Top Army General Objects To GOP Plan To Slow Troop Reductions

[Purveyor]

Source: The Hill

By Jeremy Herb - 05/16/12 11:36 AM ET

Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno said Wednesday he’s opposed to a plan from House Republicans to slow the reduction of U.S. forces over the next five years.

The House Armed Services Committee included language in the Defense authorization bill to limit troop reductions to 15,000 per year for the Army and 5,000 for the Marine Corps through 2017, a slower pace than the military had planned for.

The Army proposed cutting its forces by 72,000 and the Marines 20,000 in the 2013 budget, in part as a result of the drawdowns in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as budget constraints.

Odierno said at a Pentagon press briefing Wednesday that the House proposal is too restrictive for the Army.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/army/227739-top-army-general-objects-to-house-slowing-troop-reductions

[think]

1. K&R

[BadgerKid]

2. No surprise that the GOP doesn't want to reduce the MIC. n/t

[Swede Atlanta]

3. I thought the GOP was all about listening to the military commanders in the field...

Another lie and bait-and-switch of the right.

I'll bet they don't want to draw down any too quickly because they figure if they can somehow bamboozle the murkan peeple into electing RMoney in November, they will need those troops when he launches the next war in January of 2013.

[24601]

5. The Army Chief of Staff is neither a Commander nor in the field. And just to correct the

original story, he's not the top Army General either. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs is the senior officer on active duty and since GEN Dempsey is in the Army - he's the Top Army General these days. (and he also is neither a commander nor in the field)

[tabasco]

4. Why do republicans hate the troops? n/t

[24601]

6. Refusing to eliminate their jobs and throwing them out on the street isn't hating the troops.

Except maybe in bizzaro world where keeping someone employed is considered hate.

[pscot]

7. So, given a choice between cutting Social Security

and returning healthy, demonstrably capable young Americans to the work force you say dump the oldsters. The military tail is wagging the whole damn country. Time to cut troops and close bases, here and overseas.

[cheapdate]

8. The military isn't a jobs program.

Either we legitimately need to maintain military personnel levels at one number, or the other. It would seem to me that with the war in Iraq essentially complete and the war in Afghanistan winding down that a reduction of personnel would be reasonable and justified.

[tabasco]

9. Hahahahahaha.

I'm a former military officer and I'd like to tell you your statement is quite uninformed. The military does not exist to create jobs and the vast majority of troops only serve one hitch.

As far as throwing them out on the street, Obama has funded VA better than any president in the history of this country.

LOL at your comment.