By: Nick Pisano

Nick Pisano — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 06:42:51 +0000

The problem that I have with O’Hanlon is that his prescriptions for DoD are all too similar to non-DoD proposals in cutting the budget: he wants to do it on the backs of soldiers, sailors and Marines, especially those who are near the bottom. No other profession requires that one make the supreme sacrifice, if necessary, not the mention the family separations and dangerous conditions during normal operations, but O’Hanlon will continually attack military pay, allowances and the few benefits that still exist like commissaries and exchanges which, by the way, are run using non-appropriated funds and don’t impact the DoD budget in any way. But, just like the Washington elite’s attacks on old people (Social Security, Medicare), O’Hanlon doesn’t hesitate in shifting the argument to some false equivalence of “shared sacrifice” that will turn American economic reality into one consisting of hereditary aristocrats and serfs. That these serfs die to defend the economic interests of the aristocrats is, I guess, simply a premium. As Korb noted in his analysis, sweep up money (and money that never gets expended) will offset virtually all of the sequester given effective management. I know this is true because I’ve been there and implemented similar measures during previous drawdowns.

By: Bearpaw

Bearpaw — Fri, 03 Aug 2012 12:27:24 +0000

It’s worth noting for perspective that people who claim that *any* “defense” cuts undermine national security can regularly be found expousing that view on TV, while the bake-sale proposers are limited to bumperstickers. (And tend to mean it as tongue-in-cheek commentary rather than a serious proposal.)

Comments on: Getting Defensive

By: Nick Pisano

By: Bearpaw