incase you didnt notice...he also let all those scu m b ag terrorists into our boarders.... he also cut military funding like most democrats...
This is from The Heritage Foundation, merely to back what ive stated and its at www.heritage.org...
i know its long, and i just want to say im making a point, NOT STARTING AN ARGUMENT OR WAR (of sorts)
"The Facts About Readiness. In the early 1990s, the Bush Administration began to reduce the size of the U.S. military so that it would be consistent
with post-Cold War threats. Under the Clinton Administration, however, these reductions in forces escalated rapidly, with too little defense spending,
while U.S. forces were deployed more often.
Because the security of the United States is at stake, it is imperative to present the facts about military readiness:
FACT #1. The size of the U.S. military has been cut drastically in the past decade.
Between 1992 and 2000, the Clinton Administration cut national defense by more than half a million personnel and $50 billion in inflation-adjusted
dollars. The Army alone has lost four active divisions and two Reserve divisions. The number of total active personnel in the Air Force has decreased
by nearly 30 percent. In the Navy, the total number of ships has decreased from around 393 ships in the fleet in 1992 to 316 today. Even the Marines
have dropped 22,000 personnel.
In spite of these drastic force reductions, military missions and operations tempo increased. Because every mission affects far greater numbers of
servicemen than those directly involved, most operations other than warfare, such as peacekeeping, have a significant negative impact on readiness.
FACT #2. Military deployments have increased dramatically throughout the 1990s.
The pace of deployments has increased 16-fold since the end of the Cold War. Between 1960 and 1991, the Army conducted 10 operations outside of normal
training and alliance commitments, but between 1992 and 1998, the Army conducted 26 such operations. Similarly, the Marines conducted 15 contingency
operations between 1982 and 1989, and 62 since 1989. During the 1990s, U.S. forces of 20,000 or more troops were engaged in non-warfighting missions
in Somalia (1993), Haiti (1994), Bosnia (1996), and Iraq and Kuwait (1998).
This dramatic increase in the use of America's armed forces has had a detrimental effect on overall combat readiness. Both people and equipment wear
out faster with frequent use. Frequent deployments also take funding away from ongoing expenses such as training, fuel, and supplies. Moreover, the
stress of frequent and often unexpected deployments can be detrimental to troop morale and jeopardize the armed forces' ability to retain
FACT #3. America's military is aging rapidly.
Most of the equipment that the U.S. military uses today, such as Abrams tanks, Apache helicopters, Bradley fighting vehicles, surface ships,
submarines, bombers, and tactical aircraft, are aging much faster than they are being replaced. Due to a shortsighted modernization strategy, some
systems are not even being replaced. Lack of funding coupled with increased tempo and reduced forces strains the U.S. military's ability to defend
vital national interests.
As weapons age, they become less reliable and more expensive to maintain. The services have attempted to provide for their higher maintenance costs by
reallocating funds, but they often take the funds from procurement accounts, effectively removing the money from modernization programs. Shortages of
parts and aging equipment are already affecting readiness, and the effects are expected to worsen. Pentagon spokesman Kenneth Bacon recently reported
that spare parts are so scarce that the Air Force is made to "cannibalize" perfectly good aircraft for spare parts.
FACT #4. Morale is on the decline in the U.S. armed forces.
According to an August 1999 U.S. General Accounting Office review, more than half of the officers and enlisted personnel surveyed "were dissatisfied
and intended to leave the military after their current obligation or term of enlistment was up." Because U.S. servicemen are the military's greatest
asset, a ready U.S. military requires bright, well-trained, and highly motivated active and reserve personnel. Unfortunately, due largely to low
morale, the services are finding it difficult to recruit and retain servicemen.
Conclusion. Under the Clinton Administration, the U.S military has suffered under a dangerous combination of reduced budgets, diminished forces, and
increased missions. The result has been a steep decline in readiness and an overall decline in U.S. military strength. Nearly a decade of misdirected
policy coupled with a myopic modernization strategy has rendered America's armed forces years away from top form.
To deny that the United States military has readiness problems is to deny the men and women in uniform the respect they deserve. America's military
prowess can be restored, but policymakers must first admit there is a problem. Only then can the President and Congress work together to reestablish
America's top readiness capabilities.""