Jump to content

Report: Hagel plans to reduce size of Army to pre-WWII levels


Geee

Recommended Posts

199012-hagel-plans-to-reduce-size-of-army-to-pre-wwii-levelsThe Hill:

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel plans to reduce the size of the United States Army to its smallest force since before World War II, according to The New York Times.

 

Hagel reportedly will unveil the plan Monday in his 2015 budget for the Pentagon, which will also call for an entire class of Air Force attack jets to be retired.

 

After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the Army peaked at 570,000 troops, the Times reports. Hagel wants to shrink the force to between 440,000 and 450,000. That would mark the Army’s smallest force since 1940.

Several Pentagon officials confirmed the budget plan to the Times on condition of anonymity. They say it would be large enough for the U.S. to defeat any enemy, but too small to carry out longer-term foreign occupations.Scissors-32x32.png


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hagel Begins Trimming Army to 1940 Levels

 

By Jonathan CoppageFebruary 24, 2014, 6:00 AM

A reduction in the size of the military has been a long time coming. And now, it appears to have finally come. The New York Times reported last night that Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, largely invisible since his confirmation a year ago, would be announcing “what officials describe as the first Pentagon budget to aggressively push the military off the war footing adopted after the terror attacks of 2001.” The budget, according to the Times‘s anonymous sources, would be ”a military capable of defeating any adversary, but too small for protracted foreign occupations.”

 

The military-industrial complex is not likely to take the cuts lying down, as there are many interest groups targeted for outright cuts or reductions in growth. And already, the Times reports, the lobbies are ramping up:

For example, some members of Congress Scissors-32x32.png

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/hagel-begins-trimming-army-to-1940-levels/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/124c8839989e]Air Force Reluctantly Upgrades A-10s After Congress Complains
Strongly-worded letter preserves attack jets … for the time being
Dave Majumdar
2/22/14

 

The Air Force is in a dilemma. It’s committed to buying hundreds of troubled and expensive stealth fighters just as it runs low on money. To make up the difference, the flying branch is trying to retire the A-10 Warthog, a slow but tough—and devastating—ground-attack aircraft.

 

Now the A-10 might be around for a little while longer, after a tough-talking senator compelled the Air Force to keep the attack jet’s software up to date.

 

On Feb. 12, the Air Force’s top civilian official directed the service’s Air Combat Command to continue developing a new software upgrade for the A-10 after a complaint from Sen. Kelly Ayotte, a New Hampshire Republican.

 

“In response to your concerns, I have directed that Suite 8 development continue in Fiscal Year 14,” Secretary of the Air Force Deborah Lee James wrote in the letter to Ayotte. “As we continue with FY15 budget deliberations, I look forward to discussing the A-10 with you at greater length.”

 

(Snip)

 

 

_______________________________________________________________

 

"For The Time Being" is the operative phrase. As I understand it the AF Brass hates this plane, has hated it since day 1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Draggingtree

Sacrificing the Military to Entitlements

March 3, 2014 by Bruce Thornton

 

Vladimir Putin, playing geopolitical chess while our president plays tiddlywinks, has effectively taken over Crimea. Armed men, looking suspiciously like Russian military personnel, have seized both airports and established border checkpoints decorated with Kalashnikovs and Russian flags. This comes after other armed men seized two government buildings and raised Russian flags, as the legislature appointed a pro-Russian regional leader. Meanwhile Russian military forces are gathering on the border, with Russia’s parliament unanimously voting to approve deploying troops in Ukraine. Scissors-32x32.png

 

United States “should mind its own business internationally and let other countries get along the best they can on their own.” More important, many don’t want to spend money on defense if it means cuts to entitlements.Scissors-32x32.png

 

Consider that at the same time the Ukraine crisis was heating up, more cuts to our defense budget were announced. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel unveiled plans to reduce the army’s strength from 520,000 active-duty personnel to between 450,000 and 420,000 soldiers, eliminate the A-10 Warthog ground-support aircraft, mothball 11 Navy cruisers, put in doubt funds needed to retrofit the USS George Washington aircraft carrier, and cut 8,000 Marines from the Corps. And things could get much worse if sequestration remains in effect after 2015. Max Boot points out the obvious dangers of these cuts: “The world is a more chaotic place than ever and we face the need to respond to a multiplicity of threats, Scissors-32x32.png

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/bruce-thornton/sacrificing-the-military-to-entitlements/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congress RallyingAgainTo Save the A-10 Attack Jet

Senate proposal blocks plan to ground legendary tank-killer

David Axe

3/9/14

 

In late 2013 the U.S. Air Force let slip its plan to retire all 340 of its A-10 Warthog attack planes between 2015 and 2019a move the flying branch said would save $3.5 billion and protect funding for new bombers, aerial tankers and the F-35 stealth fighter.

Congress thwarted that plan temporarily. Now the flying branch is trying again to bury the Warthog. And lawmakers are mobilizing to block this second attempt.

 

(Snip)

 

Last year, A-10 pilots, ground troops and certain key U.S. legislators objected to the Air Forces plan. Sen. Kelly Ayotte, a New Hampshire Republican, led the effort to preserve the Warthog in the 2014 defense spending authorization. But the bills language prevented the Air Force from retiring the A-10 only in 2014something the flying branch never actually intended to do, anyway.

 

Ayotte also sponsored a separate lawS. 1764: A bill to limit the retirement of A-10 aircraftthat would require the Air Force to keep its A-10s until there are enough so-called Block 4A F-35s in front-line service to fully replace the Warthogs. The Air Force doesnt anticipate getting its first Block 4A stealth fighters until some time in the early 2020s.

 

(Snip)

 

 

A-10-Warthog-Front-View.jpg

Hi There.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

SrWoodchuck

Congress RallyingAgainTo Save the A-10 Attack Jet

Senate proposal blocks plan to ground legendary tank-killer

David Axe

3/9/14

 

In late 2013 the U.S. Air Force let slip its plan to retire all 340 of its A-10 Warthog attack planes between 2015 and 2019a move the flying branch said would save $3.5 billion and protect funding for new bombers, aerial tankers and the F-35 stealth fighter.

Congress thwarted that plan temporarily. Now the flying branch is trying again to bury the Warthog. And lawmakers are mobilizing to block this second attempt.

 

(Snip)

 

Last year, A-10 pilots, ground troops and certain key U.S. legislators objected to the Air Forces plan. Sen. Kelly Ayotte, a New Hampshire Republican, led the effort to preserve the Warthog in the 2014 defense spending authorization. But the bills language prevented the Air Force from retiring the A-10 only in 2014something the flying branch never actually intended to do, anyway.

 

Ayotte also sponsored a separate lawS. 1764: A bill to limit the retirement of A-10 aircraftthat would require the Air Force to keep its A-10s until there are enough so-called Block 4A F-35s in front-line service to fully replace the Warthogs. The Air Force doesnt anticipate getting its first Block 4A stealth fighters until some time in the early 2020s.

 

(Snip)

 

 

A-10-Warthog-Front-View.jpg

Hi There.

 

Ooooooorah!

 

Warthogs from Hell!

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJSk2Xc3Eq4&feature=player_embedded

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why Congress May Let Air Force Retire The A-10
Colin Clark
March 14, 2014

A-10-retirement-chart-1024x735.jpg

 

CAPITOL HILL: Aside from Sen. Kelly Ayotte, the reaction from Capitol Hill to the Air Force plan for retiring the ugly and beloved A-10 has been relatively muted and may remain so. Why would Congress, beloved for going slightly nuts whenever the military tries to retire a ship, aircraft squadron, or anything else that means jobs in their districts or states, not rail against this sweet plane going quietly into the night? They will be replaced at most A-10 bases by F-16s, C-130Js or KC-135s so few or no jobs or money will be lost.

 

The Air Force has crafted a plan in stark contrast to its efforts last year to trim assets. And the reaction to this one has, so far, been quite muted. The slide above, which depicts the shifts and their timing, was part of a detailed briefing to professional staff and Military Legislative Aides in the last week that included classified assessments of the various tradeoffs the Air Force considered to save the $3.7 billion the Air Force expects to save. Among the scenarios gamed: sending the entire B-1 bomber fleet to the boneyard; pushing 40 F-35 As to the far out years; and retiring 356 F-16s. The Air Force, Chief of Staff Mark Welsh told me after today’s House Armed Services Committee hearing, ran war games to assess the impacts of each action. The retirement of the A-10 fleet was found to be the least disruptive to America’s global capabilities.

 

________________________________________________________________________________________

Comments....

 

PolicyWonk

Considering that the DoD considers more BRAC action to be coming down the pike, the A-10's that the Chair Force has been trying to get rid of since the day it was imposed on them will finally happen. Then they will replace those aircraft with ones that will be sent off to other bases when they decide which bases will be closed.

 

And of course, it makes sense to kill off an aircraft that uses a gun (that shoots CHEAP bullets - not much profit from) to replace it with one that uses GPS guided bombs (i.e. very expensive and lots of profits) that have NEVER been tested to determine if they are useful in a truly contested environment where GPS jammers, etc., might be used.

 

Outstanding! The guys on the ground are going to be the lab rats for a combination of weapons that have yet to be tested against a sophisticated adversary. If they don't work when the time comes - its the guys on the ground that will pay for the Chair Forces arrogance.

 

Gary Church PolicyWonk

Sorry to disagree with you on this one Wonk but any "sophisticated adversary" is going to have MANPADS and that means those A-10's will all get shot down on their first mission in a "contested environment." The guys on the ground are going to have use designators and drones. Both have been around a long time and are well proven. That's the future in this age of robots and missiles.

 

 

 

That's the future in this age of robots and missiles.

 

 

Gosh where did I read this before? Oh that's right back in the early 1950's....and that worked out real well. wallbash.gif

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1730709938
×
×
  • Create New...