62. tbone

    Take some of that money that the F35s cost and put it toward R &D that would develop a cheaper more effective aircraft. Instead of cutting benefits to the families of the military direct those cuts at some of the salaries and perks of the officers in 0-7 rank and above and the money taken out of them be directed to those families who need those benefits to survive on. Though I think this is a good start, its still not big enough cuts to really dent the wasteful spending going on in the military. Also lets minimize the amount of aid going to other countries while were at it. We need to start taking care of our own here while were at it.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:25 pm | Reply
    • Edgyone

      The army is readjusting to the current market where employers are scaling back benefits across the board. As the bankers and money movers keep all of our productivity there is less and less to go around. Until people wake up to what is happening those that provide services and create products will be squeezed more and more until we break. Take down the plutocracy, pull out of your money markets, stocks, and fee based "investments" and make the banks squirm, caveat emptor to a better tomorrow.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:32 pm | Reply
  63. Johnny Gilbert

    We need to save the money and this is a good start. We already have -plenty- to do what needs to be done. Cut back defense welfare spending and use it for our people and rebuilding the infrastructure.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:20 pm | Reply
    • whoyourname

      Good idea but the money wont go there

      February 24, 2014 at 11:24 pm | Reply
      • Sparrows345

        "For the people" you mean soldiers, their dependents, who rely on housing, health, education benefits and more? Or are you discriminating against them?

        February 24, 2014 at 11:26 pm |
    • notredamegirl

      So the troops will have to live on the streets to make the US whole? The US needs to stop paying politicians since a majority of them are millionaires!

      February 25, 2014 at 2:57 am | Reply
  64. dan

    why not just cut down to pre 9/11 figures? Lets find out what big military projects are actually worth investing in and cut the rest. but before we start downsizing the military, making decisions to soon to take moneu away, tell the politicians to get some common sense. Pull the military out of Iraq (yes many are still their) and Afghanistan. You don't send brave Americans into combat then decide to cut funding while they are over their. Bring them home.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:18 pm | Reply
    • Will S

      Because that was 14 years ago and the world has changed.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:27 pm | Reply
  65. Bubba

    Thus the annual show down for military welfare begins. Why buy $50 Million airplanes, when the $110 Million airplanes are so much more expensive? The same Republicans who cannot stand spending thousands on feeding welfare kids, have no issue spending Trillions of dollars protecting the welfare kids rights to go to bed hungry, with overpriced hardware that is used to battle enemies with 1930's technology.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:18 pm | Reply
    • mom

      How about people don't have kids that they can't afford to feed?

      February 24, 2014 at 11:21 pm | Reply
    • Sparrows345

      You're an idiot. You don't realize how many depend on troop and dependent care, housing and food allowances, health and tuition, and child care in the military. It's just not how YOU want that welfare to go to. It's why in a tough situation, a hardened vet would just as soon shoot you as give you a nod and a wink knowing you tried starving his kids through selective welfare.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:24 pm | Reply
    • dan

      yes you do need multi million dollar planes. we are fighting guerilla style warfare on their homeland. This is not a call of duty game. one day a village can seem normal, then next you heavily out numbered and recieving rpm and mortar fire. its not conventional warfare and a uniform enemy. take a walk to time square on a friday. just imagine their are 1 million insurgents and you gave to point them out you cant you dont know until your getting fired at.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:25 pm | Reply
    • notredamegirl

      Majority of people on welfare abused and sit around the house not working! Stop giving welfare to lazy people who can't even afford one child! They should be made to get a job and if they don't, cut their welfare!

      February 25, 2014 at 3:01 am | Reply
  66. Le Grand Old Pattie

    This is not acceptable. America must be able to defeat the Russians, the Nazis, the commies and aliens from Mars all at once. Anything less is treachery.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:18 pm | Reply
    • Brian

      You think you're funny, but you just can't fine yo'azzzz with both hands. You are almost as clueless as the moderators and 95% of the posters on soundoff. No wonder smart people use the other systems to "sound off."

      February 24, 2014 at 11:24 pm | Reply
    • Pete

      Anything more than defending our own borders is "strong arming" other nations.. Why do you think Bin Laden spearheaded 9/11? Our government was more than willing to break into the middle east.. And for what? And what does our government do about the real issues that hurt our citizens, and families? Like Cocaine production in Columbia... Their military budget would have been better spent burning the production fields there... Who cares if the knuckle heads in the middle east kill each other? Not me...

      February 24, 2014 at 11:37 pm | Reply
    • notredamegirl

      You laugh now, but you won't be laughing when we get attacked!

      February 25, 2014 at 3:04 am | Reply
  67. Sparrows345

    What many of you clowns don't get is that a very large part of the military budget goes towards troop and office pay, education, dependent care, housing allowance, health care, tuition reimbursement. Known as welfare. Just not the kind that the left approve of, as they want to dictate who gets what.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:18 pm | Reply
    • mom

      ' known as welfare '.
      What is that supposed to mean? Sounds like benefits of the job to me; benefits for signing away your rights to say NO when the call comes.
      If we can pass out free cell phones to the jobless, we can surely provide quality benefits for our military families!

      February 24, 2014 at 11:23 pm | Reply
      • Michael smith

        These surmised " housing" allowances ARE PSEUDO WELFARE HANDOUTS!

        February 24, 2014 at 11:26 pm |
      • Sparrows345

        Not if the left has it's way, they want to discriminate against military families by diverting everything to THEIR favored causes.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:28 pm |
    • sparrow3456

      seems like you're the biggest clown of all

      February 24, 2014 at 11:31 pm | Reply
  68. mykpfsu

    Well this was the only reason Hagel was nominated. So Obama could act like it was all a Republican's idea when the chicken's come home to roost.
    Yes say what you want about the military industrial complex, but thats not what these cuts are about. If so the F-35 would have been cut and the Littoral Combat Ship program would have been completely axed, or at least reduced to one shipyard.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:17 pm | Reply
    • Will S

      You can train a grunt in three months; another year of follow-on at his permanent station and he'll be competent. Ships and planes take years to develop and build, and they last for decades. We still use B-52s (in commission since 1955).

      That said, the F-35 program is a trillion dollar boondoggle that needs to be cancelled immediately.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:34 pm | Reply
  69. Smeagel4T

    And now we get to sit back and watch the "fiscal conservatives" scream about not wanting to make any cuts.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:17 pm | Reply
    • mykpfsu

      You mean the ones that wanted to keep the sequester that cut the military?

      February 24, 2014 at 11:19 pm | Reply
  70. Le Grand Old Pattie

    Listen to cuban General Marco. He knows more about military strategy then anybody else.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:17 pm | Reply
  71. QZ

    At the end of a day, the military spending has to be compatible with size of economy.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:17 pm | Reply
  72. John

    RHONDA, I do not believe we give millions to other countries. I might be wrong, but I believe, we give them aged weapon systems (ships, tanks etc.) which our Military does not use anymore, probably for free. The receiving countries are upgrading them using US made electronic components. Therefore, those countries contribute to job creation in America.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:16 pm | Reply
  73. chrisx5566

    Yes, Total revenue is 2.5 trillions in 2013. See the link http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/fed_revenue_2013US.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:16 pm | Reply
  74. Bob miller

    This is not news. Hagel was being brought in to do just this kind of cutting. He's the hatchet man for the Obama admin. Knew this was going to happen before Hagel even got the appointment. Cutting the bens of all of these men and women who protect us. We ought to be ashamed to have our government conduct our country's affairs in this manner. Shame on them and us.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:16 pm | Reply
  75. Tony46

    In only a few more months, nobody could tell for sure if they are in America, somewhere else, or if everything around us is just a nightmare.
    Also 20 million more unemployed are coming to the tally..So far.
    The african is laughing his way into dictatorship.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:14 pm | Reply
    • Name*

      Jesus your ignorant. I hope to God people like you never get any sort of power in this life time.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:22 pm | Reply
    • sabersimon

      So the question that I ask you is...Have you ever been to a country like India where people are not protected and there really are no civil liberties to protect people from being taken advantage? My assumption is no. How about you become educated and stop being ignorant. If you disagree with this, I am not saying I do or not, then come up with a logical argument against or for it. Oh and by the way...I am a veteran so don't tell me that I am not an american or am not patriotic. I just want you to keep your plush life in perspective and add some meaningful insights to the argument. That is all. Have fun and do please stop being ignorant or making others ignorant. It is your irrelevant uneducated opinions that hurt our country. Only can one's own self rise above it all and empower others to do good with knowledge and experience.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:55 pm | Reply
    • notredamegirl

      He is a half white African! So he is a part of your race too!

      February 25, 2014 at 3:08 am | Reply
  76. gts58

    America has to face reality under the incompetence, arrogance and narcissism of the "Liar In Chief" – this is all part of his plan to neuter the military and more cuts is on the way. Obama needs to convert the saving from the military cuts and give it to his ever growing "Army of Welfare Voters" – after all – the midterm elections are coming up and he must get them to the polls!

    February 24, 2014 at 11:12 pm | Reply
    • notredamegirl

      Exactly!

      February 25, 2014 at 3:11 am | Reply
  77. Eric

    So we're going to keep giving black people money and allowing Mexicans to flood this nation and drain our money with their kids, but we're not going to fund the military. If you people think that the other nations of the world are not gearing up for war then you are ignorant. There will be future wars, and we will suffer. If you want proof, then just look at the history of the world. Until then, lets just keep giving out welfare to lazy bums shall we? Get that Obama phone to playa.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:11 pm | Reply
    • mom

      Exactly. Majority of folks are too ignorant of WHAT it could be like here if our military might fails to give pause to those who are only too ready to do evil to us.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:17 pm | Reply
    • dan

      Your very wrong. Honestly I use to say the same thing. I looked it up. The great majority of Mexican Immigrants are cheap labor which is good. They allow Americans to afford workers and own their own business. Very little try to cheet the system. Believe it or not the majority of welfare users are white. look it up. the youtube post are not done by researchers, just some idiots trying to make a viral video. The immigrants you should be worried about are Asian. They come over here with Degrees, start their own businesses, abd pay white american workers close to nothing for pay.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:30 pm | Reply
    • notredamegirl

      Don't generalize! I'm black and a vet too! So black military members shouldn't get paid or blacks with jobs shouldn't get paid! Blacks and Mexican people aren't the only people getting welfare! Whites get it too! What is the point of bringing race and nationality into it! This is way America is divided now!

      February 25, 2014 at 3:16 am | Reply
  78. Great Plan for Socialism

    So lets put 70,000 troops on the American streets w/ no jobs........We just transferred these men and women to welfare and food stamps.............

    February 24, 2014 at 11:11 pm | Reply
    • Darth Vader

      They have the most generous GI bill in US history, get a degree for crying out loud! The last thing these service members need is to be coddled or told they will be automatic failures outside the military.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:22 pm | Reply
    • Jim Rome

      Um, they have no jobs because we've literally spent $700 BILLION per year for the last ten years in Afghanistan and Iraq. Get it?

      February 25, 2014 at 1:33 am | Reply
  79. StormyWeather

    In the old days....we'd walk out on the field and exchange weapons. We'd then load our weapons and walk 10 paces. May the best man live. See...now that is showdown. This....is a fix up and I doubt has anything to do with honor.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:11 pm | Reply
  80. msradell

    While some of the cuts make perfect sense and the savings are certainly needed getting rid of the A-10 aircraft is totally absurd. For today's type of conflicts it's the perfect aircraft to support our troops. It's rugged, inexpensive, very safe for the pilots and able to loiter in the combat zone for extended periods of time. Forget about the ridiculously priced F-35 it will never fulfill its expectations anyway and keep the A-10!

    February 24, 2014 at 11:10 pm | Reply
  81. David Rutledge

    If we outspend all the earth combined in military expenditures and we cannot feel safe with that output (thereby cheating schools, infrastructure, social programs, ourselves), how bad do we suck at defense? In the days of the British Empire, the formula was: the British Navy should be equivalent to the next 2 powers in the field; we outspend the entire world – all of it – in military affairs – not just double. If we cannot cut back and take care of our own pressing issues at home, when will it ever be enough? It's not even about keeping us safe – if it ever was; it's about defense contractors and politicians sucking on the public teat – whatever it takes to keep themselves rich and in power.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:06 pm | Reply
    • Jimh77

      Right on David.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:25 pm | Reply
  82. jimbo

    GOP: cut food stamps, unemployment benefits, social security, school lunch and pre-K progrmas, but by god you better not touch the 100's of billions in welfare for the defense industry.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:06 pm | Reply
    • Eric

      If you call having a military that can defend us welfare then you need to leave this nation. How dare you say that giving lazy people free food and money is better than having a standing military. You're the kind of disgusting person that has turned this nation into a cesspool.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:14 pm | Reply
    • mom

      No need for food stamps or anything else if our country is not secure.
      Get your head out of the sand, what do you think stops others from bringing a war here on our shores?
      And I don't mean just flying planes into towers. I mean a REAL war in the streets.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:14 pm | Reply
    • williamhazlitt

      Liberals believe that the Islamic world is morally superior to the West and that the West has no right to defend itself. Liberalism as it has become should be listed in the DSM as a type of psychosis.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:39 pm | Reply
    • notredamegirl

      They get pay checks and not welfare because the military is their job! The US will only had to to the welfare line!

      February 25, 2014 at 3:20 am | Reply
  83. Gail

    As a military wife let me say this: the commissary is big part of the benefits we use.

    My husband is enlisted and doesn't make a lot of money (who does in the military!) and the monthly budget is always tight, with two kids.

    And they want to increase the costs of family medical too?

    For all the "Support Our Troops" stuff I see and hear parroted everywhere, things like this have the exact opposite effect.

    Want to "Support Our Troop"?

    Then stop the things that are going to hurt them and their families.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:06 pm | Reply
    • Jim1073

      I made plenty of money in the military, I would like to say its cause I made it through the ranks but that really doesn't matter. The #1 reason I had plenty of money was cause I wasn't stupid enough to have children or get marries while I was in the service. When I first got in my platoon sgt. had 8 kids and was making TONS of money, then the military capped the family payout at 3 kids and he was all crying about how he couldn't make it any more....guess what? that is his fault for trying to get over on the system.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:11 pm | Reply
      • mom

        Do you also believe that welfare should be capped at 3 kids? Why does our military not have the same right as those who do NOT WORK?

        February 24, 2014 at 11:19 pm |
      • Gail

        So now people in the military shouldn't have families?

        As if my husband didn't give up enough of his civil and human rights already to "serve".

        He/We can be sent anywhere, any time. No other job or life is like that. He chooses to serve, and we support him in doing so.

        But I guess we don't deserve to be taken care of as part of the bargain?

        If you want to cut, cut "at the top levels", be it a couple fewer planes on a multi-billion dollar order, or a few ships the Navy does not even want.

        Don't cut at the bottom where a lot of people are "just making it" now.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:27 pm |
      • notredamegirl

        It's not the military's fault that people sit up in the house all day making children they can't afford! Don't have a job, then those people should be forced to find a job! Cut lazy peoples welfare and not the military!

        February 25, 2014 at 3:26 am |
    • Steph

      Do you actually bother to work a job (stay at home mommy doesn't count) or do you just mooch off of your husband? Seriously, from a currently-serving Reservists standpoint, you Active duty wives are the worst whiners. You get cheap healthcare, subsidized housing, tuition benefits for you and your children, DOD funded schools and other military focused social programs, tons of community support, etc. Pretty much the government pays for everything you need to be comfortable, on top of a base salary and it is still never enough. So I am curious, why do you feel like you deserve all of this (basically welfare, as someone else said) for having done nothing besides getting married and popping out babies? Really hate to tell you but it is just as sucky in the real world and being an Active duty Army moocher does not make you special.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:44 pm | Reply
      • notredamegirl

        You're just as ignorant! How bout we cut the reserves, that should also solve our money woes! You reservist don't do anything but meet on base 2 times a month for a couple of seconds and then leave and become a civilian again! Cut you people and bring back AD from overseas and replace you twice a month military members!

        February 25, 2014 at 3:32 am |
  84. Steve

    Isn't $3.5billion the cost of one F35???

    February 24, 2014 at 11:05 pm | Reply
    • Dan

      Officially the cost of each is currently 161 million. According to a GAO insider, the true cost is 219 million and likely to go up.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:11 pm | Reply
    • Cruising56

      America spent 400 billion developing a plane that eventually the military didn't want. It's time the military started living within its means, instead of spending obscene amounts on 'pie in the sky projects' that eventually have to have their production numbers reduced. The only people benefitting are the obscenely wealthy weapons manufacturers.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:21 pm | Reply
  85. Jeb

    We spend 6 times more than China, 11 times more than Russia, 27 times more than Iran and 33 times more than Israel on our military.

    Enough!

    Cut it!

    February 24, 2014 at 11:04 pm | Reply
  86. I hate Democrats

    Every time some Democratic administration cuts the armed forces, they have to be re-built at much higher cost. Why do they never learn? Does Obama think drones can do everything?

    February 24, 2014 at 11:03 pm | Reply
    • Jeb

      Base on what exactly?!

      February 24, 2014 at 11:05 pm | Reply
    • Jim1073

      no, but they can do 60% of everything and the reductions aren't all that bad. I mean I really dislike losing the A-10 but hey, losing the wooden ships seemed like a dumb idea at the time.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:05 pm | Reply
      • Paul

        No, RPAs (we don't fly drones) can't do 60% of what manned aircraft can. Yes, they are an invaluable asset, and bring a veery unique skill set to the fight, but to say that they are even close to the level of effectiveness as manned aircraft in the same role is absurd.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:36 pm |
    • Dan

      Right. The next time a Republican President decides to start a war based on lies and deception, we'll be unprepared.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:06 pm | Reply
      • Steve

        Hillary voted for the wars. She was in the White House earlier. She had access to classified information you nor I did. So if you want to get chippy, count the war dead in last six wars started under D's and R's. WWII, Korea and Vietnam are D's. Desert Storm, Afghanistan and Iraq are R's. D's kill them at about 50:1. And 1 is too many.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:21 pm |
    • Jim Krugh

      It would appear that the next Republican president sees fit to get us into another war which we do not need to be fighting in a country or countries where we don't belong and has nothing to do with keeping America free. That appears to be why the spending on defense increases after being reduced.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:36 pm | Reply
      • Paul

        Would you prefer we do the fighting on American soil?

        February 24, 2014 at 11:37 pm |
      • Mateo

        They aren't coming over here because they are not stupid enough to bankrupt their country like we are by being over there. Plus we have a lot of guns in citizen's hands. Thank the 2nd amendment.

        February 25, 2014 at 12:36 am |
  87. Keith

    If you don't want to pay them benefits quit sending them to war. We can cut our military budget by 50% and still have the largest military in the world. That should be big enough

    February 24, 2014 at 11:03 pm | Reply
  88. Dan

    Don't the conservatives want to prevent their grandchildren from having to pay for ridiculous defense spending?

    February 24, 2014 at 11:02 pm | Reply
  89. Kelcy

    These are not savings. Congress already cut the funds. They did not appropriate the dollars in the Omnibus this month and they slashed the budget numbers for the next ten years. While they gave a wee bit back from the cuts in the Sequester not enough to prevent the cuts. They are not going to put funding back through the period of time this Appropriation covers (which is through FY 2015 I believe in order to avoid the next election). Nor for the next ten years. Most assuredly no republican will support it at all for fear they will be tea partied in 2014. They can rant and rave all they want but it's gone unless they cut other things (like social security or medicare or medicaid or...... name your social program here. The democrats won't support that either. Unless we want to increase our taxes (which no one will want to do) then as Sec Hagel said..... Get Real.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:01 pm | Reply
  90. chrisx5566

    Can not imagine we spend about 1/4 of our total revenue on military. So many people are suffering and we spend more than $ 600 billions year after year for some "imagined" possible enemy in the future.

    February 24, 2014 at 11:00 pm | Reply
    • Jim1073

      wow, your math is really off. You think we spend $600 billion on our military and that is 1/4 our revenue?!?! So you think we make $2.4 trillion in revenue?!?!

      February 24, 2014 at 11:08 pm | Reply
      • skytag

        You say he's really off but fail to show that to be the case. Questions prove nothing.

        February 24, 2014 at 11:18 pm |
      • chrisx5566

        Yes, Total revenue is about 2.5 trillions in 2013. It was lower that that before. See the link. http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/fed_revenue_2013US

        February 24, 2014 at 11:18 pm |
      • Dan

        Total revenue is irrelevant, and is nothing but a straw man argument. The number that matters is discretionary revenue, since non-discretionary is a tax to cover the costs of specific programs, such as Social Security and Medicare. While many like to carelessly throw around "total revenue" as if it matters, it does not. Military spending comes from the discretionary spending budget, which does not include the revenues specifically allocated for lawful (and beneficial) programs . An interesting note is the total given for defense spending is also false, as it doesn't include other costs, such as the additional $30 billion or so for nuclear weapons and nuclear reactors in naval vessels, which fall under the DOE budget, not the DOD budget. There is a great deal more as well, but I'm not writing a novel, just correcting someone who seems confused as to how our budget actually works.

        February 25, 2014 at 1:31 am |
  91. bspurloc

    they can overcome the losses by boosting the "AID" given to countries with the pure intent they cherry pick from the war machine catalogue

    February 24, 2014 at 10:58 pm | Reply
  92. Bubba

    Both Dems. or Repubs. are gonna vote against these cuts. The Military Ind. Complex contributs too much to their gravy train. The only way the military machine gets cut is when the dollar collapses.

    February 24, 2014 at 10:57 pm | Reply
    • Yoda Jr.

      True, the Military Industrial Complex has done a good job of making sure every district gets a piece of the pork.

      February 24, 2014 at 11:11 pm | Reply
  93. Hell No!

    Then the accompanying interview with Wesley Clark, who will be out in force telling us presidential candidate Hillary is our only real choice.

    February 24, 2014 at 10:55 pm | Reply
  94. KEVIN

    Drop a few nukes on the middle east first to wake up the world to the reality of true war. Then we can cut back on our conventional war program. The world no longer realizes what we can and actually will do if we are attacked.

    February 24, 2014 at 10:54 pm | Reply
    • radioredrafts

      WHAAAARRR!

      Um, no thanks.

      February 24, 2014 at 10:57 pm | Reply
  95. Jon

    Cut the budget. I don't know why this decision is even taking this long.

    You have a bunch of war-mongers and career military men who want to military industrial complex to continue. And their only argument is, "But but.... if we cut the military, we won't be able to interfere all over the world when needed!"

    GOOD.

    February 24, 2014 at 10:53 pm | Reply
  96. Jonjo

    Democrats will force GOP to corner. Either you raise spending or you cut spending and lose your military vote. That's tough.

    February 24, 2014 at 10:53 pm | Reply
  97. Publius1787

    THe military will drop to pre-World War II levels. When war came it took a huge conversion in society to prepare and fight the war. THe greatest technological advancement of mankind, harnessing the power of the atom, was done during this war.
    Now imagine that happening five or ten years from now. Would we be able to do the same thing?

    February 24, 2014 at 10:51 pm | Reply
    • radioredrafts

      Just think, we could use some of that money to fund the FDA and still lower taxes.

      February 24, 2014 at 10:55 pm | Reply
    • Fred

      It's been 70 years since WW2. Why have we been spending like WW2 is still happening all of this time?

      It's insane.

      February 24, 2014 at 10:57 pm | Reply
  98. FubarObama

    Can't believe this guy is sec of defense

    February 24, 2014 at 10:50 pm | Reply
    • Fred

      You could always volunteer to pay more taxes so that we can afford to have such a ridiculously large and expensive military.

      Hello?

      February 24, 2014 at 10:53 pm | Reply
      • radioredrafts

        You've won the Internet for today, my friend.

        February 24, 2014 at 10:59 pm |
    • clark

      So a Vietnam vet, republican senator has less business being sec of defense than whom exactly? Oh Obama nominated him, you'd hate anybody he selected, got it.

      February 24, 2014 at 10:55 pm | Reply
  99. Burkeson

    Now if we could scale back Obama's travel expenses to fit the Obama Economy – the Obama's would be camping in the Whitehouse backyard.

    February 24, 2014 at 10:49 pm | Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.