Quantcast

Comments about ‘Pentagon begins planning for massive budget cuts’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Dec. 5 2012 2:50 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

Rumsfeld lost track of a couple trillion and nobody noticed under bush?

andyjaggy
American Fork, UT

The military is important, but they need to learn to do more with less just like everyone else.

Screwdriver
Casa Grande, AZ

Goooooooood!!!

It's not a fiscal cliff at all, it's a peace savings.

Conservatives always forget the part where the deified founding fathers didn't want a standing army at all. We can blow up the world ten times if need be and we have more guns per capita that any other country.

We're safe, conservatives are just scared little men incapable of feeling safe.

worf
Mcallen, TX

Military provides thousands of jobs.

Wouldn't it be better having people working with defense of our country, then sitting home hoping someone is going to call with a job offer? Collecting welfare?

Do our leaders really care for a working America, or should we all be on our knees.

J Thompson
SPRINGVILLE, UT

The military is an authorized cost of government, unlike Social Security. We are obligated to fund it it fully.

mcdugall
Layton, UT

@J Thompson, How do you figure social security is not an "authorized" cost of Government?

cavetroll
SANDY, UT

When you look at military spending, it really does need to be cut. The Air Force didn't want or need the new F-35s, but were forced to acquire them. Now the F-35 program is over budget by billions of dollars. Bad design, poor workmanship, and a host of other reasons led to this, and it is putting the pilots in danger. Yet none of our representatives are howling over this calamity.

worf
Mcallen, TX

We can't cut welfare, but the military?

I thought Obama was bringing unemployment down to 5.2%?

California should be the richest state!

* Perfect weather
* resources
* ports for importing and exporting

Now one of the poorest, with only illegals wanting in. The rest of the country is following their path.

Our California liberals, are getting what they voted for.

J Thompson
SPRINGVILLE, UT

McDugall

Read Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution (it's only one sentence long) and then tell us where FDR had the authority to force us to pay into a Ponzi scheme, a scheme that the Governnent is trying to back out of, after charging most of us 15% all of our working lives to fund.

bricha
lehi, ut

Im all for keeping the us safe but 700 billion dollars a year? Seems a bit excessive to me. If I understand it right we really aren't talking about cuts we are talking about slowing the growth of their budget.

Flashback
Kearns, UT

The only spending mandated by the Constitution is defense spending. Read the Preamble some day where it says the words, "provide for the common defense..."

If our defense is not strong, then we are in trouble. Is there waste? Yes. I'd like to see the F22 and F35 cut completely and invest the money in updating the airframe and systems on the F-16 and F-18 and build many more new ones. Maybe invest in more Harriers for the Marines, and a bunch more A-10's. Some design tweaks with new technology would save a lot of money.

You want to really save money? I would say cut welfare in all forms. Means test it, and watch those on it to make sure that they actually need it. Cut the Education Department and give some of the money saved to the states as block grants and let the states determine what their own education priorities are.

Also reform medicare. I'm getting close to the age that the government will make me get Medicare. I frankly don't want to even participate in it. Means test it. I'll buy my own insurance.

worf
Mcallen, TX

The military budget is less then half of our yearly deficit spending, and cutting it would increase unemployment, and welfare.

Either way,--it does nothing to improve the economy, but weakens our ability to defend ourselves.

Like we see in California---May our liberal friends get what they voted for.

VST
Bountiful, UT

@cavetroll said, "Bad design, poor workmanship, and a host of other reasons led to this, and it is putting the pilots in danger."

You made that statement with regards to the F-35 aircraft. Are you sure you are not referring to the F-22, whose production was stopped at 187 aircraft back in the defense appropriations bill of 2010?

I am unaware of these types of problems you mentioned (especially the safety of the pilots being jeopardized) with the current production of the F-35 aircraft.

VST
Bountiful, UT

@Flashback said, "I'd like to see the F22 and F35 cut completely and invest the money in updating the airframe and systems on the F-16 and F-18 and build many more new ones."

One big problem with that approach Flashback. Russia, China, and four other nations are in full scale development of 5th generation (stealthy with advanced avionics and high maneuverability) fighters that potentially will have equivalent capabilities of both the F-22 and the F-35 fighters. The F-16 and F-18 will be no match against any new 5th generation fighter aircraft.

Russia is actually the closest to producing their first operational aircraft (anticipated in 2015) that will match the capabilities of the F-22/F-35. China is a little further out (anticipated somewhere around 2018-2020). Prototypes of both planes are in flight test right now.

Six of our ally nations will be purchasing the F-35s from the U.S. to support their 5th generation fighter defense needs.

ExecutorIoh
West Jordan, UT

The country is $1.3 trillion dollars over budget, each year. We need to do more than cut $1.2 trillion over 10 years, we need to cut $1.2 trillion in for year. We have all become accustomed to a certain tax rate and a certain level of government spending, but that has got to get fixed before the collection calls start coming on the federal debt.

FT
salt lake city, UT

Military budget should be a fixed percent of our GDP. Currently we spend more than 8 times all other countries in the world combined!! That's not sustainable!! Balancing the budget is not hard but our politicans serve their interests instead of the people. Utahns should start by voting out Hatch and Lee and elect new represntatives who are respected and will work with others to solve our fiscal mess.

worf
Mcallen, TX

World dictators would love this.

Thank you Barry for protecting our country.

Fred44
Salt Lake City, Utah

You guys are funny, cut cut cut except for the military, then spend whatever our wise republicans in Washington tell us we need regardless. I thought it wasn't a revenue problem it was a spending problem. I guess what you mean to say is that the spending problem only applies to what people other than the far right think we should spend money on.

If this is a time of sacrifice maybe we should all sacrifice a bit. The other thing quit chasing cold war bogey men, as long as we have enough nuclear weapons to blow the world up five times, Russia and China are not going to attack. What we need to worry about is the rogue nations and f-22's and f-35's are not going matter when dealing with them.

rnoble
Pendleton, OR

I encourage the Pentagon in this endeavor. I would like to see some attention on how the current and next year budgets are affected in addition to that "cuts over ten years" business. Saying they must cut X over ten years is much less real than X this year and Y next year and that will mean that our debt is not getting bigger or is being paid down this year and next year. Everybody knows that something else will change over ten years but this year is more concrete and immediate. The way I see it the bigger numbers over ten years gets more attention but it is smoke and mirrors and leads to a sleight-of-hand bait and switch circumstance.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments