Pentagon faces budget pressure through 2028, resulting in dramatic cuts in weapons programs

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

stbretnco 11/19/2009 10:14:57 AM

Did you even read the article?

Quote Reply

SlowMan 11/19/2009 10:20:54 AM

@ stbretnco

> Did you even read the article?

?The picture is not a pretty one,? Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.), the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said in his opening statement Wednesday at a hearing on future defense budgets.

Ranking member Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) raised alarm over a ?dramatic decline? in funding for weapons systems — from 35 percent of the overall defense budget in fiscal 2010 to 24 percent in 2020.

Well, it appears that I have, while you haven't. So please do read up and take a moment to think before replying.

Quote Reply

stbretnco 11/19/2009 10:24:18 AM

Keep reading, slow one, it points out the F-35 as a model project, commenting that the streamlining of aircraft procurement into two models (F/A-18 and F-35) should be a model for the Pentagon as a whole.

Quote Reply

SlowMan 11/19/2009 10:39:34 AM

@ stbretnco

> Keep reading, slow one,

You keep reading again.

> it points out the F-35 as a model project, commenting that the streamlining of aircraft procurement into two models (F/A-18 and F-35) should be a model for the Pentagon as a whole.

They were commenting on Pentagon strategy of narrowing weapons models to save money, not F-35 as a model project. F-35 is one of biggest weapons program disasters in history, the only reason it's alive is because Pentagon has no alternatives and because of its obligations to partner nations.

The fact is, weapons procurement budget will drop by 1/3rd by 2020, and F-35 procurement cut is inevitable, especially when its cost is spiraling out of control.

This is in the fact of massive Chinese arms build-up, including hundreds of J-XXs to dominate over F-35 in the pacific.

Quote Reply

stbretnco 11/19/2009 10:44:35 AM

It's only a disaster in your myopic point of view.

You blather on about how Chinese fighters that aren't even in prototype form yet are going to wipe the F-35 out of the sky, nefarious Japanese plans to start a war with Korea, your credibility is about equal to Bagdhad Bob.

Quote Reply

Lynstyne 11/19/2009 11:23:42 AM

It's only a disaster in your myopic point of view.

I allways felt Comical Ali was a better nickname for him than Baghdad Bob.

However you comparison of him to slowman was certainly apt, other posters would also qualify.

Quote Reply

sentinel28a 11/19/2009 4:16:13 PM

For example, the Defense Department has narrowed production of tactical fighter aircraft to two jets — various versions of the Boeing F/A-18 Navy-Marine fighter and of the multiservice, multinational Lockheed F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. In shipbuilding, the effect of recent decisions may be to allow fairly long and relatively large production runs of DDG-51 destroyers, the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS); of new ships based on the LPD-17 amphibious ship; and of Virginia-class submarines, according to Daggett. The termination of the Transformational Communications Satellite (TSAT) program will spur reliance on improved designs of existing technologies.

That is the only mention of the F-35 in the entire article. Note that it does not imply in any fashion that the F-35 will be cut; in fact the article clearly states that the cost of new weapons technology will cause defense budgets to rise, and older fighters cost more to maintain. The "narrowing of production" clearly favors the F-18E/F and the F-35, at the expense of the F-22 and probably the Light Cargo Aircraft (LCA) requirement as well.

There may indeed be cuts in the F-35 program, but the article doesn't suggest that, Slow. That was your own addition. You might be right, but this article doesn't support your claim.

On a related note, I notice that the Democrats are suddenly hot to cut down on defense spending, while they're trying to shove Obamacare through, which will cost far more than the defense systems we'll need to defend ourselves. I guess the Dems think that our wonderful new medical care policy will keep the US' enemies away by the sheer amount of armor-like paperwork it will generate.

Quote Reply

ambush 11/19/2009 7:35:36 PM

The irony is that defense spending is better at saving and creating real jobs than that stupid $780 billion stimulus program.

Quote Reply

Beazz 11/19/2009 7:56:15 PM

@ stbretnco

> Did you even read the article?

Well, it appears that I have, while you haven't. So please do read up and take a moment to think before replying.

Well it appears the author of that article is simply pulling a sentence here and a sentence there from whatever and whoever he needs to say whatever he wants. Here is Ike Skeltons full opening remarks and I simply do not see where you get the sky is about to fall? Appears to be business as usual in the world of big time defense budgets. Something you would have no clue about.

Beazz

House Armed Services Committee

Ike Skelton, Chairman http://armedservices.house.gov

For Immediate Release: November 18, 2009 Contact: Lara Battles or Jennifer Kohl

202-225-2539

Opening Statement of Chairman Ike Skelton

Hearing on Resourcing the National Defense Strategy:

Implications of Long Term Defense Budget Trends

Washington, D.C. ? House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) delivered the following opening statement during today?s hearing on Resourcing the National Defense Strategy: Implications of Long Term Defense Budget Trends.

?Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to today?s hearing on Resourcing the National Defense Strategy: Implications of Long Term Defense Budget Trends. In the first week of February 2010, the Department of Defense will deliver two critical documents to this committee. One is the Quadrennial Defense Review, which will outline the national defense strategy and some of the major policy changes required to implement it. The second will be the President?s budget request for fiscal year 2011, the first true budget of the Obama Administration and one of the primary mechanisms for adopting the QDR?s recommendations. These documents, along with the two ongoing wars, are likely to dominate the discussions of this committee next year.

Quote Reply