(Robert) Gates Warns Against Big Cuts in Military Spending

[alp227]

Source: The New York Times

WASHINGTON — In a grim warning about financial priorities during a time of fiscal crisis, the defense secretary, Robert M. Gates, said Sunday that budget pressures must not limit Pentagon spending such that the military is unable to defend American interests in an unpredictable world.

Most notable for Mr. Gates — a longtime advocate for diplomacy and development, along with military power, to protect American global interests — was his reminder of the long-term requirement for the United States to sustain an armed force superior to any adversary.

“The problems we as a nation are grappling with are well-known: steep fiscal imbalances and mounting debt, which could develop into a deep crisis for our country,” Mr. Gates told graduating seniors at the University of Notre Dame.

He went on: “At the same time, we face a complex and unpredictable international security environment that includes a major war in Afghanistan, winding up the war in Iraq, revolution throughout the Middle East, new rising powers, nuclear proliferation in Iran and Korea, the continued threat of terrorism, and more.”

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/23/us/politics/23gates.html

[sakabatou]

1. Up yours, Gates

....................../´¯/)
....................,/¯../
.................../..../
............./´¯/'...'/´¯¯`·¸
........../'/.../..../......./¨¯\
........('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...')
.........\.................'...../
..........''...\.......... _.·´
............\..............(
..............\.............\...

[slay]

4. +1

war monger/profiteer assholes these fuckers.

[truedelphi]

6. Yep in the recent Rolling Stone epic about the twenty something

War profiteers, Gates personally went to some god-forsaken capital to get the armaments and ammo the
Kha-What-is-stan's had frozen in place.

The chain of command now profits directly from our wars.

[ixion]

5. Yep. Gates the neocon wants the MiC to stay funded

imagine that. :puke:

[gtar100]

17. Agreed!

[NM Independent]

40. ^THIS

[Owl]

43. +2

[villager]

2. well, of course. If you strip the elites of their ability to threaten or broadcast violence

...all hell might break loose!

If by "all hell," you mean the elites being suddenly less able to maintain empire, exploit workers, etc...

[DeSwiss]

3. Of course he does.....

...what else would a WARMONGER say?

You know, I like the word, WARMONGER. It reminds me of the old-fashioned word WHOREMONGER.

- Guess who's getting screwed????

K&R

[plumbob]

41. OMFG! We're ONLY spending 48% of all the military spending on EARTH!?

What if EVERYONE ELSE gangs up on us!!??? Doomed, I tell ya! Doomed!

Gotta close that gap immediately!!!!!!!!!!!!




See? I coulda grown up to do this shit and got some of that Koch $$$$$$$$$$$$$$.






I think there's the teeniest chance there might really be a hell, though, or at least karmic blow-back.

Sigh.

[DeSwiss]

44. And yet that means......

...the $1,470,000,000,000 that the world spent for killing, maiming and destroying when divided by the approximately 6,902,887,287 people on earth (http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/popclockworld.html">official count - 3/01/11) means that on average we all spent approximately $212.95 per person in 2008 to be protected from one another.

- All things being equal, I just as soon that we had bought everyone pizza and beer instead......

[plumbob]

47. MMMMMMMMMM. Beer and pizza.

Can we work in some dessert, too?

[DeSwiss]

54. Yes.

- Yes we can.

[No Elephants]

58. I don't believe that the world is spending only $1.47 trillion or that the U.S. is spending only

$711 billion.

What is and is not included in these figures?

[DeSwiss]

66. You could be right.....

...since the article blurb states that the DoD is one of their primary sources. However, the details appears to be behind their paywall.

- And I ain't buyin.....

http://www.iiss.org/publications/military-balance/the-military-balance-2008/

[Fuddnik]

7. Now there's a real surprise.

[think]

8. Do we need 268 military installations in Germany to be safe today? nt

[No Elephants]

59. MANY things we don't need to be safe today. On the flip side, we probably

need many things to be safe today that we don't have because our thinking is outdated.

[buckrogers1965]

9. What threat does the United States have?

Can we be invaded? No. Can we be bombed? No. What can happen is people blowing stuff up every now and again. But guess what? If we spent 100 times as much as we do right now, people could still blow up stuff.

So the only thing we have to fear, is fear itself. Time to cut military spending down to just 1% of what we are spending today.

[plumbob]

48. Second the motion!

Call the question!

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

10. That speech could have been given in the sixties.

So sad, nothing changes, just the same old tired bullshit.
Are his "American interests" the same as mine?
Is his vision for our future the same as mine?
I don't think they are.

[theophilus]

11. Our (tax funded) military should defend OUR interests. Right now, deployed in

ill advised wars, our military is hurting the American public. Trillions are being drawn off the public treasury in a fools errand that enriches the Military Industrial Complex but produces little of lasting value for the vast majority of Americans. What is not is OUR interest is to use my tax funded military to defend the interests of Exxon, Halliburton, et al. If those folks need "protection" they must be forced to hire mercenary security forces on their own payroll. I refuse to continue funding these private forces at very high prices. OUR military can operate much more efficiently and do a better job of protecting Americans here in America. IMO....

[savannah43]

31. You mean the public treasury the wealthy people who

own and run the corporations, barely, if at all, contribute to through taxes? That treasury? And who's interest is the military protecting? Real people in this country? Or the Koch Bothers (intended) and others like them. Let them hire Blackwater/Xe, or as I like to call that mercenary enterprise, Blackheart. Pay for your own security. What a nice little scam they all have going--destroy public education, kill unions and thus completely kill jobs. Let Wall Street wipe out the middle class and their meager wealth, use the commodity markets to raise food prices putting everyone, except themselves, in a state of fear, and driving up gas prices to add to the fear and dread real people feel. All the while becoming fabulously wealthy themselves and letting us pay for it. Oh, Karma. Please get them all.

[savannah43]

32. One of Halliburton's major investments is war.

And fracking.

[GeorgeGist]

12. American interests ...

not American people.

[Zorra]

13. Fear much. Be afraid, Americans. Multi-national orporations need your

military to protect their overseas operations.

Multi-national oil companies need your military your miltary to protect their overseas operations and to use millions of gallons of fossil fuel each day.

The WTO global plutarchs need your military to protect them from you.

Be afraid, have fear, the bogeyman is just outside your door and he's coming to get you!!!

"Cut! It's a wrap. Whaddya think, Mr.Gates?"

"Ya know, Rupe, I think that can't help but strike fear into the hearts of all those stupid "little people". Great work, amigo, great work"

[liberal N proud]

14. When it is your baby , you do everything you can to prevent it being cut

His opinion is worthless.

[JDPriestly]

15. I've lived in Germany.

Do we need a military presence in Germany? In my opinion, probably yes.

But do we need the numerous military facilities we have there no?

No way. It has just become a habit to keep a big part of our military personnel and support system in Germany. The Germans don't need quite such a large American military presence in their country, and we don't need to have such a large representation there.

Pull some of them out now. If we don't reduce our presence overseas, we could get to the point that we can't afford any presence overseas.

[Ramulux]

22. Why do we need a military presence in Germany?

[JDPriestly]

23. It's the right distance from a lot of other parts of the world.

Our troops are protected there, but close enough that we can transport them quickly to a lot of areas where they might be needed.

[Ramulux]

25. What do you mean?

What do we need to be using our troops for anywhere near Germany? Also, does the fact that Germans dont want an American military presence in their country mean anything?

[stevenleser]

29. Actually they do want us there. They keep voting for politicians who uphold the policy. In a

democracy, that is how it works.

[savannah43]

33. Thgat's also how it works when we bribe politicians and

fix elections. You don't really think that we only fix elections in the US do you?

[stevenleser]

35. Clean elections is an issue a lot of places. I dont think I've heard about issues in Germany or most

of Europe, however.

[Ramulux]

49. Ummmm

The Japanese keep electing politicians who support the Okinawa military bases while 99% of the country is against them. So, I dont think the fact that the politicians in Germany support our bases means that the German people support them.

Secondly, what they think about the bases isn't the point, it what they are used for, so I will ask again, what reason do we have to keep military bases in Germany? What do we need to be using our soldiers for in any place near Germany?

[stevenleser]

63. That is how a Democracy works. Sorry if that disappoints you.

As for your second question, as I am neither attacking nor defending what the military is being used for in this context, its not incumbent on me to answer.

[Ramulux]

71. So you are saying that..

even though our politicians support the war in Afghanistan while a majority of the people in this country are against it, that means that our country supports the war in Afghanistan? Are you making the case that if our politicians support something that automatically means that the country supports it?

Also, are you agreeing with me that we dont need any military bases in Germany or do you think there is some need for them?

[JDPriestly]

46. It has been a number of years since I lived in Germany.

At that time, the Germans I met were very happy to have Americans there. (I was not there as part of the military.)

A plane leaving an airport in Germany can reach areas in the Mediterranean, in Eastern Europe, all over Europe and areas in the Atlantic ocean. It's not called Central Europe for nothing.

[quakerboy]

52. And why do we need that?

What is the driving force behind the need to reach all of these places? Why do we need the ability to strike near instantly in any part of Europe. Why do we need the ability to project force into eastern Europe, or the Mediterranean.

What is the motivation behind this need that could not be equally met by facilities owned and operated by the German government, offered to our use in the event of an actual emergency.

[JackRiddler]

51. Ah, so "we" need a platform from which to project force in other countries we have no business in.

[mike3121]

36. Good point WHY?

I was stationed in Germany (Heidelberg). It was a paid vacation. What I saw was a vacation paradise for hordes of high ranking officers and their staffs. Full birds were so common you'd trip over them on a daily basis. Do you know what it costs to support a full bird. His base pay, shipping whole baggage over, high cost per diem whenever he goes somewhere. A staff of at least 6 underlings to support him. On and on. All on your unemployed dollar.

[Kolesar]

39. I would like to hang out in Germany for a while

Visit the Alps, take boat tours on the Rhine River.
Even the Pentagon is getting sheepish about the huge, useless "commands" in Germany.

[classysassy]

72. Germany is a great place to vacation for three years

The congressmen and women love to go there on fact finding missions,the generals love to go there for the great ,food,beer and broads,the Germans want us there to protect them and spend our money so their citizens can work for Uncle Sam and take off on all their holidays.We tax payers are suckers.

[provis99]

67. thats just so many ways of stupid.

Do we need military bases in Canada too? How about Argentina? I'll bet we need a few bases in Antarctica, too.

We don't need a single military person in Germany. Or Italy, or Britain, or Japan, or any other place our imperialist warmongering fingers can stretch.

[drokhole]

16. Is this a fucking press release?

What the fuck, NYT? Not a single challenge, absolutely no perspective, to these absurd, demonstrably false assertions? "We need to spend more than the next guy to be safe." What a fucking joke. The interests, like others have pointed out, are not ours, it is of a select monied few. And we get to foot the bill. Stop suppressing other cultures, stop bombing them to high hell, and maybe we wouldn't need to worry so much. Then again, we would still need some well-armed bullies to shove our policies, and private businesses, down people's throats.

Oh, and this reminded me of this awesome Onion article:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/budget-mixup-provides-nations-schools-with-enough,20350/

[Lasher]

42. And we can't even post comments to the 'article'.

Let's not allow the unwashed masses to confuse Secretary Gates' narrative, shall we?

[Angry Dragon]

18. Then we just need to nuke about 10 countries to

show everyone else we are the bad-ass kid on the block
and don't give us any shit............

[on point]

19. Sorry. End of Empire. Massive cuts to military. Learn to live inside your borders!

All of this talk about American interests is really code for support for multinationals.

There is a certain part of effort on a world stage which can be about preventing even larger wars, but for too long we have been the instigator of wars.

[Ramulux]

20. Scumbag

Oh no, we have such terrible debt and unemployment, but we definitely cant take money away from our empire-building exercises overseas, that would be immoral. Who else is going to regularly murder Afghan civilians if we dont? Think about all the poor Afghan children who will have to grow up with both of their parents alive rather than blown up by drone attacks. Its unconscionable.

Just for fun, I would like to see someone who still supports Obama try to defend his decision to retain the services of Gates.

[Vattel]

21. FUCK YOU GATES!!!!

[xchrom]

24. Go to Hell, Gates. Nt

[Yon_Yonson]

26. The military industrial complex is going down the shitter ... about time!

[Mosaic]

27. Bullshit

Bullying others is a crime. We don't have a defense force, we have an offense force. And I don't want my tax money going to sustain this evil "power" over our neighboring countries.

[L0oniX]

28. Killing people here so they can kill people over there ...or pushing granny off the cliff...

so they can keep their war machine. After all ...why pay money to those who don't or can't work anymore? What??? You didn't know that SS was a ponzi scheme to soak the people for the war machine?

[SHRED]

30. "American global interests"

Translated: "Private corporate interests".


---

[Zorra]

57. Exactly nt

[athenasatanjesus]

34. We gotta be prepared for all those enemies we plan on having.

Especially the ones we create ourselves.

[azul]

37. There is a basic war profiteering formula.

For each dollar spent to create an enemy, x number of damn dollars are produced for profiteers.

Gates is their shill.

edit: We, the people, unfortunately are their servants and cannon fodders.

[cstanleytech]

38. Ah yes the typical claims when the sacred cow (military overspending)

that must never ever be cut even if it means we will end up bankrupt spending as much as we do on it.

[pfitz59]

45. End the empire

end military corruption!

[Overseas]

50. If we could bring all the military service jobs back in-house, with lower overhead,

and put thousands of people back to work that would be great. I want my tax dollars going directly to the workers.

When we did the military service jobs like cooking and electrical wiring in-house, we got double-duty for our dollars-- they served as job training programs for after the military. And you could still serve your country even if you weren't cut out for combat. And health care and a pension.

Eliminating the profiteering of privatization would go a long way toward substantial savings in military spending.

[OnyxCollie]

53. Transforming the military to meet the demands of the 21st century

costs money.

A lot of money. 3.5%, 3.8%... Oh, let's just say 4% of GDP to be safe.

The people at PNAC explained it all in their lovely sales brochure, "Rebuilding America's Defenses."

We shouldn't allow the Iraq War drawdown interfere with their plans now, should we?

[area51]

55. Ridiculous. The military has to let go of the teat -- it's killing us.

Close a lot of the military bases, end the multiple wars of choice, offer returning soldiers training in the medical profession and in rebuilding projects such as bridges, etc. and start a transition to single-payer health care.

[cstanleytech]

68. I agree with alot of what you said.

[Hawkowl]

56. Obama's worst cabinet member?

There are so many to choose from. Geithner? Arne Duncan? Eric Holder? What a bunch of FUCKING SHIT BAGS!!!

[No Elephants]

60. One of many heinous Obama appointments.

[City Lights]

61. Time for Gates to hold a bake sale, or sell wrapping paper.

Perpetual war is bankrupting us on more than one front.

[blueclown]

62. How can we pay for all those no-bid contracts if we lower defense spending substantially?

:sarcasm:

[Octafish]

64. Team-B-2

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=2006705&mesg_id=2007712

[izquierdista]

65. NYT editors do a fine job editing the truth

Truth be told, it can be resurrected from the omitted words:

In a grim warning about financial priorities during a time of fiscal crisis, the defense secretary, Robert M. Gates, said Sunday that budget pressures must not limit Pentagon spending such that the military is unable to defend American corporate interests in an unpredictable world.

Most notable for Mr. Gates — a longtime advocate for diplomacy and development, along with military power, to protect American global corporate interests — was his reminder of the long-term requirement for the United States to sustain an armed force superior to any adversary.

[Blue Owl]

69. slam the Gates shut

n/t

[lsewpershad]

70. Mr Gates

Why don't you just leave quietly?