Idea for cutting the defense budget...

[TheMightyFavog]

Disband all Marine Corps fixed wing aviation squadrons. This is nothing more than a gross duplication of services and a waste of money. The Marine Corps can rely on the Navy to handle the air support missions. Current USMC pilots would be either allowed to retire early or transfer to the Navy or Air Force.

[Arctic Dave]

1. Disband military bands.

Stop military advertising.

Stop flyovers at games.

[Sherman A1]

6. I would keep the bands & flyovers

I believe they are far better uses of resources than two unnecessary wars. There are lots of places that can be cut once the troops return home.

[Arctic Dave]

8. Cut them and stop the wars.

Let them join another band and the fighter pilots can learn crop dusting.

[Booster]

2. I admit to being really dumb on this subject, but why couldn't

the Air Force handle the air support missions of both the Marines and the Navy Corps?

[Booster]

3. And speaking of saving money: why do fire departments send

out a full crew AND the firetruck when they go grocery shopping? I understand that there may be a fire while they're shopping, but I heard that it costs thousands of dollars to send the truck out even to the store. Why can't they send one guy in a car and if there's a fire they can tell him where it is and he can go directly there - where the rest will already be. For some reason this has always bugged me.

[Tesha]

7. How do you figure it "costs thousands"?

It costs the diesel fuel used to run the truck and
a few miles worth of maintenance. The crew is paid
the same whether they're sitting at the station or
at the local supermarket. And frankly, I'd just as
soon that my local Fire Department starts the truck
every day just so we know it'll start when it's
really needed.

Plus, "showing the flag" never hurts, either. Kids
and parents (taxpayers) get a kick out of meeting
the fire companies.

Tesha

[Booster]

11. I read it somewhere but can't find it now. I think the person who

said it was taking into consideration insurance on the truck, crew, etc. I've forgotten exactly what he based the cost on but when I read it it sounding logical. Also, stores now deliver groceries so it really doesn't make sense for all of them to pile in the truck and go shopping.

[Tesha]

12. I'm familiar with my city's budget.

Most of the costs associated with maintaining the
Fire Department are "fixed costs" based on the
staffing, facilities, and equipment levels established
for the fiscal year; there are relatively few "variable"
costs and whether or not the company drives the
fire truck to the grocery store doesn't really affect
those variable costs.

I'm sorry, but you were misinformed.

Tesha

[Booster]

13. Thanks for clearing that up. Now when I see a firetruck at a

grocery store I won't even think about it. Maybe the guys & girls from the FD need a little outing.

[Tesha]

15. I'm sorry you feel the need to respond with snide remarks.

A few facts (other than "I heard that...") would generally be
a much better approach.

Tesha

[Booster]

23. I don't know how you got a snide remark out of my response.

It certainly wasn't meant that way.

[Tesha]

24. Okay -- thanks! (NT)

[Kennah]

9. Kid on a bike with a trailer could deliver

[Hangingon]

4. Marines are experts at CAS.

[JHB]

14. Right. Some specialization is necessary.

A better option would be designs that aren't platinum-plated to be expensive as possible.

[jmowreader]

16. The Air Force doesn't do carrier-based aviation

Also, there's the fear (which is rightly put) that the Air Force will screw the Navy when it comes to allocating resources.

The Navy supplying Marine air support would be good, though; the jarheads would squeal, but we're at the point where there's not enough money to run three air forces.

[MicaelS]

19. Air Force doesn't like close air support anymore

It's not "sexy". Sexy is fast movers. In other words, supersonic fighter jets, and heavy bombers flying at 30,000+ feet. That way the Air Force can fly above all the poor bloody infantry on the ground, and they don't have to worry about getting killed by some grunt carrying a rifle like the way Red Baron was killed. They can only truly prove their manhood by dicing with death ONLY with other pilots.

The AF does not have a plan to replace the A-10 Thunderbolt (Warthog) tank buster / ground support which it stopped buying 26 years ago. There are only 325 Warthogs still on duty, fewer than half of the 715 originally purchased.

Truthfully, all the AF wants is F-22s, F-35s, a new tanker for in flight refueling, and a new bomber to replace the B-2.

[hack89]

21. Flying off carriers requires unique skills and training. nt

[madinmaryland]

5. We have 20,000 + nuclear warheads and are "modernizing" our stockpile. Wouldn't that

be a good place to start?

[sudopod]

17. It only takes 30 to murder most life on earth with an extended nuclear winter.

There's some fat we can cut there.

[MicaelS]

22. 5,113 warheads and it will go lower...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_the_United_States

As of September 2009 it possessed 5,113 warheads operationally deployed, in active reserve, or held in inactive storage. This figure compares to a peak of 31,225 total warheads in 1967 and 22,217 in 1989, and does not include "several thousand" warheads that have been retired and scheduled for dismantlement.

In 2009 and 2010, the administration of Barack Obama declared policies that would invalidate the Bush-era policy for use of nuclear weapons and its motions to develop new ones. First, in a prominent 2009 speech, U.S. president Barack Obama outlined a goal of "a world without nuclear weapons".To that goal, U.S. President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed a new START treaty on April 8, 2010 to reduce the number of active nuclear weapons from 2,200 to 1,550.

That same week Obama also revised U.S. policy on the use of nuclear weapons in a Nuclear Posture Review required of all presidents, declaring for the first time that the U.S. would not use nuclear weapons against nonnuclear, NPT-compliant states. The policy also renounces development of any new nuclear weapons

[Kennah]

10. What if ...

... Congress allocated a fixed budget for each branch, whatever the dollar amount may be.

The Chairman and the Joint Chiefs, the Secretary of Defense, and The President would then decide how to spend the money? I daresay a general who knows he has X dollars to work with would know best how to divide up that money so that the service could still achieve it's mission.

Congressional pet projects from the Military Industrial Congressional Think-Tank complex would be severely curtailed.

"Plane A is better than Plane B, but Congressman Fuckhead's district produces Plane B, so I get a shitload of those."

[sudopod]

18. That's how they force NASA to do it. nt

[MicaelS]

20. I'd go further than that...

I'd disband the Marine Corps, or else fold it into the Army. Truman was right.