| I was reading the article in the CS section today about the state of disrepair that our training facilities are falling into; they said it was due to cannibalizing maintenance budgets during the Clinton years. However, aren't most of the equipment-related shortcomings (R&D, procurement, and maintenance) all due to rising personnel costs (both recruitment & retention)? Isn't a US soldier paid better than pretty much any other worldwide counterpart?
Maybe I'm just starting to get inured to "shortfalls" in the military budget; from all the different things I hear about underfunded programs, from the F-22 and F-35 to the Osprey to NMD and THAAD (most of which have simply grown in cost more than they've shrunk in funding), you'd swear we were defended by kids with sticks and stones training in a public park instead of the most formidable military in world history.
All that being said, I'm definitely in favor of upping the budget again if need be to keep training facilities (assuming that they're modern enough to be worth keeping, not beyond repair) in tip-top shape. Americans are not genetically any better fighters than anyone else, and a well-trained military is just as important as a high-tech one, if not more.
--Phoenix Rising |