Defense: Is Obama cutting too deeply?
The President announced cuts of nearly $500 billion in defense spending over 10 years, or 8 percent of the $6 trillion in military spending planned for the next decade.
So much for American military supremacy, said Arthur Herman in NationalReview.com. President Obama last week announced cuts of nearly $500 billion in defense spending over 10 years, thereby putting the U.S. military “on the road to second-class status.” Under his new defense strategy, the Pentagon will be forced to abandon its long-standing goal of having enough troops to fight two wars at once, as the Army is reduced from 570,000 troops to 490,000. Future weapons projects like the F-35 fighter jet will be cut or frozen. These cuts are dangerously shortsighted, said The Washington Post in an editorial. With the war in Iraq over, and Afghanistan winding down, Obama believes the U.S. will no longer need the ability to launch troop-intensive invasions. But with the “Middle East in revolution, an increasingly belligerent Iran, and a North Korea undergoing an unpredictable leadership transition,” who knows what the future will bring?
Let’s have some perspective, please, said The Denver Post. “With the national debt at $15.1 trillion and counting,” we have no choice but to downsize the world’s most expensive military, which has ballooned in size and cost since 9/11. Obama’s proposed spending cuts represent just 8 percent of the $6 trillion in military spending planned for the next decade. And while “budgetary necessity may have been the mother” of Obama’s new strategy, said the Los Angeles Times, it still makes sound military sense. Rather than large deployments of troops, the U.S. would rely more on special operations forces and unmanned drones to take out threats, like Islamist militants in Yemen and Somalia. A smaller, more agile military could make the country more secure, not less.
In reality, Obama’s defense plan is hardly revolutionary, said Doyle McManus in the Los Angeles Times. The Pentagon has already abandoned its two-war doctrine, as we learned in 2003 when it pulled troops out of Afghanistan to fight in Iraq. And while our ground forces will shrink, the Defense Department has a plan to quickly boost troop levels in case “a future president decides to wage two wars after all.” For now, though, the president chose to take an ax to the Pentagon to spare domestic spending, said Jennifer Rubin in WashingtonPost.com. Fortunately, “we have an election coming up,’’ which will give the American people final say. Should national security be “the first priority’’ of the federal government, or not?
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/26e60/26e60cb924a49f61d1c912d9db390eb10f6d3fa2" alt="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/flexiimages/jacafc5zvs1692883516.jpg"
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
-
The Years at the Harold Pinter Theatre: an 'unmissable' evening
The Week Recommends Eline Arbo's 'spellbinding' adaptation of Annie Ernaux's memoir transfers to the West End
By The Week UK Published
-
The White Lotus: a delicious third helping of Mike White's toxic feast
The Week Recommends 'Wickedly funny' comedy-drama stars Jason Isaacs, Walton Goggins and Aimee Lou Wood
By The Week UK Published
-
Classic car insurance: how best to protect your vintage vehicle
The Explainer Insuring your classic car may be cheaper than you think
By Marc Shoffman, The Week UK Published
-
'Seriously, not literally': how should the world take Donald Trump?
Today's big question White House rhetoric and reality look likely to become increasingly blurred
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published
-
Will Trump's 'madman' strategy pay off?
Today's Big Question Incoming US president likes to seem unpredictable but, this time round, world leaders could be wise to his playbook
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published
-
US election: who the billionaires are backing
The Explainer More have endorsed Kamala Harris than Donald Trump, but among the 'ultra-rich' the split is more even
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
US election: where things stand with one week to go
The Explainer Harris' lead in the polls has been narrowing in Trump's favour, but her campaign remains 'cautiously optimistic'
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Is Trump okay?
Today's Big Question Former president's mental fitness and alleged cognitive decline firmly back in the spotlight after 'bizarre' town hall event
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
The life and times of Kamala Harris
The Explainer The vice-president is narrowly leading the race to become the next US president. How did she get to where she is now?
By The Week UK Published
-
Will 'weirdly civil' VP debate move dial in US election?
Today's Big Question 'Diametrically opposed' candidates showed 'a lot of commonality' on some issues, but offered competing visions for America's future and democracy
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
1 of 6 'Trump Train' drivers liable in Biden bus blockade
Speed Read Only one of the accused was found liable in the case concerning the deliberate slowing of a 2020 Biden campaign bus
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published