and fight his own war with the muzzies.
On Jan 11, 10:43 am, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> *http://tinyurl.com/7a9vfm6*
>
> * *
>
> *Top Five Defense Moves for 2012
> <http://www.rightsidenews.info/2012011015351/us/homeland-security/top-...>
> *
>
> Tuesday, 10 January 2012 06:17 James Jay Carafano, Ph.D. ****
>
> [image: Description:
> E-mail]<http://www.rightsidenews.info/component/option,com_mailto/link,c348eb...>[image:
> Description: Print]<http://www.rightsidenews.info/2012011015351/us/homeland-security/top-...>[image:
> Description: PDF]<http://www.rightsidenews.info/pdf/2012011015351/us/homeland-security/...>
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> Iran is rattling sabers. Iraq may be falling apart. In North Korea, one of
> the world's most inexperienced and unpredictable leaders has his thumb on
> the country's nuclear button. Talks with the Taliban look like an instant
> replay of the Paris peace negotiations with Hanoi. The Arab Spring has
> turned into a long winter of discontent. Now is not the time to be gutting
> defense.****
>
> Yet the Secretary of Defense is poised to announce a new strategy that will
> rubber stamp massive military cuts, pulling the safety net out from a
> global security architecture that has protected U.S. vital interests
> worldwide since 1945. The Obama Administration's strategy by wishful
> thinking will not be sufficient to keep the nation safe, free, and
> prosperous in the year ahead. Rather, Congress and the White House should
> be making bold moves to restore America's capacity to protect itself. Here
> are the top five they could make.****
>
> *1. Own the Skies*
>
> Rather than slowing production of the F-35—America's newest combat
> aircraft, which can replace upwards of a dozen airframes that do a variety
> of missions from reconnaissance to attacking targets—the Pentagon ought to
> be ramping up production. It is time to reap the benefits of the $50
> billion taxpayer investment in this program. Likewise, the Pentagon should
> reopen the recently canceled F-22 production, the companion stealth fighter
> for the F-35. The two planes were designed to work together to give the
> U.S. the capacity to maintain air supremacy in any theater for decades.****
>
> At the same time, the government should be aggressively seeking to export
> both planes to any capable ally. In particular, the goal ought to be to
> ring the Asia-Pacific from India to the Arctic with a robust allied air
> fleet of F-35/F-22 fighters.****
>
> *2. Build Ships Faster*
>
> The U.S. has the smallest Navy since before World War I. While it is true
> that modern ships are much more capable than their predecessors, the planet
> is the same size. When U.S. presence is absent for critical areas, as was
> recently seen in the Strait of Hormuz—trouble follows. From submarines to
> amphibious ships to carriers, the U.S. needs to ramp up production.****
>
> The needs also go beyond the Defense Department. Replacing the Coast
> Guard's aging fleet of ships continues to lag, undermining the capacity of
> the U.S. to protect its sovereignty at sea. In particular, replacing the
> Coast Guard (part of the Department of Homeland Security) fleet of
> "high-endurance" cutters has to be a priority.****
>
> *3. Do Not Cut Ground Forces*
>
> Human capital is the most valuable resource in the armed forces. Shedding
> the most qualified, combat-experienced, volunteer ground forces in the
> nation's history would be like Apple canceling the production of iPhones to
> save money. It makes no sense.****
>
> The argument that "we won't need these troops because we are not going to
> do any more Iraqs and Afghanistans" is just a strategy of hope. These were
> the same arguments used to justify troop cuts before 9/11. As then, the
> enemy gets a vote, and it always votes to fight the wars that the U.S. is
> least prepared for. Rebuilding ground forces is far more expensive—and less
> risky—than maintaining adequate troop strength to defend the nation's
> interests and deter conflict.****
>
> *4. Put Missile Defense on the Fast Track*
>
> President Obama's "phased and adaptive" missile defense program has proven
> itself to be insufficient and inadequate. The nation needs immediate and
> comprehensive missile defense now. That demands starting a three-step
> process:****
>
> **1. ***Expand* and continually improve the Navy's proven and popular
> sea-based Aegis missile defense system;****
>
> **2. ***Pursue* advanced integration of the various components of a
> layered missile defense system, including ground-based interceptors; and****
>
> **3. ***Develop* and deploy space-based missile defenses, particularly
> space-based interceptors, to counter ballistic missile attacks.****
>
> *5. Start with Smart Savings*
>
> There are savings to be gained from more efficient defense spending, but
> they should be reinvested in defense modernization. The most immediate
> source of efficiencies to be gained is in the area of simplifying,
> consolidating, and contracting defense logistics. Estimates of immediate
> benefits range up to $90 billion. Congress and the Administration should
> focus laser-like on this area of Pentagon spending—now.****
>
> Really curbing cost growth over time requires getting the cost of manpower
> under control by establishing a more rational and practical package of pay
> and benefits for service members and their families. This can be done in a
> manner that honors commitments to those currently serving and providing
> more flexible and desirable benefits that would allow the service to
> continue to recruit and retain a quality all-volunteer force at reasonable
> cost.****
>
> *The Wrong Way to Balance the Budget*
>
> Gutting defense would not balance the budget. However, it would certainly
> contribute to making the world less safe for America and its allies and
> leave the U.S. less prepared to deal with the dangers ahead. The smart move
> would be to invest in defense—rather than pay the butcher's bill later.****
>
> SOURCE: The Heritage
> Foundation<http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/01/top-five-defense-mov...>
> ****
>
> *[image: Description: Jim_Carafano]**James Jay Carafano, Ph.D., is Deputy
> Director of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International
> Studies and Director of the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign
> Policy Studies, a division of the Davis Institute, at The Heritage
> Foundation*****
>
> ** **
>
> image004.jpg
> 8KViewDownload
>
> image001.png
> < 1KViewDownload
>
> image003.png
> < 1KViewDownload
>
> image002.png
> < 1KViewDownload
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment