Carrier and jets to go in Bush defence cutbacks

#1
Beginning to feel the pinch?

Be nice if Crab Air had this many planes to cut back?!

Carrier and jets to go in Bush defence cutbacks
By Alec Russell in Washington
(Filed: 31/12/2004)

America will retire one of its aircraft carriers and scale back plans to build a new generation of fighter jets as part of its first cuts in military spending since the September 11 attacks, it was reported yesterday.

The Pentagon budget has mushroomed in the past three years, increasing by more than a third to about $420 billion (£220 billion) this year. Much of the money is funding the deployment of 150,000 troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, said to be costing America about $5 billion a month.


Grounded: 100 F/A 22 Raptors are to be cut

But President George W Bush is now under mounting pressure on Capitol Hill to rein in the budget deficit that surged in his first term, contributing to the dramatic decline of the dollar. Many Republicans believe he is abandoning the party's tradition of fiscal discipline.

The White House is reported to have asked all branches of the federal government to prune spending requests for the 2006 fiscal year which will be presented to Congress early next year.

According to the New York Times, the Pentagon has proposed a $60 billion cut in spending over the next six years.

The most high-profile victim would be the navy, although Pentagon officials stressed that all the services would be affected.

If Congress approves the economies, the aircraft carrier John F Kennedy would be taken out of service next year, the newspaper said. It is one of the oldest of the 12 carriers, first saw service in 1968 and recently completed a mission in the Gulf.

Plans for a new destroyer may be delayed and there is also a proposal to reduce expenditure on a new amphibious landing ship for the marines. The navy had planned to buy five LPD-17 San Antonio-class vessels for more than $1 billion each.

The air force's F/A22 Raptor fighter would begin to lose funding after 2008. This would mean 160 to 170 would be built, rather than the 277 the service had hoped for.

The army will win in the spending review. While other services are being trimmed, the army is planning to increase its strength by up to about a dozen brigades over the next few years.

"It doesn't matter if you can win a war 20 years from now if we lose the global war on terror next year," the Times quoted one US military official as saying.

Eric Ruff, a Pentagon spokesman, refused to comment on specific cuts, adding that nothing was definite until the budget was submitted in February.

But he fuelled speculation that some of the older high-technology weapons systems were under threat in the countdown to next year's four yearly defence review.

The defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, has long regarded them as costly relics of the Cold War.

Mr Ruff said all services were considering their priorities and how best to focus on agility, flexibility and speed. These were three of the watchwords of Mr Rumsfeld's desired "transformed" defence force.
 
#2
Wow. Had to happen though.

Bush sort of reminds me of Homer Simpson in the episode were he became waste disposal chief of Springfield and went totally OTT on spending. Until the reality of it all came slamming home and he had bankrupted the city.

It is of course the only comparison I have with GWB and Homer!

said to be costing America about $5 billion a month.
Kin 'ell! Not even Dr Evil could sustain that!! How the feck can your average yank accept that sort drain? War against Terror and all that but thats just taking the urine. I suppose only when Joe American starts to pay serious levels of tax, high burger prices and a tank of gas that costs more than a small third world economy will he actually realise that some things aint worth it. Welcome to the real world, USA.
 
#6
I doubt the RN has enough sailors to staff a Nimitz class carrier [crew-3200/air group-2480]. But it would make more sense than to build the new carrier.

Now, as to the so called cuts. One carrier is to be retired. At least one new class of carrier is in the works. If you notice any time "cuts" in out year's these are really not cuts at all. Defense spending is one way for Congress to bring home the bacon [jobs] for their constituents. The military aware of this fact insure that sub contractors come from as many congressional districts as possible. One year the USAF decided to buy F-15's and B-2's but didnt have enough money in the budget for C-17's so Congress allocated extra money for more C-17's. Some weapons programs may get cut entirely. The Army FCS program is supposed to provide wheeled armored vehicles that have the same protection as current Bradley's and Abram's all on a 20 ton chasis. Iraq has been a wake up call for DoD. Armor technology has yet to provide that type of armor capability. Frankly I dont think its possible. So the FCS program may see "cuts" with money shifted to upgrade programs for the Bradley and M1A2. I really think more money will be spent. Some people advocate a $500-600 billion defense budget to fully fund USN and USAF procurement and a 600,000 man Army.

So don't shed any tears for DoD because it is truely an alice in wonderland world where budget cuts really arent cuts. If you see 100,000 troops phased out - now thats a cut. The USAF and USN are seeing very modest manpower cuts to pay for ships. The Navy is also reducing crews on its warships and have begun a test program where replacement crews are flown to say Oz to meet up with its ship. The outgoing crew gets on the plane for a return flight to the US. The ship can stay near its station without having to transit back to CONUS. Also the USN is working on surging forces rather than having half its carriers at sea. We saw that during the summer naval exercises in the Pacific where we surged 7 battle groups.
 
#8
FNUSNU said:
After all we've for them I think they should give us the carrier they want rid of to save us some cash!
It'd probably end up like that sub we sold to the Canadians. Get it half way across the pond and it'd start sinking :D
 

Mr Happy

LE
Moderator
#11
48 leaner meaner brigades than 36 with so many chef's in the kitchen I hope!

The reality of US war machine is that it can and will beat anyone, the navy is seriously over powered and the army could do with some of that money. Like wise the USMC should be rolled into the Army and not exists as a 4th service (and ultimately the Navy and USAF should become one as well, for the UK too but that's a seperate thread).

Lastly, I loved the quote "what use is it if we lose the war on terrorism tomorrow" - like that's likely!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: Which terrorist group is going to invade the US and make all it's citizens slaves or dead? I mean, can somebody even explain how the US could lose a war on terror?
 
#13
tomahawk6 said:
I doubt the RN has enough sailors to staff a Nimitz class carrier [crew-3200/air group-2480]. But it would make more sense than to build the new carrier.
The JFK is not a Nimitz class carier, but the manning is still around the same. Having said that, it could give the RN a measure of prestige to once again have a REAL carrier - if you only had planes to put on it. Do you have any F-4's left, you could use some of them. :D We're retiring the F-14's soon, too. Maybe some of them would sweeten the deal.

To take it a step further, it would be on par with the RN giving the Canadians four defunct diesel subs. A few years ago, the material readiness condition of the JFK was sufficient to take it out of service for six months to a year and have the captain relieved.

Cutting the F-22 is just another nail in the coffin of that program. This system has been in the works for the better part of 10 years and still is not in active production much less in a operational squadron.
 
#14
FNUSNU said:
After all we've for them I think they should give us the carrier they want rid of to save us some cash!
The yanks gave us some ships a few years back, in return Churchill gave them a 99 year lease on UK bases.
 
#15
Maybe we should loan\lease some of theier stuff, it might work properly for a start.
 

Mr Happy

LE
Moderator
#16
If the yanks were kind enough to chuck us some of their cast-off's, would we be able to run it? When it came time to decommission it could we afford it? Would we have to completely reorganise the Navy ORBAT to take it on, and then again when we decommission it?

Is it nuclear powered, beware all those CND Greenpeace Ministers..
 

Goatman

ADC
Book Reviewer
#17
bubblehead said:
tomahawk6 said:
I doubt the RN has enough sailors to staff a Nimitz class carrier [crew-3200/air group-2480]. But it would make more sense than to build the new carrier.
We're retiring the F-14's soon, too. Maybe some of them would sweeten the deal.

....tell you what...why not give them to the Iranians, the only OTHER global operator of F-14 ?

Then again, you wouldn't want to even things up too much now would you....

U.S. Jets Buzz Iran Airspace

Warplanes said to spy nuke sites, test defenses

January 3, 2005
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

WASHINGTON – U.S. military warplanes flew over Iranian air space, raising Tehran's concerns preparations are being made to knock out its nuclear facilities, according to Iranian news media reports.

The U.S. jets reportedly flew out of bases in Afghanistan and Iraq, with the latest coming Saturday when a fighter buzzed at low altitude an area in the northeastern province of Khorrasan, which borders Afghanistan.

Other reports of overflights cited intrusions by F-16 and F-18 fighters over the southwestern province of Khuzestan, which borders southern Iraq. Papers said the planes appeared to be spying on nuclear sites.

The U.S. military was silent on the veracity of the reports. However, one source said he would not be surprised if the reports were accurate, given the building international tensions over the state of Iran's nuclear weapons program. "The circular maneuvering of the two American fighters indicated them as carrying out spying sorties and controlling the borders," said an Iranian official.

Less than a week earlier, Iranian air force chief Brig. Karim Qavami was quoted as having ordered his forces to open fire and shoot down any unidentified aircraft violating the country's airspace.

"Given that the intrusion of enemy aircraft over Iran's airspace is possible, all fighter jets of the country have been ordered by the army chief to shoot them down in the event of sighting them," he said.

In August, five U.S. warplanes entered Iranian airspace from the southwestern Shalamcheh border and overflew Khorramshahr. Iranian military specialists believe the intrusions are designed to assess the capabilities of Iran's anti-aircraft defenses.

Army chief Gen. Mohammad Salimi also said the Iranian air force has been ordered to defend the country`s nuclear sites in the event of an attack.

"The air force has been ordered to protect the nuclear sites, using all its power," the daily Iran quoted Salimi as saying, adding the air force had temporarily suspended all its maneuvers to focus its capabilities on patrolling the skies over Iran.

Such statements have raised the stakes in a war of words amid foreign press speculation about possible Israeli and American attack on Iran`s nuclear facilities. Iranian military commanders have warned of grave consequences if any such attack takes place.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/a...RTICLE_ID=42225


-------------------ends----------------------------

<< Aux armes - Les Americains! >>

Le Chevre
 
#18
you could always give them a few nukes :lol: . upset israel and upset
the iranians hard liners hardly go around preaching about the great satan if they just been given a bunch of nukes as a suprise chrissy present . And also when you invade at least you would find some wmds :lol:
 

Mr Happy

LE
Moderator
#19
woody said:
you could always give them a few nukes :lol: . upset israel and upset
the iranians hard liners hardly go around preaching about the great satan if they just been given a bunch of nukes as a suprise chrissy present . And also when you invade at least you would find some wmds :lol:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads