General Discussion

bike man

(620 posts)

14. Cutting that part of the 'infrastructure' located in other countries (700+ sites

Thu Jul 11, 2013, 07:27 AM

Jul 2013

of various size and manpower), bringing home all the military personnel and families at those sites would be an immediate savings.

No longer having lease payments on those sites, another savings. No salaries for civilian contract workers at those sites, another.

Disperse all the military personnel and families among the bases in the US would be a positive financial impact on the local enonomies affected.

Gradually reduce the overall size of the military via normal attrition as enlistments expire combined with less vigorous recruiting efforts.

Have the Department of Defense become the Department of DEFENSE rather than Police Force to the World.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

32 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Hagel: Cutting $52 billion from Pentagon next year would would have "severe*& unacceptable effects" [View all] Catherina Jul 2013 OP

I'm willing to take that risk. Gravitycollapse Jul 2013 #1

Me too.............nt Enthusiast Jul 2013 #12

me three.. DCBob Jul 2013 #15

If Hagel says $50Billion then cut it at least $100Billion byeya Jul 2013 #22

But I thought he was the Republican that was going to make cuts possible! Bonobo Jul 2013 #2

Yeah what happened to that? avaistheone1 Jul 2013 #5

The WAR Machine SamKnause Jul 2013 #3

No, that's the severe and unacceptable effect of a Democrat seating a Republican in the cabinet. pa28 Jul 2013 #4

Like maybe the "severe" and "unacceptable" effects of using that money area51 Jul 2013 #6

Such a tool. Nominated to uphold the status quo. Democracyinkind Jul 2013 #7

They could save billions if they stopped violating the 4th amendment Cronus Protagonist Jul 2013 #8

Exactly how many billion dollar ultimate weapon programs have they reduced trimmed or eliminated? Ford_Prefect Jul 2013 #9

I have a better plan than cutting $52 Billion Sherman A1 Jul 2013 #10

You know what they won't cut? The multibillion dollar corporate welfare Egalitarian Thug Jul 2013 #11

Does that mean we'll stop constructing headquarters buildings we won't use? Savannahmann Jul 2013 #13

Cutting that part of the 'infrastructure' located in other countries (700+ sites bike man Jul 2013 #14

Please let this be the end of the chess messiah bullshit. TheKentuckian Jul 2013 #16

It didn't take long to disprove that theory, did it? kentuck Jul 2013 #17

I'm sure lots. I'd already seen that play in the first term and it turned out to be bull TheKentuckian Jul 2013 #31

Considering the Army found 900M reflection Jul 2013 #18

Of course it would, Catherina! Cutting one thin dime, would immeasurably damage cali Jul 2013 #19

Well there ya go. Autumn Jul 2013 #20

The cuts the Pentagon has already made so far means that... Hubert Flottz Jul 2013 #21

Yeah, to people like General Dynamics, Lockheed, General Electric, Halliburton. hobbit709 Jul 2013 #23

Looks like the military is a huge welfare program burnodo Jul 2013 #24

Maybe they should persue peace then. Coyotl Jul 2013 #25

Oooh! Bite your tongue. Some things are sacred. byeya Jul 2013 #27

Hagel is saying the Bush tax cuts are having "severe and unacceptable effects" Coyotl Jul 2013 #28

Cutting food stamps and Social Security and doubling student loan interest rates will also cause djean111 Jul 2013 #26

They should cut ten times the amount! Roll back the empire of corporations on point Jul 2013 #29

If DOD cannot absorb the $52 billion cut, wonder where those cuts will come from? indepat Jul 2013 #30

Tell me again why Hagel was the "good Republican" we could "accept"? WinkyDink Jul 2013 #32