Pentagon cutting jobs, maintenance due to budget fears: official

Comments (8)
paintcan wrote:

Cutting “maintenance” is the way massive bureaucracies with tons of overhead costs in the form of retired generals and numerous lower ranking officers, can make sure the expensive hardware rots and has to be replaced in the not too distant future at even more enormous costs.

The only thing real in a bureaucracy is the money. Everything and possibly everyone else is expendable (at least a variable). It is also a good way for the military to drain resources for ages and possibly never fire a shot, except that they have to be able to engage in real time battles or the command structure start to loose credibility.

If there wasn’t another true word or attitude preserved in the Federalist Papers it is the belief stated: that a standing military is hard on the a nation’s citizen’s liberties and is certainly hard on their treasuries.

It also demands to be used regularly like a dog needs regular “walkies”.

Jan 25, 2013 1:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Burns0011 wrote:

Idiocy. Cut new programs, not maintenance. Maintenance is VITAL.

Jan 25, 2013 2:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AZWarrior wrote:

Wow Paintcan, that is a little over the top I think. Our military has it’s faults as I can atest as a former Air Force Squadron Commander, but I always found that our folks gave the best value to the nation that they could. Now, we can have all kinds of discussion about tge cost of cutting edge (often bleeding edge) technology, but I for one sure don’t want to go back to fighting the nation’s battles by throwing the lives of your fellow countrymen at the enemy because we didn’t have the best weapons feasible to use. Maybe rather than not only blaming the military for costing so much, we should also look at our civilian political leadership and the battles you send us to do.

Jan 25, 2013 2:14pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@AZWarrior

I prefer that we close the vast majority of our overseas bases and bring our troops home. Aside from our responsibility to defend Japan, our other allies need to start pulling their own weight. We don’t need bases all over Europe, Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. I am convinced we can have a top rate military, and better defend ourselves at half the cost if we are not strung out all over the world.

Jan 25, 2013 4:31pm EST  --  Report as abuse
poggy wrote:

It is about time! The pentagon runs the largest corporate welfare program in the world. The wasteful and gargantuan budget should be slashed in half, to begin with…

Jan 25, 2013 6:10pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Vuenbelvue wrote:

The local newspaper that serves the Ft Campbell, Kentucky area, Clarksville Leaf Chronicle, printed a article that about 8,200 civilians work on the Post that has approximately 31,500 active duty soldiers. That is a 1 in 4 ratio.
The military does not really need any active duty units in the USA since there are a stated 4,000,000 NRA members who would gladly claim militia status to protect the Home Land and maybe 90,000,000 other gun owners to call up.

Jan 25, 2013 7:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
fromthecenter wrote:

how about cutting all ties with haliburton and have the soldiers cook the food and pump the gas? I’m pretty sure that would be alot cheaper.

Jan 25, 2013 9:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
fromthecenter wrote:

@theNewWorld – I totally agree with you!

Jan 25, 2013 9:27pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.