America's military can handle anything ... except a budget cut

[xchrom]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/20/us-military-budget-cuts-not-doomsday


Members of the U.S. military retire its ceremonial flags signifying the end of their presence in Iraq at the Baghdad Diplomatic Support Center in Baghdad December 15, 2011

On 1 March, the most dreaded word in Washington will become a fiscal reality – sequestration. Just those four syllables are enough to send chills up the spine. The across-the-board spending cuts will impact a host of federal agencies, but especially the Defense Department. It will become the law of the land, plunging the nation into a bleak, dystopian future in which (possibly) the rivers will boil over, locusts will consume the nation's agricultural bounty, and cats will sleep with dogs. America will almost overnight be reduced to a second-rate power, quickly to be overrun by hordes of foreign insurgents empowered by America's retreat from the global stage.

Obviously, I am exaggerating. But only sort of. If you listen to American's military leaders talk about the impact of sequestration, you might be convinced that, in fact, the sky is falling.

According to the nation's highest-ranking soldier, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Martin Dempsey (pdf), sequestration will "put the nation at greater risk of coercion". This is actually tame when compared to Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta's prediction that sequestration would "invite aggression". His deputy, Ashton Carter calls sequestration and the possibility of a year-long continuing resolution to fund military operation as "twin evils" (pdf). In the words of Chuck Hagel, the man likely to replace Panetta, the spending reductions would "devastate" the military.

The uniformed military is no less ominous in its warnings. Admiral Jonathan Greenert, head of US Naval Operations, says the cuts will "dramatically reduce: (pdf) our overseas presence; our ability to respond to crises; our efforts to counter terrorism and illicit trafficking" and "may irreversibly damage the military industrial base". General James Amos, Commandant of the Marin Corps goes even further (pdf), in warning that a failure to properly resource the military will put the "continued prosperity and security interests" of the United States at risk.

[Scuba]

1. "... irreversibly damage the military industrial base"? I'm down with that.

[gtar100]

2. Our military leaders love America to death.

I mean, they love to defend America but couldn't give a rat's ass about the people in it. I only say that because of their willingness to bleed the country dry before they are willing to consider cutting their own costs. So it's not really America they love, just the gravy train that it provides.

[dixiegrrrrl]

3. "America's military can handle anything ... except "

Not to mention:

anyone but straight white men joining
&
the threat of peace

[TwilightGardener]

4. I actually don't think the sequester is desirable, either. I do believe the DoD budget needs to

be cut, but the department and its duties and missions are so immense it would have to be difficult to have these cuts take place all at once, suddenly.