Sec Robert Gates proposes massive US military-budget cuts(backed by Obama and McCain)

[Thorn777]

Sec Robert Gates(R) made an proposal to cut back on certain costly military expenditures like jet-bombers and missile systems. The reasoning behind this in a nutshell: in these asymmetrical wars of today you wont need all this fancy equipment.

(He is backed on this by pres Obama and sen McCain)

As expected, the Congress is overall very skeptical about this, to make an understatement. On both the democratic and republican side, the congress-men/women have to take in account the respective job losses at their home-states in the weapons-industry, and the weapons industry on their turn is of course screaming outrage with some backing of the pentagon.

That industry did good by spreading in to all those different states to get political backing, but I hope Congress grows some balls.

http://www.reuters.com/article/reute...53600C20090407

Seems like a good, bold and especially necessary move to me.

[Sharrow]

Obama and Gates know what they are doing. Essentially they want a military that can deter China/Russia but also actually undertake the conflicts that are actually occuring so hence the emphasis on the F35 over the F22 for example and the investment in COIN and Special Forces.

MUch as I admire the F22 it is just too expensive per unit. The F35, Typhoon or Su 37 can do almost the same at a fraction of the price.

Sensible all round.

[Quadratus]

We are so screwed.

[Sharrow]

Quad,

Oh dear, you aren't and you might actually gain a more useful military rather then one stuffed with pork weapons. There is no substitue for well equipped boots on the ground. Gates and Obama know this. Congress needs to learn it.

Kind Regards

Sharrow

[C-Rob]

what happens if we DO do battle with a technologically sound opponent instead of insurgent rabble? you, all three, you dumbass politicians.

But whatever. Do what you want.


Made me think of Rome's comitatense/limanatei thing. Dont' know why. Probably irrelevant.

It seems that it takes massive resources to deflect missles that really do piecemeal damage(unless nuclearly armed) I guess it works.

[Quadratus]

Quad,

Oh dear, you aren't and you might actually gain a more useful military rather then one stuffed with pork weapons. There is no substitue for well equipped boots on the ground. Gates and Obama know this. Congress needs to learn it.

Kind Regards

Sharrow

Read the bottom post:

what happens if we DO do battle with a technologically sound opponent instead of insurgent rabble? you, all three, you dumbass politicians.

[Sharrow]

Er.....you still have a first rate high tech military. Gates wants more usable weapons.

For example, the F35 can pwn any PRC fighter coming along anytime soon, ditto the Russians - especially when you consider the superiority of US pilots training and skill levels - BUT, and this is crucial, it is also eminently deployable to low intensity conflicts such as Afpak and Iraq. Hence the shift to it away from the F22. The Raptor, incidently, recently extracted a 1:22 kill ratio against simulated PRC opposition therefore a fleet of approx 182 Raptors and 2000+ F35s gives stunning strength in depth.

[Farnan]

what happens if we DO do battle with a technologically sound opponent instead of insurgent rabble? you, all three, you dumbass politicians.

But whatever. Do what you want.

Yea what if the Martians invade?

[Quadratus]

Yea what if the Martians invade?

There are nations with the same level of technology, or pretty close to us (such as China) that could start a war with us.... That's the point he's trying to make.

[Farnan]

There are nations with the same level of technology, or pretty close to us (such as China) that could start a war with us....

Martian invasion is more likely. Thus we should prepare for that more. And China isn't even close.

[Quadratus]

Martian invasion is more likely. Thus we should prepare for that more. And China isn't even close.

Care to invest money to make a global force shield to prevent Martians from invading?

[Kiljan Arslan]

Martian invasion is more likely. Thus we should prepare for that more. And China isn't even close.

I already got some Botox for the Martians.

[Jagdpanzer]

There are nations with the same level of technology, or pretty close to us (such as China) that could start a war with us.... That's the point he's trying to make.

Ridiculous. China is nowhere near US level of technology. The only countries anywhere close to US level of technology are NATO members and other allies of US (Israel, Japan, Australia, South-Korea)

[Barry Goldwater]

Good, this may be a regrettable - but certainly necessary - step on the road to recovery. Glad to see Obama & friends doing something right about the economy at last.

[mrmouth]

Ridiculous. China is nowhere near US level of technology. The only countries anywhere close to US level of technology are NATO members and other allies of US (Israel, Japan, Australia, South-Korea)

You cannot really compare any country to the US in these terms. And then there is the question of adequately fielding that technology, or force projection. That encompasses multiple components, including airlift, sea transport, and manpower. Again, no country can come close to moving what we can move, in the time frame we can. Our population breakdown is also favorable, and will only continue to improve. That is a problem for multiple countries around the world. You need young men to fight your wars.

The US is generally around a decade ahead of even our closest allies. When looking at a country like China, your talking a half century at least. They cannot even project military power in their own region for extended periods of time. Your talking another 20-30 years before they can even do that effectively. Let alone project power around the globe.


These cuts largely make sense. The only one I have issue with is the future combat program, which was the path that much of the infantry upgrades took to get to our guys. These upgrades truly make us a modern infantry, that nobody can even come close to matching.

However, Gates also expressed interest in continuing to modernize the infantry and its support structure. So in the end, it doesn't matter how it gets to our guys, just that it does. And I think it will.

He expressed interest in further adapting our military to the fights we will see in the future. The fights we are involved in now.

As far as the F-22, the cap at 187 is fine. You have to remember, a squadron of F-22's is generally smaller than a conventional fighter squadron because of the improved avionics. So your talking around 18. At 187, your talking 8-9 squadrons. These are special, multi-role fighters. Your not going to fly these on a whim. They were never designed to be a workhorse fighter, like the F-18, or F-16. Which the F-35 will replace.

And people also need to know, if the really hit the fan, we have a place out in the Southwest that is home to the third largest air force in the world (behind US and Russia). Mothballed, but fully functional aircraft of all kinds.

http://www.strategypage.com/military..._20061241.aspx

[Panzerbear]

Ridiculous. China is nowhere near US level of technology. The only countries anywhere close to US level of technology are NATO members and other allies of US (Israel, Japan, Australia, South-Korea)

... which buy their weapons from US ?

let me assure you, nobody is on the same level as US in terms of technology (mostly true for aerospace), not even close. the US doctrine is to have a high-tech army. the rest of the world is merely trying to catch up. kind of tough to replicate, when US military budget is nearly $600 billion .

now whether or not technology wins wars - thats a whole another conversation. Americans are still nowhere near pacifying Afghanistan, even though they are fighting against militia armed with 1960s era weaponry.

[Holger Danske]

There are nations with the same level of technology, or pretty close to us (such as China) that could start a war with us.... That's the point he's trying to make.

Do you really, seriously, truly believe that either China or Russia wants to pick a fight with you within the next couple of decades?

I cant believe the military-industrial complex is allowing this.

Although I heart the A-10, in an airshow I saw it in action and it destroyed a target with its machine gun....most epic thing I have ever seen.

Yeah, it's the perfect lawnmower against Russian or Chinese armored hordes... Imo they should rather stick some more powerful engines on it and make it fully digitally integrated with the rest of the military, and of cause upgrade it's already decent armor. It's basically like an Abrams on steroids, with wings. Oh and last but not least all NATO aircraft should have mandatory cup holders and coffee machines.

[Sharrow]

Quadi Baby
What the PRC wants is stability, stability and stability. INternationally they want respect and an equal footing with the US, EU, Russia and India.

Why do you think that a nation whose entire economic model is predicated on large scale industrial export, much of it seaborne, would start a war with the US???

[Captain Jin]

I think this is a good thing. Navy and Air Force have some insane price tags on some of their projects. As bad ass as a rail gun is, it's completely unneccessary. There was mad jealousy out of both of these services in the last eight years because a fat chunk of funding has gone to Marines and Army since we're the ones primarily fighting in Iraq and Afghan. It went so far as the navy attempting to make it's own infantry battalion!! Hello, the Marines the Navy's infantry! F'ing morons, of course they didn't get enough people to join so it got scrapped. What were they thinking, if squids wanted to be grunts they'd have joined the Corps in the first place.

If you look at how much it costs to send an Air Force pilot through a 16 week long 'test pilot' training session where they learn cool stuff, it's over 1 million a pilot for just 16 damn weeks!!! Do you know what a Marine Infantry battalion could do with over a million for the entire battalion in a four year span!? I certainly don't, but I know it'd be incredible.

[C-Rob]

This seems like a disgusting situation- nations led by elites who rather line their pockets than fight a tyrannical evil. I'm not saying that that tyrannical evil exists, but it could someday, and where would we be if we specialize against insurgents? SOL!

Budget cuts could always go too far.

Pretty tired of the martian foolishness.