RSN May Fundraising
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
read more of todays top articles

Tara McKelvey writes: "Since 9/11, Pentagon officials have had no trouble getting whatever they needed from Congress. But all that's about to change with the debt deal, which could slash defense spending."

Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta speaks at the Pentagon. (photo: Alex Brandon/AP)
Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta speaks at the Pentagon. (photo: Alex Brandon/AP)

go to original article

 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+40 # rm 2011-08-03 16:45
I doubt seriously that the Pentagon is worried. This is just another way to scare americans who are deluded enough to think the Pentagon insures their safety. Now they will be afraid of their shadows. Fear is the most powerful way to manipulate people and this is just another tactic of the American hard right wing to manipulate people.

Congress is not about to cut Pentagon funds -- I wish they would. I wish they'd cut military spending down to about $50 billion a year. We don't need it. Our military is the great source of instability and insecurity in the world.

The Pentagon is not a defensive army. It is a criminal organization, starting wars against nations that have the natural resources US corporations want. It needs to be shut down.
 
 
+20 # Activista 2011-08-03 20:39
Article is bunch of propaganda - "reduced budget will mean the United States will have to retreat from its role as superpower"
"Pentagon’s base budget swelled from $307 billion in 2001 to $529 billion this year" - it is like One trillion per year for US militarism - is NOT enough?
"“Do you want to share the world with the Chinese or with nuclear-armed Iran?" why NOT - they are not invading anybody - better than Israel terrorizing Middle East with 200+ nuclear bombs.
 
 
+17 # rf 2011-08-04 02:58
Wasn't that an American Heritage Fond. statement? Really lazy for any journalist to use anything from these foundations that are nothing but propaganda tools. It should always be stated "The right wing propaganda machine says..."
 
 
-17 # stannadel 2011-08-04 03:49
Activista has an Israel obsession. Israel has never threatened to use nuclear bombs on anybody--they even deny having any. The Israelis do have them of course, but they have been reserved for situations in which the survival of Israel and its population would be threatened.
 
 
+17 # futhark 2011-08-04 05:09
Possessing nuclear weapons is, in itself, a threat to all living things, whether designated as enemies or not.
 
 
+6 # Activista 2011-08-04 07:14
And Apartheid Israel did NOT attack ANY of the neighbors - compared to Iran?
Israel planned to sell nuclear arms to Apartheid Africa - Revealed: how Israel offered to sell South Africa nuclear weapons ...
www.guardian.co.uk/world/.../israel-south-africa-nuclear-weapons - CachedMay 24, 2010 – Secret South African documents reveal that Israel offered to sell ... Some weeks before Peres made his offer of nuclear warheads to Botha, ...
 
 
-12 # stannadel 2011-08-04 03:52
If Israeli bombs terrorize the Middle East, who do US, Russian, British, French, and Chinese nukes terrorize? And who would a nuclear armed Iran Terrorize?
 
 
+27 # antineocon 2011-08-03 21:33
anyone who is with or near the US military know the unblieveable waste fraud and abuse that exits in the military services and the bloated Pentagon. CUT THE DEFENCE DEPT CUT THE HELL OUT OF IT WE WLIL BE BETTER OFF.
 
 
+19 # Terre Watt 2011-08-03 22:04
A lot of Americans are already afraid of their shadows, not to mention their neighbors, people who don't look like they do or for that matter think like they do.
 
 
+1 # Lara 2011-08-03 20:23
Although there are 174 pages of text to wade through, isn't the military exempt from deficit cuts?
 
 
+18 # propsguy 2011-08-03 21:11
if only the pentagon's budget is slashed, at least some good will have come out of this wretched bill. i'm not holding my breath
 
 
+15 # franselr 2011-08-03 21:57
The US spends 40% of all military spending in the world. If you include the military budgets of US allies, military spending jumps to 75%. The US military budget is six times what is spent by China. Our nuclear capability is still numbered in the thousands of warheads. Remember we won the cold war?

The military-indust rial complex has the political influence and power with Congress that was foretold by Eisenhower. We can only hope that people electing Congress are not fear mongered into continuing the military largess and elect progressive politicians. This recession may well degrade into a depression if Congress chooses guns over butter and jobs.
 
 
+11 # Activista 2011-08-04 07:18
Militarism bankrupted USA as did Soviet Union 25 years ago. When we will ever learn?
 
 
+12 # jaybyrd33 2011-08-04 01:13
It seems that our energy policy is dominated by the Pentagon. Instead of asking people to drive less and maybe pay a dollar a gallon tax they are planning to invade countries that have oil. They spent two trillion in Iraq and got 480 billion in oil...5th grade math says that is not a good policy..
 
 
+3 # Activista 2011-08-04 07:28
cost of Iraq war - The true cost of the Iraq war: $3 trillion and beyond
www.washingtonpost.com › OpinionsSep 5, 2010 – Writing in these pages in early 2008, we put the total cost to the United States of the Iraq war at $3 trillion. This price tag dwarfed ...
The US Militaristic budget is like one trillion - with no valid rational why?
 
 
+13 # HeidiStevenson 2011-08-04 03:29
This author references the Center for American Security and the Heritage Foundation as authorities. I see no reason to read past that point. The article is trash. The fact is that any effect on the military will be minimal. This is just spin to keep eyes off what's really happening - the destruction of all the safety nets of the people, transfer of yet more wealth to the wealthiest, and the destruction of any chance of pulling out of the recession.
 
 
+13 # MainStreetMentor 2011-08-04 03:40
“It’s chaos,” adds the Heritage Foundation’s Mackenzie Eaglen. “Like Upside-Down Day at the Pentagon.”

Really? And what do you think working Americans have had to go through since the Bush/Cheney kakistocracy? Losing their homes to Wall Street ... loss of jobs due to corporate Greed ... no afforeable healthcare coverage ... gas prices through the roof ...
 
 
+9 # Isar 2011-08-04 03:58
It is true that the Pentagon budget has been bloated for a very long time and even major players in Defense have admitted this. However, it is another Republican game play, and many of the Republicans get money from Lobbyists for big corporations who make tons of money on our war-mongering. We MUST end the two wars we are still fighting, and THEN we must "Just say no" to these war-for-oil manipulations that crop up as a solution to our energy crisis. Heaven forbid that we should try something else. NO...as long as there is oil out there, we will fight for it. THAT is the American Way, right? OIL drives our war motives. Just gotta have it....Love the stuff! --- So we send our young men and women to die and/or be crippled for life...and for what? For oil! We should be ashamed of ourselves. We should be rising up and marching on Washington EVERY DAY to end these wars. Maybe we should ask Jane Fonda to lead us once again.
 
 
+12 # Lucius 2011-08-04 04:54
Propagandistic claptrap, especially from the ultra conservative AEI, masquerading as reporting. Kids who can't stop crying because daddy has to go to a foreign country to kill Muslims? Aw shucks. Fear mongering nonsense such as, “Do you want to share the world with the Chinese or with nuclear-armed Iran?” Share the world?! What are you crazy? Hell no, the US ought to invade China and Iran and wipe them off the map. Right? America has to be the one and only Superpower, the last man standing. The US needs to maintain its military hegemony across the Globe. That's the plan endorsed by the AEI (and the Government). And, apparently, cutting a measly $50 billion a year for 10 years is going to seriously infringe the military's ability and readiness to fight multiple wars on multiple fronts because that's what We do. Ok?
 
 
+5 # futhark 2011-08-04 05:08
This American's worst nightmare is that the Pentagon will continue to glut itself on the wealth of the world and offer little in return but arrogant threats of death and destruction. This is the essence of the so-called "Carter Doctrine".
 
 
+4 # Still_Standing 2011-08-04 05:50
Last week there was a Daily Beast article telling us that Obama wouldn't really lose support from the left in 2012. Now there's this ridiculous propaganda piece. I think RSN should ban The Daily Beast from its site. To confirm my suspicion about this rag, I even saw a Daily Beast columnist on one of the Sunday morning corporate "news" shows.
 
 
+4 # dkonstruction 2011-08-04 07:21
my understanding is that the "cuts" being proposed will simply slow the rate of growth of the defense department but that even this growth rate will still be greater than the projected rate of inflation which still means a net increase in defense spending in which case this talk of "cuts" is a total sham...anyone know anything different?
 
 
+5 # Diane Johnson 2011-08-04 07:57
how about a fraud investigation of those defense contractors and the no competetive bid contradts Bush gave out?... then closeing un necesary military installations in over a hundred counties, and let the u.s. corporations there hire their own security... we wont have to keep leasing the property.
 
 
+2 # fredboy 2011-08-04 08:26
The Pentagon and Office of Homeland Security need to engage their forward-thinkin g analysis to examine the very real national security and homeland security threat posed by the Tea Party and its rigid, absolute doctrines.

This is not political thinking, it is reality. Plug in their approach to our nation's attempt to both re-strengthen our economy and and national being and you will detect a great and most horrid unraveling. The big question, of course, is whether it is through ignorance or intention.
 
 
+3 # MylesJ 2011-08-04 09:31
The most recent annual survey of peace among the top 149 nations shows the US at #85 in promoting peace. The rating is based 60% on domestic peace and 40% on peace with other nations. Iraq is last, right close to them are Israel and Russia with numbers in the high 140s.
 
 
+4 # Steve Miller 2011-08-04 11:33
May the day soon come when the Pentagon has to depend on bake sales to raise money for their many unnesasary brutal war efforts. Or maybe this would be better, the only funded wars will be where the politicians who endorse the war effort also pick up weapons and head to the front lines. The Pentegon would have to close in 6 months. Hey, and these corporations that have the military at their beck and call, yet pay their CEO's far more than they pay in taxes, let them hire mercenary warriors. Yes, manditory investigations of the easy coallescence between Pentegon officials and the Bush boys. Bring the soldiers home. Create jobs and tend to our own damned business.
 
 
0 # Gary in Midwest 2011-08-06 12:46
I happened to catch Leon Panetta's news conference last week and I don't think I've ever been more disgusted. This guy is a good indication of how bad a leader Obama is. We just passed a disgusting debt deal and Leon's not willing to get on board with defense cuts? To get in line with what his boss has just agreed to? If there's only one thing progressives got out of the deal it was saving necessary entitlements by implementing a few defense cuts and who's stupid enough to think there isn't 350 billion in wasteful defense spending? If I was Obama I'd fire Leon Panetta.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN