Obama unveils new strategy for 'leaner' US military, page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times
Topic started on 5-1-2012 @ 10:59 AM by judus
The US military will become "leaner" as it switches focus to the Asia-Pacific region, US President Barack Obama has announced.

a rare appearance at the Pentagon, he unveiled a far-reaching defence review under which thousands of troops are expected to be axed.
"So yes, our military will be leaner," Mr Obama told reporters on Thursday, "but the world must know - the United States is going to maintain our military superiority with armed forces that are agile, flexible and ready for the full range of contingencies and threats."

Joined by Defence Secretary Leon Panetta, President Obama stressed that the defence budget would still grow, but at a slower pace.

He said the US was "turning the page on a decade of war" and faced a "moment of transition".

"Even as our troops continue to fight in Afghanistan, the tide of war is receding," he said.

President Obama added: "At the same time, we have to renew our economic strength here at home, which is the foundation of our strength around the world. That includes putting our fiscal house in order."

The president said the new strategy would end "long-term, nation-building with large military footprints", with the Pentagon instead pursuing a national security strategy based on "smaller conventional ground forces".

Mr Panetta said the review would make the US military "more agile, more flexible, ready to deploy quickly".

Mr Obama has been closely involved with shaping the blueprint, meeting high-ranking defence officials six times since September.



Slim down he says to deploy more quickly deploy were the US have bases in nearly every country in the know world.

here is a look at the top war sorry i mean defense budgets


US
$739.3bn
1,569,000
6,302battle tanks 3,252fighter/ground attack aircraft 71submarines 450land-based intercontinental ballistic missile launchers

China
$89.8bn*
2,285,000
7,400battle tanks 1,669fighter/ground attack aircraft 71submarines 66land-based intercontinental ballistic missile launchers

UK
$63.7bn
174,000
227battle tanks 220fighter/ground attack aircraft 11submarines 0land-based intercontinental ballistic missile launchers (can launch from submarines)

Russia
$52.7bn*
956,000
3,310battle tanks 1,439fighter/ground attack aircraft 65submarines 292land-based intercontinental ballistic missile launchers

India
$31.9bn
1,325,000
3,233battle tanks 784fighter/ground attack aircraft 15submarines 0land-based intercontinental ballistic missile launchers (can launch from submarines)

That is were you tax payer money is going to.

God help us all


www.bbc.co.uk...


reply posted on 5-1-2012 @ 11:08 AM by beezzer
reply to post by judus

Sad. The military has been reduced to something you take out of the closet to scare someone with.

A reduced, weakened fighting force, where once stood noble, proud, brave men and women.

As long as I'm alive, I will treat the members of the military with the honor and respect that they deserve.

Thank you. Each and every one of you that stood up and demanded that you be counted.

*salute*


reply posted on 5-1-2012 @ 11:09 AM by bluemirage5
reply to post by judus



Obama won't even be in power a decade from now so this new "strategy" of his means squat


reply posted on 5-1-2012 @ 11:13 AM by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by bluemirage5


I'd just note here....the damage Jimmy Carter did to the United States Military and United States position and credbility world wide took the better part of a decade to fix and it took a man with the strength and conviction of Ronald Reagan to accomplish. Obama has already gone BEYOND anything Carter did....and I don't see a Reagan running for office....not even remotely close.

I'll count us very fortunate if we ONLY suffer the pain of Obama's harm to America for 10 years. I fear the effects my last longer than that.


reply posted on 5-1-2012 @ 11:29 AM by Stormdancer777
reply to post by FlyersFan





Exactly. Sure looks like the guy is trying to inflict as much damage as he can upon our national security before he is kicked out of office.


Katie bar the door if he gets re-elected.


reply posted on 5-1-2012 @ 11:50 AM by Shminkee Pinkee
reply to post by Skewed



Why would NATO troops be brought to US soil. After all NATO troops are already on US soil in the form of US troops, the USA being a founder member of NATO. ???


reply posted on 5-1-2012 @ 12:02 PM by Skewed
reply to post by Shminkee Pinkee



Work with me here, I do not intend to split hairs.

Was only trying to make a point.
Pages:     ^^TOP^^



Eglin Air Force Base hangar Foam Party!
  Posted 13 days ago with 4 member flags
Space weapons / Anonymous / Afghan War plan
  Posted 6 days ago with 4 member flags
What were those sounds in the sky? - Explained
  Posted 0 days ago with 4 member flags
Reports of Rumbling in the Sky: Pulsejet Technology?
  Posted 16 days ago with 3 member flags
Let anon hack drones!
  Posted 11 days ago with 3 member flags