Deleted

[Christine]

.

 

[Charade]

Who's on this board?

I am opposed to wasteful spending by any government entity. That would include the military.

 

[Christine]

Who's on this board?

I am opposed to wasteful spending by any government entity. That would include the military.

The article states who (generically) is on the board. It's not a new board or anything and they apparently provide recommendations quarterly.

I am also opposed to wasteful spending and I think there would have been cuts under either candidate. In fact, John McCain addressed the Navy's debacle with the Littoral Combat Ship program that has been a huge embarrassment. It is still being worked on but he was going to go in and put the smackdown on it!!

Anyway, my point in posting the article is that I have read here that many people believe that Obama wants to willy-nilly chop up the DoD. The article just states that he is advised by a long-standing board that provides oversight and he will probably be guided by these recommendations.

 

[blanq]

I seem to recall John McCain campaigning that he would make cuts to the military as well. He reported that there were some military programs that were not necessary/wasteful that he would cut. I would not be surprised if some who voted for him conveniently forget that though and blame Obama if/when he cuts military spending. IMHO, all areas of government need to be looked at for efficiencies and the military should be no exception.

 

[gottaluvPluto]

Generals and Admirals tend to be more like politicians and usually mirror the administration. Then the CO has to figure out how he/she is going to run their squadron on less. It isn't a good thing and will not be easy.

Honestly, they should cut civilian DOD jobs in certain places. Like the people who work in housing, especially, the ones that don't do their job so an active duty person has to pick up that persons slack. They should watch how they spend money on toilet paper and other products. Commissary, should be cut in some places, Wal- Mart is cheaper.

 

[gottaluvPluto]

Is this the Boston Globe?

 

[DawnCt1]

The military at large has historically made recommendations for spending cuts. One of their big suggestions in the last 4 years was to scale back the production of nuclear submarines. This caused a HUGE uproar in Ct, lead by the likes of Joe Courtney and Chris Dodd, (remember him). They fought tooth and nail against the recommendation, and as things usually go; Electric Boat is building submarines. In fact, DS#3 designed a $1,000,000 conveyor belt that was sold to EB just for that purpose. There is pork in every aspect of the military. EVERYONE has their own little special interests. The guy in charge of tank devisions "needs" more tanks. Rumsfeld came under tremendous fire when he went to the Pentagon itself and cut spending. One of his first targets?
The officers cafeteria. It was half full, so he closed it has consolidated it with the enlisted cafeteria. There was such an uproar, and thus began the campaign against Rummy in parts of the Pentagon.

 

[blu3d3vil]

Peace through Strength

 

[Christine]

.

 

[CapeCodTenor]

Peace through Strength

The best offense is a good defense.

 

[Charade]

The best offense is a good defense.

No no no!!! The best defense is a good offense!!

 

[Saxsoon]

The article states who (generically) is on the board. It's not a new board or anything and they apparently provide recommendations quarterly.

I am also opposed to wasteful spending and I think there would have been cuts under either candidate. In fact, John McCain addressed the Navy's debacle with the Littoral Combat Ship program that has been a huge embarrassment. It is still being worked on but he was going to go in and put the smackdown on it!!

Anyway, my point in posting the article is that I have read here that many people believe that Obama wants to willy-nilly chop up the DoD. The article just states that he is advised by a long-standing board that provides oversight and he will probably be guided by these recommendations.

Correct me if I am wrong, but Obama was already planning on cutting defense, so if that is correct, then all I see is a board telling him what to cut. He still was planning it anyway.

 

[shortbun]

Who's on this board?

I am opposed to wasteful spending by any government entity. That would include the military.

http://www.defenselink.mil/dbb/members.html

All members listed and bio'd. They are appointed for two year terms by the Secretary of Defense.

 

[CapeCodTenor]

No no no!!! The best defense is a good offense!!

That too.

 

[Christine]

Correct me if I am wrong, but Obama was already planning on cutting defense, so if that is correct, then all I see is a board telling him what to cut. He still was planning it anyway.

You are correct. Both candidates were planning defense cuts. I just wanted to point out that neither candidate would have been able to just run roughshod and cut irresponsibly.

 

[Cheshire Figment]

http://www.defenselink.mil/dbb/members.html

All members listed and bio'd. They are appointed for two year terms by the Secretary of Defense.

I found the same link. Also, besides listing who the current members are, here is a list of the criteria:

Board members are appointed to the Defense Business Board by the Secretary of Defense and they serve for a two year term. Common characteristics of the Board members are:

* A Proven record of high level achievement in the field of business/management
* A willingness to devote the necessary time to the board efforts
* Access to a network of people to tap into for more specific domain expertise
* Recognized experience with implementation of best business practices in substantive organizations
* Expertise relevant to issues being addressed (governance, human resource management, supply chain management, financial management, etc.)

 

[Geoff_M]

So will you blame Obama for the cuts or the board?

This is a bit of a "bogus" argument. The board isn't talking about "cutting" military spending, they're recommending that the funds be shifted from experimental/development programs to other areas of the military. There would be no reduction in military spending from the recommendations to "blame" anyone for. These wouldn't be Carter-like military spending cuts.

 

[Christine]

This is a bit of a "bogus" argument. The board isn't talking about "cutting" military spending, they're recommending that the funds be shifted from experimental/development programs to other areas of the military. There would be no reduction in military spending from the recommendations to "blame" anyone for. These wouldn't be Carter-like military spending cuts.

I agree. My entire point of this thread is to address some fears that have been posted here over the past few days--specifically in regard to "defense spending cuts" which, in turn is perceived as "cuts to the troops." Again, only calling out what I have seen here on the DIS. I spent several weeks trying to point out that defense cuts were addressed by both candidates and I don't believe either one addressed cutting spending for the troops, even though for one particular candidate it was assumed.

 

[Geoff_M]

I agree. My entire point of this thread is to address some fears that have been posted here over the past few days--specifically in regard to "defense spending cuts" which, in turn is perceived as "cuts to the troops." Again, only calling out what I have seen here on the DIS. I spent several weeks trying to point out that defense cuts were addressed by both candidates and I don't believe either one addressed cutting spending for the troops, even though for one particular candidate it was assumed.

Look, the concerns that the Democrats will cut DoD spending are not without foundation. Prominent Democrats in Congress (most notably Barry Frank) have said that they want to see cuts from DoD. Congress gets to write the actual spending bills, and if they opt to drop overall military spending, the question will be whether President Obama will opt to fight his own party over the issue when the bill reaches his desk for signing.