Latest Breaking News

Lasher

(29,430 posts)

35. Or we could simply deactivate the 87,52 reserve component soldiers currently on active duty?

Fri Jan 27, 2012, 05:34 AM

Jan 2012

Most of them have been activated involuntarily.

http://www.defense.gov/news/d20111227ngr.pdf

That alone would more than satisfy Panetta's 5 year reduction goal of 80,000.

And what about attrition? According to Bill Gates, up to 80% of our soldiers separate from active duty before serving a minimum of 20 years.

http://www.armytimes.com/money/retirement/offduty-retired-military-associations-prepare-for-changes-080111w/

Couldn't we slow down our recruiting just a little?

I don't see how you can consider this a bloodbath. These are token reductions.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

48 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Panetta announces plan for defense cuts that would shrink ground forces, retire some planes [View all] onehandle Jan 2012 OP

$500 billion, according to CNN. nt TheWraith Jan 2012 #1

Hope it's worthless weapons, not all staff. AllyCat Jan 2012 #2

There's not nearly as many "worthless weapons" as people think there are. TheWraith Jan 2012 #3

Barney Frank recommended idling the worthless nuclear saturation bomber fleet Kolesar Jan 2012 #28

During the Viet Nam war it was found that it was cheaper to give the VC 4 years of college and kemah Jan 2012 #4

My sense is that your observation is more applicable to later in the war. Adsos Letter Jan 2012 #30

Start billing Big Oil for the security services rendered. Old and In the Way Jan 2012 #5

Get rid of all the aggiesal Jan 2012 #6

On the contray. Johnson20 Jan 2012 #21

Are you saying ... aggiesal Jan 2012 #45

I'm skeptical. Lasher Jan 2012 #7

Or perhaps a decrease in a future scheduled increase ... SomeGuyInEagan Jan 2012 #8

I just can't get my approval around the term *cut* for this. A cut *should* SlimJimmy Jan 2012 #9

I see you are picking up what I'm laying down. Lasher Jan 2012 #14

...totals are about $33 billion less than the Pentagon is spending this year... Kolesar Jan 2012 #27

$487 billion in cuts over 10 years. Lasher Jan 2012 #29

Here's a link Skinner Jan 2012 #10

Thanks. I was just looking for a good link. You guys handled the editing function on DU3 perfectly. onehandle Jan 2012 #11

Obama just made a pretty speech. He didn't mean ANYTHING he said Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2012 #12

I think the WW-I era biplanes can probably use a rest. HopeHoops Jan 2012 #13

Only if you want the Kaiser back in power! Robb Jan 2012 #15

This'll go over well atreides1 Jan 2012 #16

A legitimate concern. Lasher Jan 2012 #17

14% over 5 years, not "14% annual" muriel_volestrangler Jan 2012 #22

Thank you for correcting my colossal blunder. Lasher Jan 2012 #24

You can do a lot of that with "prompt retirement." MADem Jan 2012 #26

Or we could simply deactivate the 87,52 reserve component soldiers currently on active duty? Lasher Jan 2012 #35

Here's how I consider it a bloodbath. When you sit across the desk from a young Sailor or Marine MADem Jan 2012 #38

Pay raises are on track until 2015. fasttense Jan 2012 #40

I don't know what the COLAs are but they probably shouldn't be reduced. Lasher Jan 2012 #41

That IS a downside of peace. Remember the "Clinton drawdown?" MADem Jan 2012 #18

It is inaccurate to describe that as the "Clinton drawdown." Lasher Jan 2012 #23

Well, that's why I called it the "Clinton Drawdown" and not The Clinton Drawdown. MADem Jan 2012 #25

I beg your pardon. Lasher Jan 2012 #34

No problem. I always called it the Cheney drawdown, myself, and got googly-eyes from people MADem Jan 2012 #37

I've shot down a boatload of chain emails on this very subject. Lasher Jan 2012 #39

+1!!! nt MADem Jan 2012 #47

And probably that many or more civilians Johnson20 Jan 2012 #44

Its a start. 4dsc Jan 2012 #19

Gonna be lots of folks Johnson20 Jan 2012 #20

That's a bad part of the plan. Lasher Jan 2012 #36

Corey Aquino kicked out all US bases in the Philippines. There are none. dmallind Jan 2012 #42

That's why I said, "...while increasing the number of soldiers stationed abroad..." Lasher Jan 2012 #48

what a goddamn lie. they aren't shrinking the budget at all! provis99 Jan 2012 #31

Plus, it gives whoever will be Obama's opponent the.... Amonester Jan 2012 #32

They aren't cutting the budget? SpartanDem Jan 2012 #43

they are slowing the rate of increase not shrinking the budget. provis99 Jan 2012 #46

Good start. Now mulitply by 10. That is your target to cut - 5 trillion over 10 yrs. on point Jan 2012 #33