Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel is planning to cut the U.S. Army to its smallest force since before World War II and eliminate an entire class of Air Force attack jets, the New York Times reports. The moves are part of a new spending proposal that officials say is the first Pentagon budget to push the military off the war footing adopted after the terrorist attacks of 2001. The officials argue the military will be able to defeat any adversary, but would be too small for long foreign occupations. The plan will be released Monday. SOURCE: The Health-Law Rollout.
It is about time I had something to celebrate about the Obama presidency. We don’t need to spend forty times as much as any other country in the world. We don’t need to be the policemen of the world. Let’s share that burden before it bankrupts us.
3 thoughts on “Hagel plans to shrink Army to pre-World War II level”
This was announced several months ago. We were well on our way before 9/11. Rumsfield eliminated most posts in Europe (finally!) We need out of Korea.
We are getting rid of close combat vehicles and moving to drones. Wouldn’t want to see who you are killing.
Ethnic cleansing continues to happen, but we don’t feel we need to step in anymore. I get it.
We do have a large command in Africa though…lots of great minerals in certain countries.
And why do we continue to be Saudi Arabia’s mercenaries?
Oh yes, the army is there to protect the interests of the US.
This is not a pacifist move.
I can’t quite see how so many people are fooled into supporting quantity over quality, and view these cutbacks as a threat to America’s ability to defend itself. Japan has an extremely limited military size, yet their navy is so well-trained and well-equipped that even the Chinese are afraid to go to war with them.
Our global empire is enormous–to this day we have some 50,000 troops stationed in Germany, leftover from WWII, as well as over 10,000 each in the UK, South Korea, and Japan. How are they going to help defend America’s borders?
Bush had the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, and Obama has the military downsizing. I suppose even the bad presidents have at least one good deed on their record.
Thanks for the comments. Since we, 5% of the world’s population, spend more on our military than the rest of the world combined it should be no surprise that when there is ethnic cleansing and other atrocities occur anywhere in the world that all the neighboring countries wait for us to charge in. When we eventually get our spending in line with everyone else I think things like that will be considered shared responsibilities.
I like the trends that you two point out. We are starting to understand that to maintain our Goliath military will, like the Roman Empire, eventually bankrupt us. Let’s let the other 95% share the burden of being the moralists of the world. It is rather pompous of us to think that we are the only ones capable of that chore.