Woodruff wrote: PLAYER57832 wrote:
I believe very much in a strong US military also, for what should be obvious reasons. By the same token, I well recognize the vast amount of savings that can be found in the military without damaging that role.
I came into this thread late, and this might be better in another thread, but I would be very interested in your personnal perspective on what should be cut in the military. (seriously)
Oh God, where to start...
Well, the obvious one is get us the f*ck out of Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan. Particularly if we're not going to fix the country and "build bridges to peace" like we should have started to do so many years ago (that has been, in my opinion, the single biggest failure of the War on Terror".
This one rather surprises me. That is Libya, sure. Iraq -- thought we were already moving toward that. Afghanistan, however, my reading has been that if we pull out now, we will leave the country even more rife for control by Talibahn and Talibahn-like groups. In retrospect, I think we were wrong to go in. That is, I think had we left things alone, it would have dissolved on its own for far better result. However, aren't we past that point now?
Woodruff wrote:There are a lot of overseas bases that should be closed. I agree with Night Strike that our major medical facilities overseas should remain open, as the service they provide if we should have to deal with another World War situation are invaluable (and very costly to re-create). As well, some intelligence posts overseas probably need to remain intact. But many can be closed with very little harm to our national security.
Off hand, I agree. I just don't know enough to specify which ones.
Woodruff wrote:There are some others that I can't think of off the top of my head, but BigBallinStalin had a poll up on this subject with some really good selections (and I can't find it now...can someone point me to it?).
I can remember some particular machinary (cannot remember if it was certain helicoptors, planes or what) could be stopped. I could also see some rather small tweaks in things like moving expenses. I can remember young soldiers being put up in apartments stocked with "rent a center" stuff, for example. I could go out to local stores and BUY the dishes, etc for less than a few month's rentals. On the other hand, I know of some special needs families that literally left everything they had behind, including specialized equipment, because it was too expensive to move. (in some cases "just" things to which the special needs kids were attached). I do understand the basic needs of the military to move people around and so forth, but I think there is room for some particular accomodations. Overall, even spending a tad more on a few, but in a need-based way, would wind up being balanced by "lack of need" cuts in other places. I think there are many little tweaks like this that could be implemented if the people involved were listened to more.
I also think we HAVE to pay more attention to both the mental health of soldiers, but also families. Again, this might seem to be an immediate expenditure..a nd in some cases it would be. However, the long term savings in medical and other costs would be phenomenal. Many small communities are tight, do rally around the families of those deployed. However, sometimes it seems that the government rather gets in the way instead of helping.
I probably know more about that aspect than the actual military bits. I am sure that more savings is gained from the big stuff, but I also think that paying attention to the smaller details helps make the whole system work better.. and that goes a long way.