Written by: Brian Kalk
The Obama administration has announced plans to cut military spending and reduce our forces by some 90,000 soldiers and Marines. About $500 billion dollars is to be cut from the defense budget during the coming decade.
This is a mistake. As Sen. John McCain said, “This ignores the lessons of history” and provides for a military that is “too small to respond effectively to events that may unfold over the next few years.”
The plan will shrink the military to the level it was at before the terrorist attacks of 9-11, even though the world certainly has not gone back to pre-9-11 conditions. Our nation and our interests continue to be in danger. The danger has increased because of decisions made by the Obama administration. Around the world, America’s interests are in greater danger today than ever before. The upheavals in Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, which were hailed by the president, have been hijacked by the Muslim Brotherhood and other terror groups.
The gutting of our military sends the wrong message to those who would be our enemies and it tells all that America is no longer a dependable ally. It sends a message of weakness.
If you wish to reduce spending, the place to start is by cutting political appointees who spend more time trying to social-engineer our military instead of adding to our security. We can also look at Germany. It is the most powerful economy in Europe. We have tens of thousands of troops there and several bases. Germany and Europe can take care of themselves, and the U.S. needs to reposition our ‘chess pieces’ to meet the new threats.
This plan has serious ramifications for North Dakota. Cutting our combat-ready strength means that when crises arise, National Guard soldiers will have to fill the breech. North Dakota citizen soldiers have gone above and beyond the call of duty in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kosovo and other hot spots. And they do it willingly. But there is a price to be paid. Our state loses their productivity at a time when North Dakota needs even more productive workers. Their families pay the highest price for their absence, but every North Dakotan pays. In the end, the defense budget looks smaller, but the money spent is the same. Government has many ways to hide actual expenditures.
Also, the Base Closure and Realignment Commission (BRAC) process is looming again. The BRAC will look to close as many military bases as possible. Given the political bent of the administration, this will not occur until after the presidential election. Closing strategic stateside bases, like Grand Forks or Minot, makes very little sense when we should be closing bases around the world that have little or no value.
Cutting government spending is a necessity. We must get our economy moving again, balance our budget and reduce the national debt. But gutting our military and reducing our ability to defend our nation is penny wise and pound foolish. As someone who spent 20 years in the Marine Corps, I know that defending America is job one. Sometimes, Washington needs to be reminded of that.
-Brian Kalk is a Republican candidate for the U.S. House.
This entry was posted in Guest Op-Eds, OPINION and tagged BRAC, Brian Kalk, military, obama. Bookmark the permalink.
Brian Kalk’s Op-Ed entitled “Obama’s defense plan is a step back” is sadly, just typical Republican fear mongering.
Or perhaps he has just seen the fictional movie “Independence Day,” one too many times.
In that movie, Will Smith and a cast of other actors defends Earth against fictional alien invaders.
In 2012 the United States defense budget will be 3.7 trillion dollars.
Weapons of war are not cheap, nor are maintaining the military presence we currently have.
A single nuclear powered Nimitz class aircraft carrier costs, on average, 4.5 billion dollars and then several millions of dollars annually to maintain and use it.
We have ten Nimitz class aircraft carriers in service and they are formidable weapons.
The typical B-2 Stealth Bomber costs about 3 billion dollars.
Russia is no longer a real threat to the United States nor is China at the present time.
North Korea and Iran are threats but neither has an air force or navy of any real consequence.
True, a small (oxymoron) nuclear bomb could be smuggled into our country but having a yearly 3.7 trillion dollar military, would hardly defend us from that.
Mr. Kalk writes, “Cutting government spending is a necessity. We must get our economy moving again, balance our budget and reduce the national debt. But gutting our military and reducing our ability to defend our nation is penny wise and pound foolish [sic]. As someone who spent 20 years in the Marine Corps…”
President Obama’s budget, with careful consultation, with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is not gutting our military one iota nor is he reducing our ability to defend ourselves.
Less expensive, unmanned drones seem to be a very formidable weapon today, against those who are waging war on us, and President Obama has used many of them.
It’s amazing, someone can simultaneously say that we need to cut our ability of having a crucial hub for our military in Germany (how many troops go through this strategic base as a clearing house?) and say that we need to keep our nation safer?
Also, it’s amazing that he is against slimming down a military that is now leaving Iraq and has plan withdrawals in Afghanistan, by saying that we need to make sure less National Guard units are deployed.
The only way that Mr. Kalk’s comments make sense is if he believes that the United States should stay at combative levels for the foreseeable future. So is Mr. Kalk pro-war?