Far Leftists now wanting Obama to cut defense

[FriscoDog]

This scares the hell outta me.




Left presses Obama to cut defense
By Alexander Bolton
Posted: 06/05/08 07:48 PM [ET]
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), who wrapped his party's presidential nomination just this week, is already besieged by liberal constituencies demanding that he cut military spending to boost social programs.

Two influential liberal groups have sent the presumptive Democratic nominee a letter pressing him to support cuts to defense programs to pay for universal preschool, relief for Americans facing foreclosure on their homes and expanded benefits for military veterans.

The demands carry weight because the groups, the Black Leadership Forum and the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), represent two constituencies that are important to Obama's political strategy: blacks and Hispanics.

Their calls for defense cuts have drawn the support of leading House liberals, many of whom gave Obama crucial support early in his contest against Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.).

The groups have also called on presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) to support the cuts. There is less pressure on McCain, however, because fellow Republicans have kept quiet on the issue. McCain also expects little support from black voters.

But McCain could feel some discomfort because his campaign views Hispanics as a crucial voting bloc. His support for shifting emphasis from defense to social programs could help him appeal to that group. The calls of liberal groups and lawmakers come at a particularly awkward time for Obama.

Since clinching the party's nomination on Tuesday, Obama has already tacked to the right on security issues in preparation for the general election. During a speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee Wednesday, Obama proposed sanctions on Iran that analysts viewed as far tougher than what he suggested before.

Now Obama must balance tough talk on national security with the desires of many Democrats to slim American military power.

Liberal groups and lawmakers have targeted the Department of Defense's largest acquisition program: the Joint Strike Fighter program, which will provide more than 2,000 aircraft to the Navy, Marines and Air Force.

The Black Leadership Forum and LULAC wrote that cutting the program "would free up $1 trillion in the federal budget."

"America could fund years of universal healthcare at $120 [billion] a year; we could fund universal preschool with $35 billion."

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), co-chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said the rapid growth of defense spending compared to domestic spending in recent years is "outrageous." She wants to slim defense programs and boost education and healthcare funding.

Lee and other House liberals would like to see about $60 billion in defense spending cuts. Specifically, they want to steer money away from what they call "Cold War-era" weapons systems, such as the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. Liberals have also called for cuts to the ballistic missile defense program, the F/A-22 Raptor, the V-22 Osprey and the DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class Destroyer.

"This is one of many issues the caucus will be talking about to him," Lee said of plans to press Obama on defense budget cuts. "I'm definitely going to present this."

[daybreaker2]

cutting military spending, and staying strong on national defense and security are not mutually exclusive.

[TYLERTECHSAS]

cutting military spending, and staying strong on national defense and security are not mutually exclusive.

Yes they are. OBAMA will be toast if he pushes this agenda.

[louisiana_dog]

Are they talking about cutting the JSF all together? Right now our navy is running exclusively off the F-18 body, through refueling, fighter, and attack roles. Sure, yes the new F-18 is 30% larger but the main design for the body is around 30 years old. The US is a major player in the JSF program and the downsizing they want to do will cut hundreds of well paying jobs.

I believe the Osprey design will make huge waves in the civilian market in the next 10-30 years. Especially in Louisiana's offshore oil rigs, this aircraft can evacuate a wounded worker faster to a hospital to be treated. There is a market out there that can create so many jobs for future Americans involving just this one aircraft. Project designing, manufacturing, piloting, maintaining, and marketing are some I can name off the top of my head. This tilt-rotor aircraft design moves our troops faster across the battlefield and can do the same for, shipping companies, oil workers, medvac, firefighting, and corporate transport.

With a quick read on the DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class Destroyer, the reason it is going to cost so much money is because of the new technology involved in developing something better than we already have. All new ships designed by the navy have either been a huge success or cost so much that the discontinued project put the technology on the shelf and waited one or two decades to build a cheaper ship. If anything, this new ship design will help pave the way for a new ship design later down the road that will protect our navy and project America’s engineering and military might across the world.

So canceling the JSF will free up 1 trillion dollars to be used on universal healthcare (126 billion a year) and universal preschool (35 billion), so my math says 161 billion a year. So that funds these programs for all of 6.2 years, after that, where is this money going to come from? What if, for some reason, America got involved in a WWIII? Wouldn’t you want our troops to be the best equipped, trained, and prepared force out there?

Sure, the chance of WWIII is small, but can anyone predict the future.

[Cool Hand Clyde]

Are they talking about cutting the JSF all together? Right now our navy is running exclusively off the F-18 body, through refueling, fighter, and attack roles. Sure, yes the new F-18 is 30% larger but the main design for the body is around 30 years old. The US is a major player in the JSF program and the downsizing they want to do will cut hundreds of well paying jobs.

I believe the Osprey design will make huge waves in the civilian market in the next 10-30 years. Especially in Louisiana's offshore oil rigs, this aircraft can evacuate a wounded worker faster to a hospital to be treated. There is a market out there that can create so many jobs for future Americans involving just this one aircraft. Project designing, manufacturing, piloting, maintaining, and marketing are some I can name off the top of my head. This tilt-rotor aircraft design moves our troops faster across the battlefield and can do the same for, shipping companies, oil workers, medvac, firefighting, and corporate transport.

With a quick read on the DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class Destroyer, the reason it is going to cost so much money is because of the new technology involved in developing something better than we already have. All new ships designed by the navy have either been a huge success or cost so much that the discontinued project put the technology on the shelf and waited one or two decades to build a cheaper ship. If anything, this new ship design will help pave the way for a new ship design later down the road that will protect our navy and project America’s engineering and military might across the world.

So canceling the JSF will free up 1 trillion dollars to be used on universal healthcare (126 billion a year) and universal preschool (35 billion), so my math says 161 billion a year. So that funds these programs for all of 6.2 years, after that, where is this money going to come from? What if, for some reason, America got involved in a WWIII? Wouldn’t you want our troops to be the best equipped, trained, and prepared force out there?

Sure, the chance of WWIII is small, but can anyone predict the future.

Just one of the many, many reasons to vote for John McCain.

[CARTEK]

Carter did it, and we got Ronald Reagan. I don't see a Reagan on the horizon, but sometimes the loony left has to win befaore the masses understand that true conservatives make far better leaders.

[daybreaker2]

Yes they are.

Uh, no. Theyre not. It's called efficiency. If you buy a $200k Lamborghini, and only stay in 1st gear, my $7k Jeep will beat you in a race every time.

I also saw W is threatening to stop paying the troops if Congress doesnt approve his war budget. Gee... he's willing to use the troops as a bargaining chip? Real classy, W. Why not start cutting the over-paid defense contractors like Blackwater first? Or is this another example of W practicing Tyler's theory that cutting money equals weakening national defense?

[daybreaker2]

Sure, the chance of WWIII is small, but can anyone predict the future.

Well, the chances of WWIII go up if McCain gets in the White House. He's just itching to go into Iran.

[TYLERTECHSAS]

I also saw W is threatening to stop paying the troops if Congress doesnt approve his war budget. Gee... he's willing to use the troops as a bargaining chip? Real classy, W.

You of all people know that's not true and you also know why. The DEMS were sticking too much high dollar and ridiculous pork on it.

BTW, your above analogy sucked.

[FriscoDog]

Uh, no. Theyre not. It's called efficiency. If you buy a $200k Lamborghini, and only stay in 1st gear, my $7k Jeep will beat you in a race every time.

I also saw W is threatening to stop paying the troops if Congress doesnt approve his war budget. Gee... he's willing to use the troops as a bargaining chip? Real classy, W. Why not start cutting the over-paid defense contractors like Blackwater first? Or is this another example of W practicing Tyler's theory that cutting money equals weakening national defense?

It is efficiency. The JSF is one frame fighter, with stealth capabilities, which can be used by ALL branches of the military. Small tweaks to handle STOL or carrier landings for navy, marines etc. This gets away from multiple designs like f-16, f-14, f-15, f-18 etc. and go with one basic airframe design, efficiency.

[TYLERTECHSAS]

Well, the chances of WWIII go up if McCain gets in the White House. He's just itching to go into Iran.

And again you know better! Your spin changes nothing my man. Sorry but it's the opposite. The Iranian President is itching for a fight with America and Israel. McCain has been to war and like those that have, will be hesitant to pull the trigger unlike a young empty suit like BHO.

[daybreaker2]

Sorry but it's the opposite. The Iranian President is itching for a fight with America and Israel. McCain has been to war and like those that have, will be hesitant to pull the trigger unlike a young empty suit like BHO.

Oh really? Is that why the Pentagon is the only reason we havent attacked Iran yet, because they had to tell Cheney he couldnt send in airstrikes?

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JF10Ak01.html

I must have missed the part where Iran has already tried to attack us under false pretenses like Cheney almost did.

[daybreaker2]

It is efficiency. The JSF is one frame fighter, with stealth capabilities, which can be used by ALL branches of the military. Small tweaks to handle STOL or carrier landings for navy, marines etc. This gets away from multiple designs like f-16, f-14, f-15, f-18 etc. and go with one basic airframe design, efficiency.

I was replying to Tyler. That was my point though- efficiency. Switching to one frame can only make aircraft in the future cheaper to build and maintain. So, not only have we CUT money from the defense budget, but we havent sacrificed national defense/security at all. Which is contrary to what Tyler thinks.

[FriscoDog]

But that is not what they are asking for based upon the article. They are wanting to scrap the entire JSF program, which is a HUGE mistake IMO. Current airframe designs on front-line fighters are decades old.

[daybreaker2]

From what you describe, it does sound like it would be a mistake to cut it. Hopefully Obama see that and doesnt cave in to the pressure of these groups.