To say that the United States is struggling with the global recession would be a rather large understatement. As the U.S. is already a debtor nation w...
To say that the United States is struggling with the global recession would be a rather large understatement. As the U.S. is already a debtor nation with huge trade and budget deficits,
the collapse of its financial sector and a drop in global trade is hammering its balance sheet. Cuts had to be made, there's no doubt about that. But a lot of Americans might be surprised at where the Obama Administration has chosen to make deep cuts -- defense spending. Patriots will fume and politicians will spout fiery rhetoric, but it's worth taking a closer look at the cuts that are being made. It tells us a lot about how the Obama Administration views America's place in the world.
To be absolutely clear, the cuts will not affect the funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and, overall, military spending is actually going up slightly. Obama can therefore honestly claim not to have cut military spending, which Republicans will no doubt wish to accuse him of. But Robert Gates, the Bush-appointed Defense Secretary, has made some unpalatable cuts to certain weapons and equipment programs. F-22 fighter production will stop this year, well ahead of schedule. An entire program of armored vehicle procurement will be stopped. Some missile-defense systems will be cancelled, as will two separate helicopter programs.
Why these programs? One of the helicopter designs was to replace the executive birds used by the President, Vice President, and various other VIPs. Gates determined that the existing fleet will suffice until a new, cheaper program can be reconsidered. Likewise, the proposed new Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) helicopters is a "troubled" program that Gates wants to see cancelled in favor of continuing to use the existing HH-60s, modified Black Hawk helicopters designed to rescue commandos and crashed pilots from behind enemy lines. An $87.0-billion program to build lighter, faster, more fuel-efficient combat vehicles for the Army was chopped because experience in Iraq and Afghanistan has proven that armor, not fuel efficiency, is the key to keeping troops safe from roadside bombs.
The most controversial cut will be the F-22 stealth fighter. There are already 183 of these planes in service, and Gates has proposed ending the run after building only four more. The Air Force will be furious. The F-22 is the most magnificent combat aircraft ever built; in one drill over Alaska, F-22s "killed" 144 other U.S. fighters without taking a single simulated loss! Clearly, they're far superior to any plane operated by any of our allies or enemies. But with a price tag of 140 million dollars each, they carry a steep cost. Gates has correctly determined that, since no other country in the worldcan build a plane that comes even close to the F-22, 187 of them ought to be enough. He wants to build more of the cheaper, somewhat less capable F-35 fighters to replace the Air Force's aging fleet of F-15s and F-16s. This would still leave the United States with overwhelming air superiority in any future war, and save billions of dollars.
All of these cuts, and more, are part of an emerging pattern. The White House and the Pentagon have clearly decided that, for now, with the economy in tatters and the federal deficit ballooning, the military can stop preparing to fight giant wars with other powerful countries, such as Russia or China. Instead, the money is going to flow to winning smaller wars, against primitive enemies, like the insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq. To fight that kind of a war, you need thousands of troops riding around in armored vehicles, not hundred-million-dollar warplanes firing smart bombs at a handful of guerillas hiding in a cave. America still has enough F-22s and aircraft carriers to deter any aggressor, and is right to focus on winning the wars it's already in. And that means less money spent on cutting-edge technology, and more on training, logistics, and increasing the number of soldiers and Marines that are available to deploy.
While it's sad to see the F-22 and the DDG-1000 warships fall by the wayside, this is the right plan for the American military. But what about the economy? There are thousands of workers in practically every state in the union who are counting on defense contracts to keep their families fed. Lockheed Martin, the builder of the F-22, has warned that 90,000 jobs might be lost if the F-22 program is halted now, and that has Congress abuzz. Those lawmakers will fight to protect jobs in their states, even if the weapons are costly and unnecessary. The defense companies know this, and cleverly disperse their contracts across the whole country, making sure that every senator and representative has a personal vested interest in keeping the tax dollars flowing.
President Obama and Secretary Gates, the Commander in Chief and the Secretary of Defense, are going to have to fight NOT to buy more weapons. This perverse system, where weapons are given to the military not because they're needed but because they'd be too politically damaging to cancel, is more a threat to American democracy than Russia, the Chinese, and Islamic terror put together. And, sadly, no number of stealth fighters and laser-toting planes can win this battle for the President. This war will be won and lost in Washington's corridors of power, and I genuinely don't know who the winner will be.
Profit Confidential
---
http://www.profitconfidential.com/
LOMBARDI PUBLISHING CORPORATION
News, Analysis, and Information Services Since 1986.
One Million Customers in 141 Countries.
Lombardi Publishing Corporation
Financial Publications Division
350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3304
New York, NY 10118-3304
---
Copyright 2008; Lombardi Publishing Corporation. All rights reserved. No part of this e-newsletter may be used or reproduced in any manner or means, including print, electronic, mechanical, or by any information storage and retrieval system whatsoever, without written permission from the copyright holder.
