Drastic (military) cuts outlined in think-tank report

[unhappycamper]

A Marine Corps MV-22 Osprey aircraft lifts a 7,000-pound M777 Lightweight Howitzer with the help of Combat Logistics Battalion 46 during an airlift operation at Landing Zone Sandhill aboard the training area of the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center Twentynine Palms, Calif., July 10.



By Dan Lamothe - Staff writer
Posted : Tuesday Jul 13, 2010 10:08:30 EDT

~snip~~

Ideas include:

• Roll back the size of the Army and Marine Corps as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan wind down. The U.S. could save $147 billion over the next decade by reducing the Army’s end strength from 547,400 to 482,400 and the Corps’ from 202,000 to 175,000, the task force says.

• Reduce the number of maneuver units in the Army and Marine Corps. The task force suggests reducing the number of Army brigades from 45 to 42 and the number of Marine infantry battalions from 27 to 24. Doing so would contribute to the $147 billion in savings as the services reduce their end strengths.

• Delay or cancel development of Navy variants of the ($243 million dollar) F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The U.S. could save $9.85 billion from 2011 to 2020 by canceling the purchase of JSF jets for the Navy and Marine Corps and buying more affordable F/A-18 jets instead. Doing so would leave the Corps without jump jets once the AV-8 Harrier leaves the service, but the task force argues that capability “has not proved critical to operations in recent wars.”

• End the fielding of new ($100 million dollar) MV-22 Ospreys. The Corps could save $10 billion to $12 billion over the next 10 years by buying new MH-60S and CH-53K helicopters, analysts say. The K variant of the CH-53 is not expected to hit the fleet until at least 2015, but the Navy began replacing outdated CH-46 helicopters early this century with the MH-60 on amphibious assault ships.

• Kill the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle program and field cheaper alternatives. The Corps could save at least $8 billion in the next decade by refurbishing cheaper, existing amphibious assault vehicles instead of continuing development of the yet-to-be-fielded EFV, the task force says.



unhappycamper comment: It's a good start, with the keyword being 'start'.

[gratuitous]

1. Yes, these cuts certainly sound "drastic"

Golly, how would the United States ever survive if we didn't have a platinum- and gold-plated military force at all times, ready to be launched at a moment's notice to swat a gnat or when a president got bored or needed a little boost for his popularity numbers? It's not like we need to feed, educate, clothe, house or employ our own citizens.

[Raster]

2. The Military Industrial Machine will fight this tooth-and-nail.

The Military Machine is killing this country and bleeding the citizens dry!

Send kids to college, not to some foreign hell hole. Make the Petroleum Mafia fight--and pay for--their own resource wars.

[hootinholler]

3. What think tank?

Where's the full report?

aTdHvAaNnKcSe
-Hoot

[unhappycamper]

4. Sorry - I forgot to post the link:

http://marinecorpstimes.com/news/2010/07/marine_cuts_071310w/

And the report:

http://www.comw.org/pda/fulltext/1006SDTFreport.pdf

[hootinholler]

5. Thanks! n/t