Gates Announces US Defence Cuts

#1
DOD Announces $150 Billion Reinvestment from Efficiencies Savings

Terminates one disasterous programme (EFV), 2 unnecessary programmes (SLAMRAAM, NLOS), resrtructures F35 (again) and chops lots of staff and admin jobs but not platforms or frontline troops. In return, the services get:

A new strategic bomber (again)
More SuperBugs
More MC12
More Reapers
New amtrack
More ships (various kinds)
More EELV

On top of which the US Army gets to keep the exta 22,000 troops it recruited recently to combat 'overstretch' until 2013.

Why can't the MoD here do 'cuts' like this?
 
#2
Why can't the MoD here do 'cuts' like this?
Simple


USA Defence budget as % GDP : 4.7%

UK Defence budget as % GDP : 2.2%

USA GDP : $14.6 Trillion

UK GDP : $2.25 Trillion


Finding savings of $30 Billion a year out of a $663 Billion budget is hardly a tough call.
 
#3
And because the line:

Most of the resulting savings will be used by the Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force to invest in high priority programs that strengthen warfighting capabilities.
If applied in a UK context would read:

Most of the resulting savings will be used to invest in high priority programmes that strengthen the NHS, fail to stop teenage pregnancy, and various other schemes which send the Daily Mail in paroxsysms of anger.
 
#4
On top of which the US Army gets to keep the exta 22,000 troops it recruited recently to combat 'overstretch' until 2013.
But...
WASHINGTON, Jan. 6, 2011 – Budget pressures that have proven greater than anticipated mean the Defense Department will trim end strength in its ground forces beginning in four years, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said today.

“Under this plan, the U.S. Army's permanent active-duty end strength would decline by 27,000 troops, while the Marine Corps would decline by somewhere between [15,000] and 20,000, depending on the outcome of their force structure review,” Gates said.

The secretary and Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, spoke to reporters at the Pentagon on the results of defense efficiencies initiatives begun in May to trim support costs and ensure funding for military modernization.

“The projected reductions are based on an assumption that America's ground combat commitment in Afghanistan would be significantly reduced by the end of 2014, in accordance with the president's strategy,” Gates said. The Army also will lose the 22,000 troops it added in a temporary end-strength increase approved in July 2009, he added.

Defense.gov News Article: DOD Directs Army, Marine Drawdowns for 2015, 2016

Why can't the MoD here do 'cuts' like this?
You think the MoD budget should be cut by $150 billion so that less than half can be given back! ;)
 
#5
Correction.

If applied in a UK context would read:

Most of the resulting savings will be used to invest in high priority programmes that strengthen the NHS, fail to stop teenage pregnancy, and various other schemes which send the Daily Mail in paroxsysms of anger.
If applied in a UK context would read:

Most of the resulting savings will be used to pay for Project CVF, A400M and the FSTA PFI.
 
#6
If applied in a UK context would read:


Most of the resulting savings will be used to pay for Project CVF, A400M and the FSTA PFI.
Ding! Ding! We have a winner Gentlemen!
 
#7
Now, your starters for 10.

How much is the projected overspend on Project CVF, A400M and the FSTA PFI in £ or $ Billions?

You may confer…
 
#8
Now, your starters for 10.

How much is the projected overspend on Project CVF, A400M and the FSTA PFI in £ or $ Billions?

You may confer…
Define 'overspend'.
 

rampant

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#9
Now, your starters for 10.

How much is the projected overspend on Project CVF, A400M and the FSTA PFI in £ or $ Billions?

You may confer…
I'm going with Lots and my second answer Waaaay too much.

Next question, whose fault is it? (Full marks if you name all the guilty parties)
 
#10
Define 'overspend'.
Original estimate vs actual cost including backhanders to manufacturers that can't actually deliver what they promised.
 
#11
This should not be mistaken for the deficit hawk zealotry of Gorgeous George recklessly axing MBTs etc, there's a bit of a shell game going on, delaying some F-35s for instance is very different from axing the program, it is certain to make them cost a great deal more. Read somewhere the Gate's "defense cut" amounts to an increase in spend of about 1%. The Pentagon's stealth socialism sausage factory rolls on keeping slightly ahead of inflation. This while DC continues running two questionable multi-trillion dollar wars off books.

This isn't even where most of the tax dollars go. US health spend rose a whooping 4% in 2009, the providers are now swallowing 17.6% of the US GDP. The ineffectual half measures of Barrycare are aren't even going to slow that rising and the GOP looks set to target the few bits of that crock that might save money.

The Fed's lavish QE continues pumping into the economy and the reality is they've got unemployment levels similar to banker buggered Ireland. Barry's latest "triumph" in extending the ruinous Bush tax cuts is just another nail in the coffin of a great country.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top