Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 183

Thread: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

  1. #81
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryan Ruck View Post
    < tinfoil> First we have a silent purging of military brass, now we have the Obama admin stripping the much harder to control state guard units of air power... < /tinfoil>

    Budgets & ‘Betrayal’: National Guard Fights To Keep Apache Gunships

    January 23, 2014

    “To be honest, we feel betrayed.”

    That’s what one National Guard gunship pilot told me when I asked him about the Army’s plan to strip the Guard of all its AH-64 Apache attack helicopters. That plan — still awaiting approval by President Obama before he includes it in his budget request for fiscal year 2015 — is just one part of a radical overhaul that includes complex downsizing and reshuffling of the Army’s entire helicopter force.
    Why would the Obama Administration be disarming the States National Guard Units Scout Weapons Teams?


    Quote Originally Posted by vector7 View Post
    Defense Secretary Hagel Gives Go-Ahead To Army's Planned Aviation Restructure to disarm the National Guards Scout Weapons Teams
    Posted: January 10, 2014 Follow InsideDefense.com on Twitter



    Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel has approved an Army plan to restructure its aviation forces that includes divesting all OH-58 Kiowa Warrior helicopters and taking all AH-64 Apache helicopters out of the National Guard to fill the active component's armed aerial scout mission requirement, according to a defense official.

    ~snip~

    In addition to retiring the Kiowa fleet and using Apaches to fill the armed scout mission, the Army plans to retire its entire training fleet of TH-67s and replace those with LUH-72A Lakota helicopters.


    Quote Originally Posted by vector7 View Post
    American Republic replaced by “Council of Governors”?

    By Judi McLeod Tuesday, January 12, 2010



    Quietly—even stealthily—in the opening days of the New Year, President Barack Obama has set up a “Council of Governors”.

    Like the 30-plus czars running America with neither the people’s nor the congress’s blessings, the Council of Governors is already a done deal.

    “Is this a first step towards Martial Law, or a tie to the InterPol, RAND National Police Force stuff we’ve been hearing about,” asked a Texas patriot who tipped off Canada Free Press (CFP) after finding news of the new Council of Governors on Twitter. “Is this a sort of Homeland Security Politburo?

    “I do know it’s another sleuth order executed without any announcement, OR EXPLANATION to the People.”

    Patriots know by now that the promised Obama “transparency” is a fog.

    Checking the Net on the Council of Governors, CFP found other than a few blogs only UPI.com had the story as of this morning:

    “President Barack Obama Monday established a panel of state governors to collaborate with Washington on a variety of potential emergencies, the White House said.” (UPI.com, Jan. 11, 2010 at 11:54 p.m.).

    “Obama signed an executive order establishing a panel to be known as the Council of Governors, which will be made up of 10 state governors, to be selected by the president to serve two-year terms.

    Members will review matters involving the National Guard; homeland defense; civil support; and synchronization and integration of state and federal military activities in the United States, the White House said in a statement.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    添ou Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won稚 accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we値l keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We値l so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  2. #82
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,612
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Gosh I WONDER why?

    Easy, because the States are capable of stopping the Feds.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  3. #83
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Two Dozen Generals and Admirals Investigated for Sexual Misconduct

    Thursday, January 30, 2014



    If it’s not being criticized for failing to crackdown on sexual assaults, the U.S. military is enduring embarrassing revelations about senior commanders accused of sexual misconduct.

    The Washington Post reports numerous generals and admirals have been accused of inappropriate sexual behavior ranging from assaults to having extramarital affairs.

    “The embarrassing episodes are described in previously undisclosed files of military investigations into personal misconduct by U.S. generals and admirals,” the newspaper’s Craig Whitlock wrote. “Along with about two dozen other cases obtained by The Washington Post under the Freedom of Information Act, the investigations add to a litany of revelations about misbehaving brass that have dogged the Pentagon over the past 15 months and tarnished the reputation of U.S. military leadership.”

    He added that of the 30 “partially redacted reports” received from the military, “a large majority concerned generals in the Army and Air Force.”

    The Defense Department tried to address the problem two years ago, when then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta ordered a review of ethical standards for senior military officers. That effort apparently wasn’t enough, because “even more cases” surfaced following Panetta’s edict, according to Whitlock.

    In December, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel issued his own directive for an ethics review, which is supposed to teach “core values and ethical leadership” to officers.

    Among the cases uncovered by the newspaper were these:

    Brigadier General Bryan T. Roberts, a commander at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, was investigated last year for having multiple affairs, and was found guilty by the Army of assaulting one of his mistresses. Roberts, who had publicly warned his troops that he has “zero tolerance for sexual harassment and sexual assault,” was fined $5,000 and reprimanded, but retained his military rank. His attorney said he will soon be retiring.

    Martin P. Schweitzer, a commander with the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division, was caught sending emails to other generals about U.S. Representative Renee Ellmers (R-North Carolina), in which he said she was “smoking hot” and jokingly talked about explicit sexual acts he wanted to perform with her. Schweitzer’s anticipated promotion to major general is now on hold pending a formal review.

    David C. Uhrich, a one-star Air Force general, was investigated for repeatedly drinking on duty and having an affair. He has received “verbal counseling” and remains on active duty, according to an Air Force spokeswoman.
    -Noel Brinkerhoff
    To Learn More:
    Military Brass, Behaving Badly: Files Detail a Spate of Misconduct Dogging Armed Forces (by Craig Whitlock, Washington Post)
    Excerpts from Military Misconduct Investigations: Roberts, Schweitzer, Uhrich (Washington Post)
    Reports of Military Sexual Assaults up by 50% as Top Navy Nominee Raises Ire (by Noel Brinkerhoff, AllGov)
    Here’s Why the Navy’s Legal System is Incapable of Dealing with Sexual Assault Cases(by Noel Brinkerhoff, AllGov)
    In Senate Testimony, Military Leaders Reject Calls to Remove Sexual Assault Cases from Chain of Command (by Noel Brinkerhoff, AllGov)
    Air Force Version of Punishing Sexual Assault: No Promotion (by Matt Bewig, AllGov)





    Flashback:
    Obama's Military Coup Purges 197 Officers In Five Years




    Related: ‘Ranks Now Lack The Will To Win’: Top Generals Say Obama Is ‘Purging The Military’ And ‘Decimating Morale’
    Related: Pentagon Official: Obama Is Purging Military Commanders
    Related: U.S. Army intelligence official: Obama Building ‘Compliant Officer Class’
    Related: ‘Government Continues Down Path Of Destroying America’: U.S. Generals Now Take Action To Watch Obama

    Excerpted from Investors.com
    Defense: What the president calls “my military” is being cleansed of any officer suspected of disloyalty to or disagreement with the administration on matters of policy or force structure, leaving the compliant and fearful.

    We recognize President Obama is the commander-in-chief and that throughout history presidents from Lincoln to Truman have seen fit to remove military commanders they view as inadequate or insubordinate. Turnover in the military ranks is normal, and in these times of sequestration and budget cuts the numbers are expected to tick up as force levels shrink and missions change.

    Yet what has happened to our officer corps since President Obama took office is viewed in many quarters as unprecedented, baffling and even harmful to our national security posture. We have commented on some of the higher profile cases, such as Gen. Carter Ham. He was relieved as head of U.S. Africa Command after only a year and a half because he disagreed with orders not to mount a rescue mission in response to the Sept. 11, 2012, attack in Benghazi.

    Rear Adm. Chuck Gaouette, commander of the John C. Stennis Carrier Strike Group, was relieved in October 2012 for disobeying orders when he sent his group on Sept. 11 to “assist and provide intelligence for” military forces ordered into action by Gen. Ham.

    Keep Reading

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    添ou Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won稚 accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we値l keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We値l so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  4. #84
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Recruiting fraud, kickback scandal rocks Army

    Soldiers received bonuses for persuading friends to sign up during Iraq, Afghanistan wars.


    SHARE 1402 CONNECT 201 TWEET 75 COMMENTEMAILMORE

    WASHINGTON — More than 800 soldiers are under criminal investigation for gaming a National Guard program that paid hundreds of millions in bonuses to soldiers who persuaded friends to sign up during the darkest years of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, USA TODAY has learned.


    Fraudulent payments total in the "tens of millions," with one soldier allegedly pocketing $275,000 in illegal kickbacks, according to documents obtained by USA TODAY. At least four others made more than $100,000 each.

    "This is discouraging and depressing," Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said in an interview. "Clearly, we're talking about one of the largest criminal investigations in the history of the Army."

    One scheme involved two recruiters who forced a subordinate into registering as a recruiting assistant, according to a congressional memo on the program. The recruiters gave the assistant all the names of the recruits who walked into their office, and the recruiters split the bonuses with the assistant. Other recruiters registered an unwitting person as a recruiting assistant, then substituted their own bank account for direct deposit of the fraudulent bonuses.

    McCaskill has scheduled a hearing Tuesday on the scandal before a panel she chairs on financial and contractor oversight. She has called top Army officials to testify.

    "No one is more outraged about this than the leadership of the United States Army," Army spokesman George Wright said. "After internal Army investigations identified instances of fraud in Recruiting Assistance Programs, the Secretary of the Army immediately terminated those programs and their funding in February 2012."

    Violations discovered by Army investigations, Wright said, will be handled through criminal, military and civil courts.

    The Army National Guard launched the Recruiting Assistance Program in 2005 to bolster its ranks, which had thinned during the wars. It was later expanded to the the Army Reserve and active-duty Army. In essence, it paid soldiers for referrals of recruits. After audits turned up evidence of potential fraud, the program was canceled in 2012.

    Soldiers serving as recruiters were barred from receiving payments, although there were few measures to prevent that from happening. Cash in payments of $2,000 to $7,500 was deposited through direct deposit into the participating soldier's bank account.

    An Army audit found that 1,200 recruiters had received payments that were potentially fraudulent, and another 2,000 recruiting assistants had received questionable payments. More than 200 officers remain under investigation, McCaskill said. As of January, there were 555 active investigations involving 840 people, she said.

    In all, the Guard paid more than $300 million for more than 130,000 enlistments. Bonus payments went to 106,364. The Army estimates it will take until 2016 to complete their investigation. Those under scrutiny range from enlisted soldiers to two general officers. The most senior officer is a major general.

    "Frankly, a halfway sophisticated high school student could have seen ability to commit fraud here," McCaskill said.

    McCaskill has also called on officials from Document and Packaging Broker Inc., the contractor who ran the program for the Army to testify. In 2007, the contractor told the Army about cases of potential fraud, congressional sources say.

    The entire program, she said, may have broken federal law from the start. Congress limited the bonuses that could be paid for potential recruits, limits that were disregarded in this case.

    "This is just a mess from top to bottom," McCaskill said.

    The incentive program helped arrest decline in Guard ranks. In 2005, the National Guard fell 20% short of its recruitment goal and was 20,000 soldiers below its overall target of 350,000, Its commander labeled the Guard a "hollow" force. Bonuses and relaxed standards for recruits helped fill the Guard's ranks to 366,880 soldiers, beyond the the total authorized by Congress.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    添ou Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won稚 accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we値l keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We値l so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  5. #85
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    25,061
    Thanks
    52
    Thanked 78 Times in 76 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military


    The End Of The Tank? The Army Says It Doesn’t Need It, But Industry Wants To Keep Building It

    January 31, 2014

    When an armored vehicle pulled down the statue of Saddam Hussein in an iconic moment of the Iraq War, it triggered a wave of pride here at the BAE Systems plant where that rig was built. The Marines who rolled to glory in it even showed up to pay their regards to the factory workers.

    That bond between the machinists and tradesmen supporting the war effort at home and those fighting on the front lines has held tight for generations — as long as the tank has served as a symbol of military might.

    Now that representation of U.S. power is rolling into another sort of morass: the emotional debates playing out as Congress, the military and the defense industry adapt to stark new realities in modern warfare and in the nation’s finances.

    As its orders dwindle, the BAE Systems plant is shrinking, too. The company is slowly trimming workers and closing buildings.

    In York, there’s “sadness that somebody that has worked here 35 years and is close to retirement is getting laid off,” said Alice Conner, a manufacturing executive at the factory. “There’s also some frustration from management and my engineering staff as we see the skills erode, because we know one day we’re going to be asked to bring these back, and it’s going to be very difficult.”

    The manufacturing of tanks — powerful but cumbersome — is no longer essential, the military says. In modern warfare, forces must deploy quickly and “project power over great distances.” Submarines and long-range bombers are needed. Weapons such as drones — nimble and tactical — are the future.

    Tanks are something of a relic.

    The Army has about 5,000 of them sitting idle or awaiting an upgrade. For the BAE Systems employees in York, keeping the armored vehicle in service means keeping a job. And jobs, after all, are what their representatives in Congress are working to protect in their home districts.

    The Army is just one party to this decision. While the military sets its strategic priorities, it’s Congress that allocates money for any purchases. And the defense industry, which ultimately produces the weapons, seeks to influence both the military and Congress.

    “The Army’s responsibility is to do what’s best for the taxpayer,” said Heidi Shyu, the top Army buying official. “The CEO of the corporation[’s responsibility] is to do what’s best in terms of shareholders.”

    The Army is pushing ahead on a path that could result in at least partial closure of the two U.S. facilities producing these vehicles — buoyed by a new study on the state of the combat vehicle industry due for release next month.

    But its plans could be derailed by a Congress unwilling to yield and an industry with a powerful lobby. They argue that letting these lines idle or close would mean letting skills and technology honed over decades go to waste.

    The Pentagon has “really made a turn in that they are now trying to solve million-dollar problems without billion-dollar solutions, but Congress keeps redirecting them,” said Brett Lambert, who oversaw the Pentagon’s industrial base policy until last year. “This is a zero-sum game. For every dollar the Pentagon spends on something we don’t need . . . it is a dollar we can’t spend on something we do need.”

    A Boom, Then Decline

    For decades, BAE Systems’s facility in York has cranked out the Hercules, the Paladin and — most notably and most recently — the Bradley Fighting Vehicle, a 75,000-pound mainstay of the military’s traditional weapons, a kind of armored vehicle that can hold up to 10 men, move at nearly 40 miles per hour and fire a cannon, machine gun and missiles.

    (Although the Bradley looks like a tank, it is not technically considered one by the military.)

    The factory got its start in the early 1960s, when Bowen McLaughlin York bought a local farm. The construction contractor’s new business was military vehicle overhaul.

    Business boomed for a time — but slowed in the mid-1980s. Eventually, BMY combined with another defense outfit to form United Defense, which consolidated its business into the York site. In 1997, private-equity firm the Carlyle Group bought United Defense and eventually took it public. In 2005, the company was sold to BAE for just shy of $4 billion.

    In recent years, the contractor hasn’t built new Bradleys but is running old versions through a refurbishment program. In 2008, 2,500 BAE workers at the York plant were pushing out about seven upgraded Bradley Fighting Vehicles a day.

    Mel Nace Jr., operations manager at the plant, grew up in its shadow. In the 1970s, he rode his minibike around the BAE Systems factory, at one point even jumping the fence to take a spin on the test track used to put the Army vehicles through their paces.

    After vocational school, he got a job at the factory in 1979 working in the machine shop. With tuition help, he went to college and received his associate’s and bachelor’s degrees as well as an MBA — all while working full-time and raising two sons with his wife.

    In 2008, Nace was promoted to plant manager. That year was one of the site’s busiest as it moved to refurbish vehicles that were sent to Iraq and Afghanistan and returned pummeled, sometimes with coffee cups welded to the roof.

    “We basically had to hire 600 touch labor employees in a 12-month period,” he said. “We had to recruit, hire, train and acclimate all of those people.”

    Not only was the plant rolling out Bradley vehicles, but it was planning production of the next generation of fighting vehicle. BAE had been tasked with building some of the combat vehicles included in the Army’s expansive Future Combat Systems program, envisioned as a sprawling arsenal of drones, vehicles and robots all connected by a powerful network.

    The York facility was readying for the boost, even installing — at an $8 million price tag — a hulking high-speed, high-precision machine able to mill, cut and thread almost any material, from steel to aluminum to alloys. The company had hired younger employees, bringing the age of its average plant employee down to 44, seeking to build a workforce to take over once older employees retired.

    BAE — and the York facility — suffered a major blow when the Army canceled the Future Combat Systems program. The vehicles portion of the program, which was to be shared between BAE and General Dynamics, would have cost more than $87 billion, according to Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

    Since then, the military has backed off vehicle refurbishment, too. The York operation has cut about half of its employees, the average age of plant workers has surged to 54 and lines are sitting idle at the facility, tucked into a swath of farmland. In December, BAE started another round of layoffs.

    The home to the fighting vehicle has been a low, squat building — with tools in their places and signs reminding those on the floor to don hearing protection. A large “Partnering for the Soldier” banner was on display. Much of the Bradley equipment is being moved into another building as BAE consolidates.

    “The reality of it is we’ve already started shutting down,” Conner, the manufacturing executive, said.

    If BAE does not get any new Bradley funding — or win new work from commercial firms or foreign governments, it will close the line in 2015.

    General Dynamics, which runs its tank-building program out of small-town Lima, Ohio, is facing a similar dilemma.

    Just like the Bradley plant, the Abrams factory bustled over the past decade. At its peak in early 2009, the plant, which is owned by the government but operated by General Dynamics, was pushing 21 / 2 refurbished tanks out the door each day.

    For the first time in its history, it diversified, producing not just upgraded Abrams tanks but also Stryker vehicles and a prototype of an expeditionary fighting vehicle (able to travel by sea and by land), which was built for the Marine Corps but later canceled.

    In 2004, the plant started spending millions to upgrade its systems, bracing to build not only the Marine Corps vehicle but also the ones planned for the Army’s Future Combat Systems effort.

    The factory added a $15.5 million machining line — replacing a system installed in the 1980s — that essentially cuts steel and aluminum hulls so that they are ready to be pieced together, much like a person would expect an Ikea desk to be ready for assembly.

    But today the facility is down to about 500 employees from a peak of 1,220. Following union rules, it has laid off the newest employees and has worked its way back to those hired in 2005, said Keith Deters, director of plant operations.

    Moving Forward

    Military officials say they’ve given careful thought to their strategy and they simply can’t afford to pay for more upgraded tanks.

    Gen. Raymond Odierno, the Army’s chief of staff, made its case before Congress in 2012.

    “We don’t need the tanks,” he said. “Our tank fleet is 21 / 2 years old average now. We’re in good shape, and these are additional tanks that we don’t need.”

    The Army has been emboldened by the new study, which considered whether suppliers who are key to building combat vehicles could be replaced.

    The study, which was run by consulting firm A.T. Kearney and took more than five months, found only a small number of companies that are vulnerable to closure and could not easily be replaced.

    Shyu, the Army acquisition official, said the military expects that vehicle makers and suppliers will look to other customers and kinds of work.

    “There’s obviously difficult decisions that every single service has to make somewhere along the line,” Shyu said. “We have to figure out what’s good enough.”

    But the Army has run up against congressional opposition. To keep these lines running, Congress has allocated well more than the Army requested for the programs — an extra $181 million for Abrams in fiscal 2013 and about $140 million more for Bradley.

    Legislators say they don’t want the money they’ve invested in building up the country’s vehicle-making capability to go to waste. The several hundred million dollars it would cost seems to them a small amount relative to the billions spent on defense annually.

    The industry, too, has pushed Congress to support its work. Last year, BAE convened its suppliers — it has 586 across 44 states — in Washington to storm the Hill, chatting up representatives about the jobs they provide and pushing for Congress to help the Bradley program.

    Critics say the companies are trying to fight off what should be inevitable: a wind-down of a product that the country doesn’t need.

    “It looks like they’re protecting profits and using scare tactics about jobs,” said Angela Canterbury of the Project on Government Oversight. “It is really making us less safe when we’re throwing money that’s hard to come by at programs that don’t meet what should be our current national security strategy.”

  6. #86
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,612
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Last week Ft. Carson began the conversion of the Tank Brigade here to an "armored personnel carrier".

    No more Abrams.

    That was announced a month ago, and started last week.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  7. #87
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Time to stop resisting and move forward with the next phase of the Administration's fundamental transformation of America through Nation Building at home.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    添ou Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won稚 accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we値l keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We値l so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  8. #88
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Rumsfeld: US Going Into Decline Due to 'Weakness' in Military


    Tuesday, 18 Feb 2014 09:51 AM
    By Drew MacKenzie and John Bachman

    Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld condemned President Barack Obama for showing such "weakness" that American adversaries are growing bolder by the day.

    Rumsfeld, author of the new book "Rumsfeld's Rules," told John Bachman on Newsmax TV's "America's Forum" that the United States is not spending enough money on the military.

    "The greatest security threat [to America] is the fact that the United States is behaving in a way that is sending a signal of future weakness," he said. "In the Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson administrations, we were spending 10 percent of gross domestic product on defense. Today, we're spending less than 4 percent and the entitlements have ballooned."

    "There's no way we can keep on spending trillions of dollars we don't have. So that vacuum we're creating is going to be filled, and it'll be filled by countries that don't have our values and clearly are adverse to our interests."

    Rumsfeld, who was secretary of defense from 1975 to 1977 under President Gerald Ford, and from 2001 to 2006 under President George W. Bush, said Iran's ayatollahs are determined to build a nuclear weapon, which will set off a dangerous Middle East arms race.

    "You very likely are going to end up seeing other countries in the region develop nuclear weapons," Rumsfeld said. "And there are other countries that are perfectly capable of it, and there are countries around the world that are willing to assist them with nuclear programs. And that is not a good thing for the world."

    Rumsfeld warned that Saudi Arabia and Egypt would soon want to arm themselves with nuclear bombs.

    The former defense secretary also attacked the Obama administration for announcing that it was pulling out all its troops from Afghanistan by the end of this year, sending a message to Taliban terrorists that the war-torn country is ripe for another takeover.

    "The president never should have said we'll be leaving on a certain date because it tells the Taliban, wait a while and then you can come in and take over," he told Newsmax TV, adding that the country was "on a good path forward and it has been placed in jeopardy unnecessarily."

    He also warned of what life could be like in Afghanistan if the Taliban gains power again. "They used the soccer stadiums to cut off people's heads. Women couldn't go out in the street without a male member of their family, they couldn't go to school. They were a vicious government."

    Rumsfeld also said the United States should not have offered to give aid to the Syrian rebels fighting the Assad regime and then gone back on its promise. "Either you keep your mouth shut, [and] if you say something then by golly you'd better live up to it, and we did exactly the wrong thing."

    Syria may be a no-win situation because Iran is helping to fight the rebels by supplying fighters to President Bashar Assad's forces while the Russians are selling them arms, he said. "The implication that, when it was over Assad could still be there, is obviously a deterrent to anyone opposing Assad."

    But Rumsfeld said the United States can bounce back and become a world leader once again.

    "We do not need to go into decline," he said. "I expect that what we'll see is self-correction taking place because we ought not to leave a vacuum that is filled by people that fundamentally don't have our values and are against our interests."

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    添ou Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won稚 accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we値l keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We値l so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  9. #89
    Senior Member Avvakum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    830
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Quote Originally Posted by vector7 View Post
    Time to stop resisting and move forward with the next phase of the Administration's fundamental transformation of America through Nation Building at home.
    Right now, Obama and friends are quite happy to feign incompetence, and the American public is buying into that pretty much. They aren't incompetent at all. Even though it's costing them popularity, the Obama Administration serenely marches onward, because they believe that any popular outcry against them comes from a false conciousness, by people blinded by Capitalism. They know the people's interests better than the people do, is what they think. They don't care at all about 2014, they did not care about 2010 or 2012 (except only to ensure Obama being around in 2016), they only care about 2016, which is what they've been working towards since 2007.
    "God's an old hand at miracles, he brings us from nonexistence to life. And surely he will resurrect all human flesh on the last day in the twinkling of an eye. But who can comprehend this? For God is this: he creates the new and renews the old. Glory be to him in all things!" Archpriest Avvakum

  10. #90
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    25,061
    Thanks
    52
    Thanked 78 Times in 76 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Here it is...

    Proposed Budget Will Reportedly Shrink Army To Pre-WWII Numbers

    February 24, 2014

    Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel will reportedly propose a Pentagon budget that will shrink the U.S. Army to its smallest number since 1940 and eliminate an entire class of Air Force attack jets.

    The New York Times reported late Sunday that Hagel's proposal, which will be released to lawmakers and the public on Monday, will call for a reduction in size of the military that will leave it capable of waging war, but unable to carry out protracted occupations of foreign territory, as in Afghanistan and Iraq.

    Under Hagel's plan, the number of troops in the Army will drop to between 440,000 and 450,000, a reduction of at least 120,000 soldiers from its post-Sept.11 peak.

    Officials told the Times that Hagel's plan has been endorsed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and protects funding for Special Operations forces and cyberwarfare. It also calls for the Navy to maintain all eleven of its aircraft carriers currently in operation. However, the budget proposal mandates the elimination of the entire fleet of Air Force A-10 attack aircraft, as well as the retiring of the U-2 spy plane, a stalwart of Cold War operations.

    The budget plan does keep money for the F-35 warplane, a project which has been beset by delays and criticism over design flaws.

    Other characteristics of the budget will likely draw further ire from veterans groups and members of Congress. The Wall Street Journal reported Friday that Hagel would recommend a limit on military pay raises, higher fees for health-care benefits, less generous housing allowances, and a one-year freeze on raises for top military brass.

    "Personnel costs reflect some 50% of the Pentagon budget and cannot be exempted in the context of the significant cuts the department is facing," Defense Department spokesman Adm. John Kirby told the Journal. "Secretary Hagel has been clear that, while we do not want to, we ultimately must slow the growth of military pay and compensation."

    "This is a real uphill battle with Congress," Mieke Eoyang, director of the National Security Program at Third Way, a centrist think tank in Washington, told the Journal

    "God bless [Hagel] for trying to get a handle on these costs," she said. "But in this political environment, in an election year, it's going to be hard for members of Congress to accept anything that's viewed as taking benefits away from troops."

    Click for more from The New York Times

    Click for more from The Wall Street Journal

  11. #91
    Super Moderator and PHILanthropist Extraordinaire Phil Fiord's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    3,496
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 11 Times in 11 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    I know this seems an odd place to post this, but consider my rationale.

    The following email was sent out by Glenn Beck. My thoughts after the quote.

    Dear Fellow Patriot,

    We've arrived at a critical time for our country.

    Glenn Beck said “it’s time to take the power from them and the right way to do it is through a Convention of States.”

    David Barton called the Convention of States the “proper solution.”

    CLICK HERE for your free Convention of States handbook.


    We must curb spending and preserve state sovereignty or we become slaves to this astronomical debt.

    Thankfully, we have a solution as big as the problem.

    Did you know the founders gave us a "Constitutional emergency cord" in case the government oversteps its boundaries? It's found in Article V, and it allows a nationwide “Convention of States” during which state legislatures can amend the Constitution without the approval of Congress or the President.

    It's our best hope!

    CLICK HERE to download a free Convention of States handbook to learn everything you need to know to make this happen in your state.

    Together, we can keep this nation free.

    Sincerely,

    Mark Meckler
    President
    Citizens for Self-Governance
    Ok, sounds great, right? Maybe not. To open the Constitution like this is what we can do and perhaps should do, but be cautioned as it seems this may be strategised by those who wish to take down our country as we are seeing externally and internally.

    A Convention of States allows direct altering of the Constitution. A very powerful tool. If the added or new wording is not precise it will be taken advantage of. If the new wording is precise, it will be manipulated. My point being this exercise must be considered with an abundance of caution. Those who are working diligently to take away our freedoms have been succeeding and any move made will be countered or used against those who champion freedom.

  12. #92
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Obama seeks to delay F-35C procurement and ground U-2s, A-10s and Kiowa Warriors

    By: Jon Hemmerdinger
    Washington DC
    19:57 24 Feb 2014



    The US government will delay procurement of Lockheed Martin F-35Cs by two years and ground its aging fleets of Fairchild Republic A-10s, Lockheed U-2s and Bell OH-58D Kiowa Warriors under the US Department of Defense’ fiscal year 2015 budget propose.

    The changes, which must be approved by the US Congress, were announced by US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel during a 24 February press conference.

    The drawdowns and delays, a response to US budget cuts, are part of a broad plan outlined by the Pentagon today to shrink the size of the US military.

    Hagel says the U-2’s high-altitude reconnaissance role will be fulfilled by Northrop Grumman’s RQ-4 Global Hawk unmanned air vehicles, and USAF officials have said the A-10’s close-air support role can be assumed by USAF F-35As and other aircraft.

    Hagel also says he approved a plan to transfer the National Guard’s Boeing AH-64 Apache helicopters to the army in exchange for the army’s Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawks.

    The Pentagon intends to slow F-35 Joint Strike Fighter procurement overall by 24 aircraft through fiscal year 2019, Hagel says.

    Otherwise, however, the Joint Strike Fighter programme would remain largely unscathed under the Pentagon’s plan.

    Hagel says the changes will “allow the military to protect our country” but create “increased levels of risk” in the near term.

    “The military will continue to experience gaps in training and maintenance, putting stress on the force and [affecting] our ability [to ensure] global readiness.”

    Specific details are expected to be released on 4 March when President Obama releases his budget proposal.

    The budget must then be approved by the US Congress, which often is hesitant to approve aircraft retirements.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    添ou Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won稚 accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we値l keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We値l so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  13. #93
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Obama and Hagel have surrendered our military strength

    Written by Allen West on February 28, 2014


    Image: Dana Summers


    This week our president and secretary of defense — correct that to manager of appeasement — surrendered the military strength of the United States. This week Obama and Hagel told the enemies of liberty and freedom that it is open season. These two mental leprechauns have obviously never read the book by Niccolo Machiavelli, “The Prince” nor Sun Tzu’s “Art of War”. I’m sure they’ve never read Clausewitz or Jomini. So these astute fellas unilaterally decide that even in the face of a more dangerous world, we shall shrink our military capacity.



    All those progressive socialist experts say we don’t need a big military. We can use our technology. To that I will respond that the most highly technical weapon on the battlefield is the individual well-trained warrior. We have been down this road before in America, as history does indeed repeat itself for those who fail to learn from it.

    After World War I we decimated our military strength — true to form others increased theirs — namely Germany and Japan. World War II came about because belligerent Nations took the initiative. Our first major combat forays in World War II were not stellar: Coral Sea, Corrigedor, and Kasserine Pass.

    After World War II we decimated our forces to the delight of the Soviets and their proxy, North Korea. Our first foray into the ground combat environment of the Korean peninsula was the utter destruction of US Army Task Force Smith. Even General MacArthur’s Inchon operation had to be delayed because only five years after World War II our Pacific theater operations did no have enough Marines and amphibious assault landing craft — simply unbelievable.

    We witnessed a reduction in forces (RIF) after Operation Desert Shield/Storm and saw troop deployments and commitments increase.

    I do not believe in, nor support, nation-building campaigns. I prefer a US Military that is based on power projection and strike operations, not a forward deployed force. We must streamline our acquisition process as it takes far too long to introduce new weapons systems. We should also examine SLEP (service life extension programs) before embarking upon massive billion dollar new systems. The A-10 platform that Hagel wants to cut is just as viable today as ever as a close air support system against massed Islamic terrorist formations.

    Obama stated we are pivoting away from the Middle East — yay for Iran, Turkey, and the Muslim Brotherhood — and focusing on the Pacific Rim. However, we have shrunk from a 570 warship Navy to one of 283 heading to 230. I don’t believe the oceans have shrunk. Yet we see China expanding its naval capability — remember the last time an Asian nation built up its maritime force? Didn’t end well for the US.

    Obama and Hagel provide no strategic vision for the 21st century battlefield, and running away is not an effective maneuver. What type of force mix shall we have allocated to our geographic AORs (CENTCOM, EUCOM, AFRICOM, PACOM, SOUTHCOM, NORTHCOM)? Where gaps exist we shall be exploited.

    Is Obama doing this intentionally? There can be no other answer than yes. Why? Because just like Bill Clinton, spending on domestic welfare nanny-state programs is more important to progressive socialists — after all, they want power, they need votes.

    Friday, I spoke at Faith Middle School at Ft. Benning Georgia to students in the 6th and 8th grades. Many of those kids had parents who were deployed or had been deployed. I looked into the eyes of those kids who are truly little heroes, giving up their moms and dads to serve and protect our Republic. I talked to them about looking my own two daughters in the eye and having to say those tough words, good bye.

    I wonder if Obama and Hagel have the character to stand before those kids and tell them their Soldier, Sailor, Airman, Marine, and Coast Guardsman matter not? Could he look those kids in the eye and tell them “Peace through Strength” is a dumb concept and that the world is safer without your parents out there scaring people? Could he look those kids in the eyes and tell them their future will be more dangerous and less secure?

    Sadly, the answer is no, he could. Because Obama lacks integrity, character, and moral courage and finds it easy to look in your eyes and lie — even to children of our warriors. The American flag is being lowered and replaced with a white flag. But I for one will never surrender, never give up.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    添ou Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won稚 accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we値l keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We値l so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  14. #94
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,612
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    The right way to do this is through the use of force.

    After all, the Americans with guns in this country outnumber the US military, the Russian military and many are trained military personnel. Duh.


    The fucking regime KNOWS they have to disarm us.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  15. #95
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,612
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Air Force to Eliminate Nearly 500 Aircraft

    Stars and Stripes | Mar 12, 2014 | by Jon Harper



    WASHINGTON -- The Air Force plans to cut nearly 500 planes from its inventory over the next five years if the Defense Department's Fiscal 2015 budget request is approved by Congress, the service announced Monday.


    The reductions -- which would affect the active duty, Guard and Reserve -- would be implemented in 25 states and the District of Columbia, according to a diagram provided by the Air Force. Only 47 planes would be eliminated overseas at a time when officials are emphasizing the importance of maintaining a strong forward presence to deter adversaries and respond quickly to crises.


    The drawdown was necessitated by budget constraints imposed by Congress. The Air Force's proposed base budget is $109.3 billion, down from the $114.1 billion originally proposed for this year, but slightly higher than the $108.8 billion actually enacted by Congress. If sequestration goes back into effect in fiscal 2016, the service's budget would take further hits.


    "Our challenge in a constrained funding environment is to maintain the balance between having a ready force today, and a modern force tomorrow," Air Force budget director Maj. Gen. Joe Martin told reporters at the Pentagon last week.


    The cuts would entail the elimination of the entire A-10 and U-2 fleets, as well as significant reductions in the number of F-15s and MQ-1s.


    "In addition to fleet divestment, we made the tough choice to reduce a number of tactical fighters, command and control, electronic attack and intra-theater airlift assets so we could rebalance the Air Force at a size that can be supported by expected funding levels. Without those cuts, we will not be able to start recovering to required readiness levels," Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark A. Welsh III said in a news release.


    The Air Force's top budget priorities are the F-35 tactical fighter, the KC-46 tanker and the new long-range bomber, and the Pentagon is trying to protect those programs from the budget axe, officials said.


    The procurement budget for the F-35, which has been plagued by cost overruns, technical problems and schedule delays, would rise to about $4.3 billion from $3.3 billion this year, funding the purchase of 26 planes. The Air Force would buy seven new tankers at a cost of $1.6 billion. Money for research, development and testing for the new bomber would more than double from $359 million this year to $914 million, Martin said.


    As the war in Afghanistan draws down and China continues to rise militarily, the U.S. military is trying to move assets to the Asia-Pacific region and prioritize high-end platforms over personnel.


    "The FY15 [budget proposal] request favors a smaller and more capable force -- putting a premium on rapidly deployable, self-sustaining platforms that can defeat more technologically advanced adversaries," Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said last month.


    To maintain capability at lower cost, some assets will be moved from the active duty force to the Reserve. The size of the Reserve fleet will only decrease by 17 aircraft, according to the diagram.


    "Wherever possible the Air Force leveraged opportunities to rebalance personnel and force structure into the Reserve component," Air Force Secretary Deborah James said in the news release. "For that reason, at most Air Reserve component locations where we divested aircraft, we replaced the existing flying missions with a new mission and preserved the majority of the manpower to ease the transition."


    In addition to getting rid of aircraft, the service also plans to slash personnel. The Air Force would reduce its end strength from 503,000 airmen to 483,000 in fiscal 2015. The removal of 17,000 active duty airmen and 3,000 Air Reserve members would be accomplished through the elimination of weapons systems, reductions in headquarters staffing and paring back aircrew-to-cockpit ratios as combat in Afghanistan winds down, officials said last week.


    The Air Force plans to use voluntary force reduction measures to thin out the ranks, as well as involuntary programs if necessary, Martin said.


    At this point, these Air Force plans are just proposals because Congress has yet to approve them. Certain measures, such as the elimination of the A-10, will be strongly opposed by some lawmakers.


    At a budget hearing last week, Sen. Carl Levin D-Mich., the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said some of the proposed force structure reductions would be "difficult for many to support."


    Senators Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., John McCain, R-Ariz. and Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., have all come out against the elimination of the A-10. Ayotte's husband is a former A-10 pilot. McCain and Chambliss each represent states where dozens of the aircraft are based.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  16. #96
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,612
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    My old unit here at Peterson will be greatly affected I heard this morning.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  17. #97
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Obama to cut AWACS fleet by 25%

    Ed Lasky
    March 11, 2014



    Adam Kredo reports for the Washington Free Beacon that Obama is planning to cut America’s key reconnaissance fleet by 25 percent:
    A key fleet of U.S. reconnaissance planes used to detect enemy aircraft in hostile settings will to be cut by 25 percent under President Obama’s fiscal year 2015 budget, according to multiple sources familiar with the budget proposal.

    A fleet of 31 AWACs, or Airborne Warning and Control System planes, will be reduced to 24 by 2015 under Obama’s budget proposal.

    The situation has prompted concern in defense circles and elsewhere, where sources have pointed out that AWACS are currently deployed in Poland and Romania in order to help monitor the standoff in Ukraine.

    AWACS are a highly advanced type of reconnaissance craft able to monitor enemy movements in the sky and ground from great distances. Each AWAC unit costs $270 million, according to the Air Force.

    NATO dispatched several of its own AWACs on Monday to monitor Russian movement in Ukraine’s Crimea region, where a tense standoff is still taking place.

    “All AWACs reconnaissance flights will take place solely over alliance territory,” a NATO spokesman was quoted as saying by the BBC.

    The seven U.S. AWAC planes cut in Obama’s budget would be completely scrapped if the proposal is adopted.

    Twenty-seven of these AWAC planes are currently based in Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma, while two are deployed in Japan and another two in Alaska.

    The planes act as a large radar system, making them ideal for monitoring movements in areas such as Ukraine, where early detection can provide the edge for response units.

    The AWACs are capable of identifying enemy movements and aircraft, but also guiding response forces during a response.
    Again and again, Obama practices unilateralism. He normally decries American leadership in world affairs but will make an exception by slashing our defense budget while those of our adversaries are soaring and the Russian bear has emerged to run rampant and wild across the world. He did not even try to get a fig leaf for his actions by negotiating a mutual reduction with other nations. He is just increasingly disarming the US - making us weaker and weaker by the day. After all, if we don’t see the danger it doesn’t exist, right? More food stamps and more welfare and more taxpayer money flowing to unions and Democratic donors are good but securing America is bad.

    Iran is developing nuclear weapons while regime leaders ridicule America - and Obama averts his eyes. Islamic terrorism is dismissed as “work place violence” (as in Ft. Hood) or man-made disaster. The Russian invasion of Crimea is called an “uncontested arrival." Red lines are ignored. The list goes on and on. The only people Obama sees as enemies seem to be fellow Americans - Republicans. And Israelis.

    Now Obama is doing his best to avoid work and responsibility for safeguarding America by unilaterally rendering us increasingly blind to our foes’ actions.


    http://americanthinker.com/blog/2014/03/obama_to_cut_awacs_fleet_by_25.html

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    添ou Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won稚 accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we値l keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We値l so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  18. #98
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,612
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    This man is simply an evil jerk.

    Can he NOT look around and see that cutting AWACs is a really, really, REALLY bad idea especially right now with Russia acting out?

    A friend of mine said this morning...."I think we, the US, have too many agreements with other countries to keep the peace. (NATO, The Americas, South Viet Nam, etc.)"


    It appears we're headed for a shooting war in the opinions of most I speak to around here. All are in agreement with what the friend said (above) for the most part. A few have stated Russia isn't up to a fight with us - then again, the Russians have worked pretty diligently of late to increase their military power.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  19. #99
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    China's Military Rise

    Harsh V Pant, March 11, 2014:


    Budget cuts are posing real problems for U.S. Military planners trying to accommodate themselves to the FY 2015 budget constraints.


    Its military spending is the second largest in the world, behind that of only the US, growth rate being greater in recent years.

    China has announced that it plans to increase its military budget for 2014 to almost $132 billion, a 12.2 per cent rise over last year. This was expected as Beijing has made no bones about its desire to emerge as a dominant military power in the Asia-Pacific.

    It has been systematically working towards that goal, increasing its military budget consistently for the last several years with a special focus on the navy, allowing it to project power across the region.

    “We will comprehensively enhance the revolutionary nature of the Chinese armed forces, further modernise them and upgrade their performance, and continue to raise their deterrence and combat capabilities in the information age,” prime minister Li Keqiang said at the opening session of the National People’s Congress which will formally approve policy already made by Communist Party leaders.

    China’s military spending is the second largest in the world, behind that of only the United States.The rate of growth in spending is greater than that of recent years.

    Though last year, China’s defence budget increased by 10.7 per cent over the previous year, this year’s rate of growth is higher than recent years. This exorbitant increase in China’s military budget over the past several years has sparked concerns among the major powers and China’s neighbours. As a growing economic power, China is concentrating on the accretion of military might to secure and enhance its own strategic interests.

    China, which has the largest standing army in the world at 2.3 million-strong, continues to make the most dramatic improvements in its nuclear force among the five nuclear powers. Improvements in its conventional military capabilities are even more impressive.

    What has caused concern in Asia and beyond is the opacity of China’s military buildup. A consensus has emerged that Beijing’s real military spending is at least double the announced figure.

    The official figures of the Chinese government do not include the cost of new weapons purchases, research or other big-ticket items for China’s highly secretive military. The real figures are thought to be much higher. According to some estimates, China will be spending close to $148 billion on defence as opposed to the officially announced figure of $132 billion.

    From Washington to Tokyo, from Brussels to Canberra, calls have been rising for China to be more forthcoming about its intentions behind the dramatic military spending pace and the scope of its military capabilities. Beijing has tried to be more transparent about its defence spending. To try to assuage concerns worldwide about its rapidly growing military capabilities, the Chinese government has released ‘white papers’ on defence for several years now.

    China has started asserting its military profile more than ever. Chinese vessels have tackled Somali pirates in the Middle East, the first time Chinese vessels had operated outside Asia. Beijing is also considering sending combat troops abroad in support of UN peacekeeping efforts. The Chinese military has deployed to sea an aircraft carrier it refitted after being purchased from Ukraine, the Liaoning, and has also tested a stealth fighter.

    Displacing the hegemony

    Chinese military officers are openly talking of building the world’s strongest military and displacing the US as global hegemony — by means of war if necessary, as one senior officer has suggested.

    This kind of talk might be premature at the moment as the US military remains far more advanced than China’s, which does not yet possess the capability to project power far from Chinese shores. Still, China’s neighbours should worry, especially as the US starts to look increasingly inward.

    Divisions within China about the future course of nation’s foreign policy are more stark than ever. It is now being suggested that much like young Japanese officers in the 1930s, young Chinese military officers are increasingly taking charge of strategy with the result that rapid military growth is shaping the nation’s broader foreign policy objectives.
    Civil-military relations in China are under stress with the PLA asserting its pride more forcefully than even before and demanding respect from other countries. “A country needs respect, and a military also needs respect,” wrote a major general last year in the PLA’s newspaper.

    Not surprisingly, China has been more aggressive in asserting its interests not only vis-a-vis India but also vis-a-vis the United States, the European Union, Japan and Southeast Asian states.

    Hawks are gaining ground in the Chinese military as the PLA becomes a powerful force in the country with its budget growing to $200 billion. There is a sense that China can now prevail in conflicts with its regional adversaries. Some voices have openly called for wars.

    The Air Force Colonel, Dai Xu, has argued that in light of China’s disputes with Japan in the East China Sea and Vietnam and the Philippines in the South China Sea, a short, decisive war, like the 1962 border clash with India, would deliver long-term peace. This would be possible as Washington would not risk war with China over these territorial spats according to this assessment.

    The increasing assertion by the Chinese military and changing balance of power in the nation’s civil-military relations should be a real cause of concern for China’s neighbours. The pace of Chinese military modernisation has already taken the world by surprise and it is clear that the process is going much faster than many had anticipated.

    At a time when India’s own defence modernisation programme is faltering, China’s military transformation should be taken seriously by Indian defence planners. China’s military assertiveness vis--vis Japan and other Southeast Asian nations is a function of its growing confidence in its military capabilities.

    Indian defence establishment, in contrast, is reduced to begging from its civilian masters for adequate provisions. This has not gone unnoticed around the world and particularly in Beijing and will likely have grave consequences for India’s ability to defend its interests.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    添ou Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won稚 accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we値l keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We値l so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  20. #100
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Budget Cuts for 2015 Pose Problems for U.S. Military

    Added by Alan Milner on March 12, 2014.
    Saved under Alan Milner, U.S.
    Tags: budget cuts



    Budget cuts are posing real problems for U.S. Military planners trying to accommodate themselves to the FY 2015 budget constraints. The consensus among senior military officers seems to be, “We cannot do that.” Senior congressional leaders are basically saying, “This is the future. Get ready for it.”

    Military budget cuts are always political footballs, but in this important by-year election climate, everyone is trying to back away from this particular tangle of thorns. Cutbacks in military spending mandated by sequestration have already gone into effect, and more are coming in 2015 that will materially affect how the U.S. military will operate for years into the future. Budget cut proponents are suggesting that U.S. cannot afford to maintain its current military structure. Opponents to the cuts claim that nothing less will do in an increasingly dangerous world.

    President Obama’s own budget proposal, which is usually dead on arrival when it is received by Congress, called for $549 billion in defense spending, and that number does not include the costs of maintaining U.S. forces in Afghanistan. The 2013 budget allocated $85 billion for Afghanistan. The president’s $3.9 trillion budget includes a deficit of $561 billion, roughly equal to the Defense Budget.

    The $496 billion 2015 budget request submitted by the Pentagon still exceeds the spending caps imposed by the Sequestration compromise worked out in 2011 and enacted as the Bipartisan Budget Act. The Pentagon does not expect to get what it asked for, but it will be Congress, not the White House or the Pentagon, that will be seen as not doing the right thing.

    Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel is leading the assault on military spending caps for the Obama administration. As a highly decorated Vietnam-era sergeant, Hagel, a Republican, is the first enlisted man to serve as Defense Secretary in the history of the department. The former two-term senator is, however, leading from behind on the military budget cuts, saying, “Tough choices are coming” if Congress votes deeper spending cuts for upcoming years.

    In challenging the budget his own Pentagon submitted to Congress, Hagel explained that the budget reflected the financial constraints .imposed by Sequestration. It is not anything that either the Pentagon or the White House want to live with, according to Hagel.

    “This is not the military the president nor I want. It isn’t the military that this committee or this Congress wants for America’s future. But it is the path we’re on unless Congress does something to change the law,” he said.

    In today’s briefing, Hagel and General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, laid out additional cuts that may be required, if Congress does not lift the sequestration restrictions on military funding.

    Under the force reduction proposals, the Army would reduce its ranks from 520,000 rank and file members to 440,000 men and women. The Marines stands to lose 8,000 slots, bringing the Corps’ forces to 182,000. That is only the beginning because, unless Congress reverses itself, the force reductions will continue into 2019.

    Under the long-term Force Reduction Plan, over the next five years, the Army would be pared down to 420,000 troopers, and the Marines would have to make do with just 175,000 Leathernecks.

    The Navy might have to “mothball” one aircraft carrier, demobilize one air wing, and cancel plans to purchase a nuclear submarine, three destroyers, three supply ships and a floating staging base.

    The Air Force would be forced to retire an additional 80 aircraft, including the A-10 Warthogs, the air support mainstay of for small unit engagements, the entire fleet of KC-10 midair refueling tankers, and the Global Hawk surveillance drones.

    The Air Force would also purchase 24 fewer F-35 Joint Strike Fighter planes over the next five years.

    If implemented, these cuts would reduce the standing Army to its pre-World War II levels and, if modernization plans are not followed, the Navy and Air Force might find also themselves fighting future engagements with outmoded weapons and aging leadership because the military follows a last hired first fired discipline when required to cut spending. (No one is suggesting that the Navy or Air Force return to pre-WWII staffing levels…yet.)

    While these cuts are being imposed, special operations forces will receive a six percent increase in their funding, indicating the Pentagon’s belief that future engagements are more likely to be short-term, small unit actions in which there will be no intent to keep boots on the ground after the job is done.

    Conservative elements within the military’s intelligentsia are warning against this increased reliance on new technologies and small unit tactics. Major General H.R. McMaster, one of the Pentagon’s top theorists, does not think the new technologies or the special operations commands will revolutionize warfare, saying, “We need the ability to provide the kind of deterrence a large army provides.”

    The question, for both military and civilian leadership, is, “How much is too much, and how little is not enough?” Total U.S. military spending in 2012 was $682 billion, more than the next ten nations on the military expenditures list.

    China has increased defense spending, going from $17 billion in 2006 to $166 billion in 2012, a warning sign for U.S. planners. As things stand right now, China has 2.2 million active military personnel. The U.S. has 1.43 million.

    No one wants to claim credit for the sequester deal.

    It was first suggested by the Obama administration as a “poison pill” to stimulate rational budget discussions. When faced with the choice between behaving rationally, or continuing to pursue unworkable budget solutions, Congress decided to take the red pill after all, and sequestration went into effect. Since then, the Obama administration has repeatedly offered budgets that exceed the spending caps imposed by sequestration, and Congress has repeatedly failed to come up with a budget solution that would lift sequestration.

    Budget cuts are posing serious problems for military planners who do not want to fight the next war with the last war’s strategy and equipment but, if something is not done soon, they may have to do just that.

    By Alan M. Milner
    Sources:
    Association of the United States Army
    Financial Times
    Reuters
    National Priorities Project

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    添ou Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won稚 accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we値l keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We値l so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you値l
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •