So here is the state of American defense five years into the president Obama who applied his mastery of taking over the health care system to perfecting our defense:
Is the military still ready for war _ or should you be worried?
Article by: PAULINE JELINEK , Associated Press
Updated: November 29, 2013 – 3:00 AM
WASHINGTON — Warnings from defense officials and some experts are mounting and becoming more dire: The nation’s military is being hobbled by budget cuts.
“You’d better hope we never have a war again,” the House Armed Services Committee chairman, Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon, R-Calif., said of the decline in what the military calls its readiness.
So should Americans be worried?
A look at what the Pentagon means by “ready” and where things stand:
It’s the armed forces’ ability to get the job done, and it’s based on the number of people, the equipment and the training needed to carry out assigned missions.
As an example, an Army brigade has a list of the things it would have to do in a full-level war, called its “mission essential task list.” And a 4,500-member brigade is deemed ready when it has the right supplies and equipment, is in good working condition and pretty much has that full number of people, well-trained in their various specialties, to conduct its tasks.
Military units are rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being the best, or fully ready. Typically, a unit freshly returned from a tour of duty would carry a 5 rating, since it’s missing people because of casualties or because some are moving on to other jobs, and it’s missing equipment that was battered or worn in the field and is in for repairs or must be replaced. A unit can be sent out in less-than-full ready status, but officials warn that would mean it could do less, take longer to do it, suffer more casualties, or all of the above.
THE U.S. MILITARY RATING NOW
Detailed information on that is classified secret so adversaries won’t know exactly what they’re up against. But because of ongoing budget fights, officials in recent weeks have given broad examples of readiness lapses in hopes of convincing Congress and the American people that cutbacks, particularly in training budgets, are creating a precarious situation.
For instance, an Air Force official says they’ve grounded 13 combat fighter/bomber squadrons or about a third of those active duty units. And the Army says only two of its 35 active-duty brigades are fully ready for major combat operations. The service typically wants to have about 12 ready at any given time so a third of the total can be deployed, a third is prepared for deployment and a third is working to get ready.
Analysts say a decade of massive spending increases have built a strong force superior to anything else out there. “We could certainly fight another war on the order of the first Gulf War (1991) without any problems; the Air Force could do air strikes in Syria,” said Barry M. Blechman of the Stimson Center think tank. “We wouldn’t want to get involved in another protracted war (like Iraq and Afghanistan), but in terms of the types of military operations we typically get involved in, we’re prepared for that.”
Even those who believe the situation is not yet dire say that eventually these budget cuts will catch up with the force. Some analysts say another two or three years of training cuts, for instance, will leave the U.S. military seriously unprepared.
As an added wrinkle, the cuts come just as the military had planned a significant re-training of the force. That is, the bulk of U.S. forces were organized, trained and equipped over the past 12 years for counterinsurgency wars like Iraq and Afghanistan and now need to sharpen skills needed to counter other kinds of threats in other parts of the world.
For instance, much of the Air Force focus in recent years has been on providing close air support for the ground troops countering insurgents and not on skills that would be needed if the U.S. were involved in a conflict with a foreign government — skills like air-to-air combat and air interdiction.
There’s broad agreement in Washington that budget cuts should be tailored rather than done by the automatic, across-the-board cuts known as sequestration over the next decade. There is not agreement on politically sensitive potential savings from closing and consolidating some military bases, holding the line on troop compensation that has grown over the war years or drawing down more steeply from the wartime size of the force.
Finding replacement cuts for sequestration is the priority of budget talks led by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and his Senate counterpart, Patty Murray, D-Wash., who are facing an informal Dec. 13 deadline to reach a deal. Any agreement that they negotiate could still be rejected by their colleagues.
For the official record, I document that OBAMA was responsible for “sequestration.” It was HIS idea from HIS White House:
Barack Obama has now repeatedly said that sequestration – which he now says is a “meat cleaver” that would have “brutal consequences” that would destroy America – was “Congress’ idea” (with the implication that it was therefore the Republicans’ idea. He said back on October 22:
“The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed,” Obama said. “It is something that Congress has proposed.”
But Barack Obama is a documented liar in claiming that. Because WHO actually proposed sequestration again?
Let’s see what White House Press Secretary Jay Carney was forced to concede during an interview with Fox News anchor Brett Bair (note: I added the first remark by Jay Carney to the transcript after transcribing it from the video):
Jay Carney: Somehow, what they [Republicans] liked then, they don’t like now and they’re trying to say that it was the president’s idea.
Bret Baier: Fair to say, but it was the president’s idea… You concede that point, right?
Jay Carney: What I will concede is that we were looking and the Republicans were looking for a trigger around which to build the mechanism to get us out of default possibility and the sequester was one of the ideas yes put forward, yes, by the president’s team.
Who’s to blame for sequestration?
“At 2:30 p.m. Lew and Nabors went to the Senate to meet with Reid and his chief of staff, David Krone. ‘We have an idea for the trigger,’ Lew said. ‘What’s the idea?’ Reid asked skeptically. ‘Sequestration.’ Reid bent down and put his head between his knees, almost as if he were going to throw up or was having a heart attack. He sat back up and looked at the ceiling. ‘A couple of weeks ago,’ he said, ‘my staff said to me that there is one more possible’ enforcement mechanism: sequestration. He said he told them, ‘Get the hell out of here. That’s insane. The White House surely will come up with a plan that will save the day. And you come to me with sequestration?’ Well, it could work, Lew and Nabors explained. What would the impact be? They would design it so that half the threatened cuts would be from the Defense Department. ‘I like that,’ Reid said. ‘That’s good. It doesn’t touch Medicaid or Medicare, does it?’ It actually does touch Medicare, they replied. ‘How does it touch Medicare?’ It depends, they said. There’s versions with 2 percent cuts, and there’s versions with 4 percent cuts.” (Bob Woodward, The Price Of Politics, 2012, pp. 326)
It is a documented historical fact that it was BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA’S White House that proposed sequestration, NOT Congress and most certainly NOT Republicans.
So, yeah, it was the president’s idea. It was Obama’s plan that Obama put forward. If the Republicans agreed to it in order to get something done on the last debt ceiling fight. And after all the time you’ve spent labelling Republicans as “obstructionists” for not agreeing with you, NOW you demonize them as evil after they DO agree with you???
So anybody who wants to blame Republicans for this mess is simply demon possessed. You hold a COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF responsible for the defense of our nation, and NOBODY else. Especially when it was aforementioned commander-in-chief’s damn idea to begin with.
Okay, let’s remember: Jimmy Carter was a liberal president who gutted the military and left America weak – and therefore our enemies aggressive and belligerent – which set us up for the Iran Hostage crisis.
Bill Clinton was a Democrat president who gutted both our military capability and our intelligence capability and set us up for the 9/11 attack which took place less than eight months after his eight years in office. Every single one of the 9/11 terrorists who murdered 3,000 Americans was already in the country and funded and trained during Bill Clinton’s blind watch.
Now, sadly, 9/11 happened because Bill Clinton left America weak and blind. Why did America get attacked on 9/11? Because Bill Clinton showed so much weakness in 1993 in Somalia that a man we would one day know very well said:
“Our boys no longer viewed America as a superpower. So, when they left Afghanistan, they went to Somalia and prepared themselves carefully for a long war. They had thought that the Americans were like the Russians, so they trained and prepared. They were stunned when they discovered how low was the morale of the American soldier. America had entered with 30,000 soldiers in addition to thousands of soldiers from different countries in the world. … As I said, our boys were shocked by the low morale of the American soldier and they realized that the American soldier was just a paper tiger. He was unable to endure the strikes that were dealt to his army, so he fled, and America had to stop all its bragging and all that noise it was making in the press…” — Osama bin Laden
Osama bin Laden began to prepare for a massive attack on America. Oh, yes, he and his fellow terrorists hit America again and again: they hit the World Trade Center for the first time in 1993. In 1996 they hit the Khobar Towers where hundreds of American servicemen were living. In 1998 two embassies in Africa (Kenya and Tanzania) were bombed and destroyed by terrorists. And in 2000, terrorists hit and severely damaged the U.S.S. Cole. And Bill Clinton proved bin Laden’s thesis correct by doing exactly NOTHING.
Meanwhile, all throughout the Clinton presidency, al Qaeda was preparing to strike us. They brought in all the terrorists who would devastate us with their second attack on the World Trade Center on 9/11 2001 during Bill Clinton’s watch.
America was both weak and blind due to Bill Clinton’s gutting both the military and our intelligence capability. And of course, being blind and unable to see what was coming would hurt us deeply:
Author James Risen won the Pulitzer Prize on Tuesday for his much ballyhooed New York Times report last December that revealed President Bush’s previously secret terrorist surveillance program – a revelation he uncovered while researching his book “State of War.”
In the same book, however, Risen makes an equally explosive claim about President Clinton’s relationship with the CIA – which his editors at the Times have so far declined to cover.
Upon taking power in 1993, Risen reports, the Clinton administration “began slashing the intelligence budget in search of a peace dividend, and Bill Clinton showed almost no interest in intelligence matters.” The agency cutbacks combined with presidential disinterest took their toll almost immediately.
“Over a three-or-four-year period in the early-to-mid 1990s,” reports Risen, “virtually an entire generation of CIA officers – the people who had won the Cold War – quit or retired. One CIA veteran compared the agency to an airline that had lost all of is senior pilots . . . “
After Clinton CIA Director John Deutch cashiered several senior officers over a scandal in Guatamala, the situation got even worse.
“Morale [at the CIA] plunged to new lows, and the agency became paralyzed by an aversion to high-risk espionage operations for fear they would lead to political flaps. Less willing to take big risks, the CIA was less able to recruit spies in dangerous places such as Iraq.”
And so we were hit on 9/11 and were completely blindsided by the attack because Bill Clinton gutted the military and the intelligence budget leaving us weak and blind. And of course our spending skyrocketed because of the DotCom economic collapse that Bill Clinton left for George Bush that happened on Clinton’s watch but gutted $7.1 trillion in American wealth (almost as much as the Great Recession, btw) and which collapsed the value of the Nasdaq Valuation by fully 78% of its value as Bush was still trying to clean all the porn that the Clinton White House had left on the White House computers. And so Bill Clinton handed George Bush a massive recession and like whip cream on top of his economic disaster he handed George Bush an even more massive terrorist attack.
But, hey, don’t worry. Barack Obama is making all the same mistakes that Clinton made and then a whole bunch of even dumber mistakes that Clinton didn’t make.
George Tenet had this to say as he testified about what he found when he took over the CIA:
By the mid-1990s the Intelligence Community was operating with significant erosion in resources and people and was unable to keep pace with technological change. When I became DCI, I found a Community and a CIA whose dollars were declining and whose expertise was ebbing.
I remember watching TV news programs like “Nightline” and seeing coverage of the war going on in Bosnia. The same Clinton who sent them there had so gutted their capability that fighter wings were reduced to desperately trying to cannibalize the parts from aircraft to keep the increasingly few that were still flying in the air. And what Clinton publicly did to the military – fully 90% of the cuts Clinton made to the federal payroll were from the military (286,000 of the 305,000 employees cut were military). And according to George Tenet, the rest of them were in the CIA and NSA.
And then 9/11 happened as our enemies literally SAW our weakness and began to salivate.
Where are we now?
and the resultingly bold Obama response to China’s aggression?
Obama can say whatever he wants to, but his words don’t mean squat when the REST of the world – and in particular our airlines – are bowing down before China’s power.
I submit that Obama didn’t merely “dangerously dither” in his ad-hoc policy in the Chinese belligerence toward Japan – he outright turned his back on yet another ally in order to appease an enemy.
China is deliberately provoking conflict with the United States because they know that Obama isn’t a strong leader and that he will back down.
What’s going on in socialist paradise North Korea? They just seized an elderly Korean war veteran and they won’t give our American back to us. They say Obama is a weak little coward and they can do whatever they want.
I think of the glory of Rome when NOBODY messed with a Roman citizen because Rome would lay waste to their country if they did.
Another American – Alan Gross – just “celebrated” his third year of Obama not giving a damn that an American was imprisoned in Cuba. Oh, I’m sorry, that’s dated: MAKE THAT HIS FOURTH ANNIVERSARY.
Alan Gross’ wife says that Obama has done NOTHING to help her get her American back. I heard her state on Fox News this morning that she had NEVER HEARD ONCE from the Obama White House.
Given the experience of the mother of one of the Benghazi attack victims, though, if Obama is ignoring you AT LEAST HE’S NOT LYING TO YOU.
In Afghanistan, Obama is repeating his own history of abject weakness. Just as George Bush won the war in Iraq and then Obama lost the peace, Obama in his utter, pathological weakness and cowardice is about to lose Afghanistan the very same way he lost Iraq (and see here). We are on a trajectory to completely leave Afghanistan after all of those years fighting to have a role there. Why? Because the Karzai in Afghanistan realized what the leaders of Iraq also realized: that Barack Obama would be a weak and untrustworthy “ally” and it would be better to turn elsewhere than turn to America. And as this article itself documents, they’re right – because Obama simply cannot be trusted.
Meanwhile, the deals an incredibly weak, cynical and desperate Obama has made first in Syria and now in Iran simply shocks anybody who has so much as a single clue. Obama has guaranteed that Syrian dictator and mass murdering thug Assad will stay in power. In fact Obama in his weakness has guaranteed that Assad MUST remain in power in order for the wmd deal to work. Which means Syria and Russia just got everything they most wanted while they spend the next years playing America for the fool it is. As for Iran, Obama has guaranteed that Iran will be in an economically stronger position to announce that they have joined the nations with nuclear weapons as soon as they have successfully developed the ballistic missile system they need to give their nuclear threat any real teeth. There is frankly no reason for Iran to develop nuclear weapons until they have the means to deliver those weapons especially to Israel and the United States.
The Iranian president announced that the deal Obama made allows Iran to continue enriching uranium. And of course it does because Obama won’t do a damn thing to stop it.
Another true statement is that Obama’s deal – again in the Iranian president’s own words – isolates Israel.
Obama is a “leader” who leaves America’s allies twisting in the wind while he makes desperate deals to appease our enemies. And as a result he will have “peace in our time.” A completely false and naïve peace just like the last damn time we had such a “peace,” but Obama couldn’t give less of a damn as long as the world doesn’t blow up until he’s out of office.
Interestingly, the Great Tribulation officially begins when Israel signs a seven year covenant with a soon-coming world leader the Bible calls the Antichrist or “the beast.” What we just saw was Israel being so isolated and so desperate that it will have no one else to turn to BUT the Antichrist. Because her one great ally America abandoned her in her time of greatest need.
There’s something called “going down for the third time.” The first two times you go under weaken you and leaves you less able to stay above the water line; it’s the third time that drowns you. Stupid, pathetic, weak American sheeple elected Jimmy Carter, only to suffer massive decline and erosion of confidence in the minds of our allies while emboldening our enemies. And we suffered terribly as a result. Stupid, pathetic, weak American sheeple elected Bill Clinton, only to suffer the same fate in a series of terrorist attacks that culminated in the massive 9/11 attack. And now we’ve really gone and done it. I truly don’t think America will ever truly emerge from the damage that Barack Obama will have done by the time he finally finishes disgracing the office of president of the United States.
Note that I have never said that Barack Obama is the Antichrist; what Obama IS is the Antichrist’s Most Useful Idiot. If you voted for Obama, you VOTED for the Antichrist to come – and you will almost certainly just as enthusiastically vote to take the mark of the beast when the coming big government leader imposes the mark as he promises the ultimate economic big government Utopia.
I’ve pointed out the simple historic FACT that Democrats SAVAGED George Bush when he said Iran was a nuclear threat. Iran WILL HAVE nuclear weapons as a result of Democrats and Obama. And the world will be a far more frightening place that careens even faster toward Armageddon when they get the bomb and the missile to deliver it.
And we can’t do a damn thing to stop it, thanks to the man we wickedly made our president.