Last year, President Obama made permanent cuts to defense budget

[ProSense]

Ending F-22: $2.9B, Laser Aircraft Savings: $214M, Cutting Wasteful Defense Spending: Priceless

Terminates the F-22 program: Savings - $2.9B

Terminates Transformational Satellite: Savings - $768M

Terminates the VH-71 program: Savings - $750M

Reduces Aircraft Carrier Rebuild Schedule: Savings - $727M

Terminates Future Combat Systems Manned Ground Vehicle: Savings - $633M

Reduces Ground Based Midcourse Defense Program: Savings - $504M

Terminates the Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI) program: Savings - $387M

Terminates the multiple kill vehicle (MKV): Savings - $283M

Cancels the second Airborne Laser (ABL) aircraft, and refocuses the ABL program as a technology research effort: Savings - $214M

Terminates Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR-X) Helicopter: Savings - $144M

[Cant trust em]

1. Some permanent cuts, but I think that overall it got a bump. nt

[Oregone]

7. Even worse, its increase outpaced GDP growth

While people can say the rate of increase remained in check (or decelerated), its an isolated statistic that doesn't take the GDP into account. Military spending as a percent of GDP rose quite a bit last year compared to the year before. It is troubling when military spending increases to any degree while the economy stagnates

[Cha]

9. You mean like the help given Soldiers and

Vets?

[DrToast]

28. You mean just like next year's budget is going to be higher?

[Peacetrain]

2. Good luck with this.. People do not want acknowledge it

[Jennicut]

3. There were cuts to wasteful programs.

Some increases to benefits for soldiers, etc. Some changing of the way we spend to address terrorism. Some more cuts needed to be made.

[Clio the Leo]

23. Sure did. NT

[NightWatcher]

4. those are just R&D tweaks, no real cuts to existing programs/wars

[tridim]

6. .

[phleshdef]

25. Except the Iraq drawdown was expediated so there were and still are many cuts there.

I love how people continue to ignore the fact that there is no longer a war in Iraq for all intents and purposes.

[cherokeeprogressive]

45. Tell that to the families of the four US servicemembers killed in Iraq this month.

I'm not ignoring SHIT, for all intents and purposes.

Anderson, Brushaun X., 20 years old
Croft Jr., David A., 22 years old
Jarrett, Michael R., 20 years old
Hurt, Gifford E., 19 years old

RIP, gentlemen.

[tridim]

5. Ahhhh... Facts!

So rare on DU these days. Thanks.

[Oregone]

15. Isolated facts don't tell the whole story

Its like judging a canvas by focusing at 1 square inch of the art. Absurdity.

Here is a fact: engaging abstinence has a 100% rate of success in preventing pregnancy and STD spread. Now, you can see how much of an idiot one would have to be to ignore all the other facts and make a policy or judgment on that one fact alone. Thats silly.

Applauding isolated facts isn't necessarily noble, or devoid of bias.

[ShortnFiery]

20. +1

Please excuse my shameless suck up, but IMO, you express your perspective both clear and concise.
And, of course, I CONCUR. :thumbsup: :hi:

[Flaneur]

18. Fact: Defense spending has increased.

[tridim]

22. As a result of Bush's bullshit wars.

Both of which the admin are attempting to end. FACT.

[Flaneur]

31. Non-Iraq and Afghanistan defense spending is up. Fact.

[tridim]

33. Yes, VA spending is up, again due to Bush's bullshit wars..

That the current admin is trying to end.

Would you rather Obama say something like, "fuck you vets, just deal with your brain injuries and PTSD yourself"?

[mkultra]

48. thats not true. Fact.

normal defense spending went down with total defense budget going up ONLY because of increases in the veterans benefits program and foreign economic aid(which falls under defense)

feel free to check it out:
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/defense_budget_2010_3.html#usgs302

[DrDan]

8. that being the case, there were certainly some programs that had significant increases

as the overall defense budget increased

[rucky]

10. and the new expenditures that raised the overall budget?

[Jennicut]

13. This is it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x152555

Some good stuff, some not so good. We would not need to increase the levels of our force if we did not have two wars going on. Iraq War will eventually end based on the Iraqi's timeline (I hope)....but what about the Afghan War? It seems endless to me.

[inthebrain]

11. While proposing 200 billion increase to the budget

I'm sure someone is going to try and polish that turd.

[jenmito]

12. K&R. Get ready for the attacks from those who won't give Obama credit for ANYTHING. n/t

[inna]

14. pathetic. fail.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/13/AR2010011300465.html

Obama wants record $708B for military next year

The Associated Press
Wednesday, January 13, 2010; 4:26 PM


WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama will ask Congress for an additional $33 billion to fight unpopular wars in Afghanistan and Iraq on top of a record $708 billion for the Defense Department next year, The Associated Press has learned - a request that could be an especially hard sell to some of the administration's Democratic allies.

[ProSense]

21. No, your post is a fail

The Defense Department budget includes VA and other services.

[inna]

26. Spin all you want, this is the RECORD HIGH defense budget.

:thumbsdown: for ridiculousness

[ProSense]

27. Spin? Ludicrous. n/t

[mkultra]

49. dues to increase in veterans benefits and foreign economic aid.

spending on kill machines is down.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

51. So we shouldn't spend anything on the VA?

[ProSense]

24. Oh, here is something else from the link you provided

The Pentagon projects that war funding would drop sharply in 2012, to $50 billion, and remain there through 2015. That is a calculation that the United States will save money from the withdrawal of forces in Iraq, as well as a prediction that the Afghanistan war will begin to wind down in the middle of 2011.

It's currently at $128 billion (the additional $33 bilion brings it to $159 billion). So the administration is anticipating a nearly $80 billion drop from the current level.

[inna]

29. You're wrong.

The additional $33 billion brings the already RECORD HIGH defense budget of $708 billion up to $741 billion.


But trying to explain something to you is a complete waste of time. You're not interested in facts, that's not what you're here for.


Ciao. :hi:

[ProSense]

30. Math Fail

$708 billion isn't war spending, $128 billion is.

[inna]

42. Reading Comprehension Fail.

Read again what I said and which is simply a fact, no matter how hard you try to spin it:

The additional $33 billion brings the already RECORD HIGH defense budget of $708 billion up to $741 billion.

But I am really done with you, I'd rather debate a chair. :hi:

[ProSense]

43. You're in denial. The defense budget includes more than war spending.

That's reality.

[JTFrog]

57. That would probably be a more even match.

:hi:

[Flaneur]

16. FY 2009 $513 billion, FY 2010 $533 billion. Plus $130 billion for imperial war.

Funny how those permanent cuts end up as an increase in Pentagon funding.

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TreasonousBastard]

17. Those are all programs, but what about structural spending...

like over 130 bases around the world? What benefit to our security does the naval base in Diego Garcia really have?

Prior to WWII we had a small cadre waiting to train a larger force if we needed it. Since WWII we have been building a massive Cold War force waiting for a war with the Soviets.

There are no Soviets any more and being responsible for the security of Japan, Korea, and all of Europe is hard to justify. Even harder to justify is using all this massive firepower to protect us from small bands of whackos who might try to bomb a building in Chicago or drop some viruses in San Francisco.

[Oregone]

19. If the base in Diego Garcia falls, the red fever will spread faster than H1N1

Next thing you know we will all be driving Trabants to our government job

[Donnachaidh]

32. can you say *drop in a bucket for a photo op*?

:eyes:

[Lydia Leftcoast]

34. But cancelled it out by continuing the illegal and senseless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan

Sorry, I'm not impressed.

[ShortnFiery]

35. + 720 BILLION = 2010 Defense Budget: Full Of Adds And Add Ons

http://industry.bnet.com/government/10004621/2010-defense-budget-full-of-adds-and-add-ons/

[Lydia Leftcoast]

36. Yup. The Department of War (the older, more truthful name) is now the

tail that wags the dog.

[ProSense]

38. Of course you're not

The Iraq war is ending, not continuing.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

39. But there's the little matter of escalation in Afghanistan

Not a trivial matter at all.

And the withdrawal from Iraq should be much faster. Why is anyone still being sent there?

[ShortnFiery]

40. Newsflash: As soon as our last combat troop leaves, the place is going to BLOW UP.

The good natives in Iraq, not unlike the North Vietnamese did during the early 1970s are just "biding their time." The civil war will happen in Iraq. The Sunnis are ANYTHING but stupid.

We never learn: Occupations don't work.

[ProSense]

44. That's what the RW claimed when they opposed withdrawal. n/t

[ShortnFiery]

47. That's what's going to happen. Either we stay there forever or let the NATIVES settle

their own Civil War?

[ProSense]

52. Nonsense. n/t

[Phx_Dem]

37. Not good enough. We need to get rid of the military altogether.

:sarcasm:

[ShortnFiery]

41. Oh that's sweet: Figuratively "blow up" the thread because you're losing the argument.

However, such actions are consistent with a "scorched earth" policy of the American neo-liberal, war-profiteering crowd.

[Phx_Dem]

53. LOL. What argument would that be?

I didn't make a fucking argument genuis. I made a sarcastic remark and in other threads I stated my opinion. And what, exactly, has been "blown up?"

Overract much?

[impik]

46. ProSense, i salute you. How you still fight in this terrible atmosphere here, is truly admirable

[Goldstein1984]

54. I would take "defense" spending with a grain of salt

How did we make so many enemies that we have to spend almost ten times the next biggest spender, and as much as the rest of the world combined?

Source: http://www.borgenproject.org/Defense_Spending.html

The World's Largest Military Spenders
(Defense budgets in billions)

United States $522
China $63
Russia $62
United Kingdom $51
Japan $45
France $42
Germany $30
India $22
Saudi Arabia $21
South Korea $21
Italy $17
Australia $13
Brazil $13
Canada $11
Turkey $10
Israel $10
Netherlands $10
Spain $9
Taiwan $8
Indonesia $8
Mayanmar $7
Ukraine $6
Singapore $6
Sweden $6
North Korea $6
Poland $5
Norway $5
Greece $5
Iran $5
Kuwait $4
Colombia $4
Switzerland $4
Pakistan $4
Vietnam $4
Belgium $3
Denmark $3
Egypt $3
Portugal $2
Czech Republic $2
Romania $2
Argentina $2
Syria $2
Hungary $2
Cuba $1

[jeanpalmer]

55. Then why did overall defense spending go up?

And why is defense spending proposed to exceed $700 billion for the first time?

And how can China spend just $70 billion on defense but have a very adequate defense? Do you see people lining up to attack China because they only spend $70 billion a year on defense? So why is Obama spending $700+ billion?

[nolabels]

56. I love it when the original poster's ill informed ass gets hung out to dry

Kicking and making a bookmark for little ole me. If i had to be truthful though, all and all, the irony was really kind of delicious :kick: