I have to admit that it is a surprising but pleasing sight to see Defense Secretary Robert Gates quoting Eisenhower and talking about cutting the military budget. It helps that Gates has traditionally served in Republican administrations and can’t be painted as some kind of peacenik.
“For example, should we really be up in arms over a temporary projected shortfall of about 100 Navy and Marine strike fighters relative to the number of carrier wings, when America’s military possesses more than 3,200 tactical combat aircraft of all kinds?” Gates asked in a reference to the congressional push to buy more Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornet fighter jets.
“Does the number of warships we have and are building really put America at risk when the U.S. battle fleet is larger than the next 13 navies combined, 11 of which belong to allies and partners? Is it a dire threat that by 2020 the United States will have only 20 times more advanced stealth fighters than China?”
Sure sounds like a liberal, though.
According to ABC news, he wants to cut the budget by $10 billion. Out of what? $1.5 trillion? Peanuts. Good sound bites, but peanuts.
$10B, hmm that would be hc for 1 yr. That is a lot!
Ike also advocated (privately to friends) combining all our forces under one unified command – the ‘one uniform’ solution. Best he could do was a major reorganization of the DoD power structure. I suspect Gates feels the same way, but faces the same obstacles.
Besides, this is Bush’s Secretary of Defense. I wouldn’t believe anyone from that Administration if they said the sky was blue or the Sun rose in the East.
Retention of those neocon bastards is a blot on Obama.
When I mentioned how we should be cutting military spending to a GOP friend, he not only went off about “keeping America safe,” but also about how that would kill millions of American jobs in both the military and private sectors. My response was, “Since when are conservatives in favor of the government creating jobs?” He had no response.
Wouldn’t it be great if those jobs were dedicated to improving quality of life for people instead of making more stuff to kill others? For instance, a “Manhattan Project” devoted to alternative energy R & D and manufacturing.
Fantastic Idea! Also, expanding the space program instead of killing it.
The space program is expanding, just not human space flight. You can do much more for the buck when you don’t have to allocate volume for the massive amounts of life support that is required to keep human beings alive in space.
I’m all for manned space flight – it’s why I went to the Air Force Academy – but in a time of tight budgets we have terrestial priorities that trump extraterrestial exploration by human beings. Once we have a good feel for things via rovers and robots we can ramp up the manned exploration program in a decade or two.
Or a century or two. I’m hardly enthused about waiting until I’m dead for things the government talked about doing when I was in seventh grade.
As a cabinet member he’s obligated to pitch their line or quit. How is it surprising that he’s following orders?