Quote:
Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna
My point is that we simply can't afford to continue to "do business" and continue government spending as we have in the past. Every department should undergo scrutiny and their spending should be prioritized and cut to levels justifiable by our national interests.
Should the drones or your nephew's air group be cut? Maybe not. But no one will convince me that all 350,000 people dressed in Air Force uniforms and scattered all over the world are critical to our national interests. When't the last time we performed a combat bombing run with a B-52? Do the prospects of having to drop a nuclear bomb somewhere justify keeping 21 Stealth bombers flying or getting ready to fly?
For that matter, of what strategic use are the fleet of 18 Ohio-class Trident nuclear ICBM launching submarines? Sure, the four 4 nuclear-powered SSGNs (cruise missile submarines) seem justifiable. But where in the national defense strategy are 18 big ICBM-launch platform submarines running around the world's oceans?
|
I totally agree with your first point above.
As for the armed services I do believe it is time to re-evaluate our military bases outside of the US and see if we can relocate/consolidate them. The B-52 bombers were used in Afganistan early on but I am not sure they are still flying missions there. With the range they are capable of flying they certainly could reach a target in a reasonable time or even be moved closer prior to a strike.
For the 18 Trident subs I tend to think even in this current global environment that 18 is not a high number. Consider if you will that each sub is on a 6 month patrol. Just looking at my globe I can easily come up with 6 - 8 patrol areas for them. That would mean a need of 12 - 16 to cover one year of patrol with some "spares".