Pentagon Official: The Facts Are In, And Obama’s Policy Is A Direct Danger To The United States

Joseph Miller is the pen name for a ranking Department of Defense official with a background in U.S. special operations and combat experience in Iraq and Afghanistan. He has worked in strategic planning.

The report is in, and the review of the president’s foreign policy is clear: If there is not an immediate course-reversal, the United States is in serious danger.

On July 31, the National Defense Panel released its long-awaited report on the effects of the QDR and delivered its findings to Congress. The panel pulled no punches — its findings were a scathing indictment of Obama’s foreign policy, national security policy, and defense policy. The panel found that president Barack Obama’s QDR, military force reductions, and trillion-dollar defense budget cuts are dangerous — and will leave the country in a position where it is unable to respond to threats to our nation’s security. This, the panel concluded, must be reversed as soon as possible.

In particular, the report addresses the need for the administration to return to the flexible response doctrine — a policy where the military was tasked with being capable of fighting two wars at the same time. Given the current state of affairs and the threats posed to our nation, the panel felt that the two-war doctrine was still required to meet our nation’s national security challenges. The man-power reductions and budget cuts are both reflections of this change in policy, so it must be altered before that is possible.

My remarks to follow in a moment..Thedailycaller

Pax

a reply to: paxnatus

Thanks for finding and posting this. May I make a prediction without even reading the source article? This thread will either be ignored by those who support Obama, or hate America, or people will try to derail it.

How will they derail it? There will be an attempt to say that since it's being reported by a guy under a pen name, it's all a lie. Or, the report doesn't say that at all.

It may be fun to watch. On second thought, it will be sad to watch. May I repeat a slogan I found on another web site?

Liberals. You don't have a good argument. You don't even have a good excuse.

What other country tries to promote stability in the world? Although, I admit, the US under the present leadership has made things worse just about everywhere.

a reply to: paxnatus

While I am sure a quick google search can find it, I don't seem to see a source for the claims the article is making. Seems like if you want to quote a report, your should link that report somewhere on the page.
I looked high and low, maybe I just missed it if someone else can find it on there.

a reply to: paxnatus

See? What did I tell you? Can I predict, or what?

Go to a non-biased site, and read the National Defense Panels report. It does not, as your link above claims, lay the blame on Obama but rather on the sequestration, a byproduct of the dysfunctional Congress.

Since World War II, no matter which party has controlled the White House or Congress, America’s global military capability and commitment has been the strategic foundation undergirding our global leadership. Given that reality, the defense budget cuts mandated by the Budget Control Act (BCA) of 2011, coupled with the additional cuts and constraints on defense management under the law’s sequestration provision, constitute a serious strategic misstep on the part of the United States.

Congress and the President have taken limited steps to ameliorate the impact of these budget cuts, including reaching a deal that provided partial relief of $44 billion since sequestration took effect in 2013. In addition, the President has proposed additional funding above sequestration in his current budget of about $115 billion over five years (in addition to $26 billion in the Opportunity, Growth, and Security Initiative in 2015).

PDF copy of the report: Ensuring a Strong U.S. Defense for the Future

WASHINGTON: This afternoon, a congressionally chartered panel of prestigious defense experts denounced sequestration as “self-defeating” and a “serious strategic misstep” that “Congress and the President should repeal…immediately.” But will it preach to anyone not already in the choir?

While bipartisan, the National Defense Panel is most heeded by House Republicans. They see it as a valuable alternative to the Obama administration’s Quadrennial Defense Reviews, which House Armed Services Chairman Buck McKeon in particular considers so inadequate as to violate the law. (There were NDPs under Clinton as well, but not during the Bush years). Both the 2010 NDP and this one call for more defense spending in general and a stronger Navy in particular. No wonder, then, McKeon hailed its release and that Republican Rep. Randy Forbes – the House seapower subcommittee chairman and an arch-foe of sequestration – called me this morning to tout the report.

Source:
National Defense Panel Slams Sequester – But Can It Change Minds?

Now if you want to debate who was responsible for the sequestration that has crippled the defense budget, go right ahead. Just a reminder, Congress itself self-imposed the sequester on themselves, if they couldn't arrive at a budget. They failed to do so, and consequently the sequester went into effect.

Still does not detract from the fact that Obama is a foreign policy disaster walking.

Now Were In Trouble!

Or they will not do anything about it, drag it on, or play with it as a cat would. Would seem that the Cat is out of said bag so it's only a matter of time somethings going to happen. Since somehow the Pentagon might have their hands in it too!

Like in Rev, someones Going To Die yet come back to Haunt Us. Since that line could be mis understood; say Oboma get impeached and later regains power. Would seem to fit since we are in the 21st Cent and Wordplay now could mean anything!

Placing Bets Other then Alabama! Ebola Virus is just the distraction being brought here. Just last month, some claim various viruses could be coming from the Boarder! That we Bring one of the Worst ones Here? I did not know it order to have NWO one would run the risk wiping everyone out; unless there is a cure.

Thats why everyone hates the US! Plain and Simple. If we can not have it, we will take it or cause so much trouble one wished they said Yes at the Get Go!

One can not Derail, Twist nor Claim Differently. Truth Hurts!

Peace

I think we need to maintain a strong military, we never should have reduced the military. But I don't believe we need to be spending huge amounts on jets that don't work as they should either. We can't be spending huge amounts of money on drones and personal drones, we need men there. Soldiers are pr people, drones are not. Soldiers can assess the situation better than drones. Sure, some drones are beneficial but to replace boots on the ground with technology that is super expensive can be a loss for public relations for our country. They will start thinking of us as robot people like in the movie terminator and most people will eventually revolt.

a reply to: charles1952

I'm sorry I didn't see you predict that some one would point out bad reporting. If you say you are quoting a report, link the report. Just like here on ATS, if you make the claim, back it up.
Not hard to source a report in an article about said report.


This QDR was set up by the DoD, of course they are going to put out reports about how they want to keep their ridiculous budget. If you really think our military can't handle anyone out there, then you are just being willfully ignorant IMO.

originally posted by: charles1952
a reply to: paxnatus

See? What did I tell you? Can I predict, or what?

no need to act like a child about it..

are you saying the Pentagon has never been wrong before?

did it occur to you that the pentagon and republicans go hand in hand and there is a election coming up ?

are we going to pretend that the Pentagon isn't PO'd about having its budget cut and is going to throw as much mud at the man responsible for that as possible?

did it occur to you people might not want to comment because of people like you?

Read the entire report, it further states it was Congress' sequestration that is causing this defense budget fallout, and not Obama:

Additionally, we strongly recommend that Congress restore the strategic decision making power that has been denied to both the President and the Secretary of Defense by the BCA. The across the board cuts imposed by sequestration have essentially prevented them from being able to align resources with national security priorities.

This warning was not heeded. As our report shows, the defense budget cuts mandated by the Budget Control Act of 2011, coupled with the additional cuts and constraints on defense management under the law’s sequestration provision which commenced in March 2013, have created significant investment shortfalls in military readiness and both present and future capabilities. Unless reversed, these shortfalls will lead to greater risk to our forces, posture, and security in the near future. In fact and this bears emphasis we believe that unless recommendations of the kind we make in this Report are adopted, the Armed Forces of the United States will in the near future be at high risk of not being able to accomplish the National Defense Strategy.

The "Budget Control Act" of 2011 was another of Congress great failings - recall that this is when the "super committee" first imposed the sequestration threat if it couldn't cut the budget. And recall that it was when Republicans shut down the government over the "debt-ceiling" crisis. Recall also that this was a second go-around over the debt-ceiling crisis from a previous government shutdown, where the GOP pushed the US into default and saw our credit rating cut.

The Budget Control Act of 2011 (Pub.L. 112–25, S. 365, 125 Stat. 240, enacted August 2, 2011) is a federal statute in the United States that was signed into law by President Barack Obama on August 2, 2011. The Act brought conclusion to the United States debt-ceiling crisis of 2011, which had threatened to lead the United States into sovereign default on or around August 3, 2011.

The law involves the introduction of several complex mechanisms, such as creation of the Congressional Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (sometimes called the "super committee"),[1] options for a balanced budget amendment and automatic budget sequestration.

The BCA 2011 is available HERE (PDF file) (GPO.gov)

Read it and you'll see how extensively the use of the sequester was, and it slashed the budget severely.

The National Defense Report further states:

We are particularly troubled that recent budget cuts under sequestration were imposed without a comprehensive analysis of their impact on the armed forces and their ability to accomplish national security priorities. We understand that prioritizing expenditures is difficult in the turbulence of democratic politics where the urgent often crowds out the important; but we must emphasize that America’s global military capability and commitment is the strategic linchpin undergirding our longstanding and successful strategy of international engagement and leadership.

A lot of this is fallout from the budget games and debt-ceiling games and government shutdown games the GOP played for the past few years. Did they do that just to undermine the Obama presidency? They did after all state that was their number one goal on the day Obama took office - no matter what the costs would be. Now you can see in this report just what one of those costs were.

originally posted by: charles1952
or people will try to derail it.

So people derail a thread by pointing out the claim the OP makes about the report is in fact false - and they do not even bother to link the report - it is as if they have never actually even read the report they are commenting on! Oh, so in fact they have not read it, or even linked to the report itself!

Obama Derangement Syndrome is strong in some people!

a reply to: paxnatus

We've been saying this for quite some time.

Nice to see some validation.

a reply to: charles1952

Lies,Lies,lies......The military industrial complex is all a lie dear readers. They want you to be afraid....very afraid. ANd it works especially with the right.




We should cut our military by 50%. War is a industry just like fast food. And the fools will say we need to have this as a deterrent.....It is a lie. Our arsenal could wipe out all life on earth. China,Russia,India none of them would risk it. And that leaves the boogie man hiding in caves. When that lie started we had a huge military and it still happened.



Conservatives ask yourself would the founding fathers be OK with the way our military is today? This has nothing to do with security it has everything to do with greed and power. Do not let them play you.

So in other words ...neocons will say what neocons say?

What in God's name has Obama done??? Forget what he has done for us, which is next to nothing but what has he done to us?

Here is why this decision is so vital and the consequences of his decision will be paid by your children and your grand children and many after that!!

This article speaks of something known as "The Flexible Response Doctrine". Basically, this states that our military have the capability to fight 2 wars at one time. Given the way the world is blowing up that makes a lot of sense..But Obama cut or defense budget by a trillion dollars! He reduced our Military troops not to mention sliced and diced their benefits and the benefits of our Vets! The article explains what exactly is in the the flexible response doctrine...A doctrine drawn up in 1961 by Kennedy and adapted by the United states, stating the aforementioned.

But here is the BIG PROBLEM as it is summed up here:

At the time the Obama administration announced the change in our defense doctrine, the president was also in front of the cameras threatening to use military force in Iran and Syria, announcing a “strategic pivot” toward Asia to counter a rising China, and swearing to uphold our defense treaties with Israel, Taiwan, South Korea, NATO, etc, all while we were still at war in Afghanistan. How can you threaten to take military action that could start a war when you are already fighting one in Afghanistan if you have changed your military doctrine to only fight one war at a time?

Consider everything we are dealing with on the global front and look at the way this man has tied our hands and made us sitting ducks!! Perhaps this was/is his plan along!

I am truly at a loss as how to stop this traitor!! If you do not support our Military the ones whom fight for your freedom then you do NOT support the United States of America!!

Oh yeah we got some change alright!!!!

Your thoughts, please.....

Pax

american hypocracy at it brightest.



" US strikes $11bn arms deal with Qatar "

yeah,, Hamas supporting,, Soldier negotiating,, Qatar,,

forgot about Berdahl?

Welp looks like this thread has gone full mentally challenged.

You folks have a good night

a reply to: SubTruth

The Pentagon budget has always been bloated, and the MIC will scream about how dire the threat is to America if we don't give it an unlimited budget. I differentiate between the Pentagon and the MIC here.

What's funny is that there have been several instances lately where the budget asked Congress to STOP funding on unwanted or wasteful projects, yet now we have a Congressional report from a former Bush neocon that whines about not getting enough funding.

Pentagon Tells Congress: Stop Giving Us What We Don't ...

Abrams Tank Pushed By Congress Despite Army's Protests

Congress Pushes for Weapons Pentagon Didn't Want

Army to Congress: Thanks, but no tanks

Congress forcing military to keep unwanted assets, programs despite spending cuts, report says

Pentagon asks for less; Congress spends more

Congress Packs Defense Bills with Millions in Pork

The unwanted war machines Congress is forcing on the Pentagon

Read those articles, then read the National Defense Report, and see where the BS is.

originally posted by: charles1952
a reply to: paxnatus

What other country tries to promote stability in the world?

You mean by propping up brutal dictators when it is convenient and toppling democratically elected governments when it suits our purposes? That kind of stability? Excellent point.

Here is a great example of our stability promotion.