Of course it makes sense to nominate someone with no military experience to head the DOD in the middle of two wars and one “kinetic action.”

If your intent is to inflict as much harm to the military as possible.

From The Hill:

Obama two weeks ago said he wanted to find another $400 billion in savings from defense spending over the next 12 years, something Gates was said to be resisting. Now Panetta will be the man charged with pushing those cuts through a reluctant Department of Defense.

Shifting Panetta to DOD “probably means bigger cuts to the defense budget,” said Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute.

“Secretary Gates was strongly committed to maintaining a robust defense posture, but Panetta will be more interested in getting along with the White House, which must find ways of cutting the deficit,” Thompson said.

More:

But aides and defense sources predicted a top charge for Panetta will be to keep alive the internal cost-trimming program Gates initiated last year. That effort uncovered over $100 billion in savings, most of which was redirected into hardware accounts, with some monies going to help pare the deficit.

While the outgoing defense secretary terminated or truncated over 50 hardware programs after Obama took office, he has argued strongly in recent months against going any further.

Gates spent ample political capital to convince White House officials to approve using those savings to beef up hardware accounts, warning against a defense budget-slashing drill that would create a “hollow force.”

How better to leave a lasting liberal impression on the military than by eviscerating it? The Code Pinkers would be pleased. After all, we can’t be the “world’s leading terrorists” if we’re left unable to fight or defend ourselves. Consider this gem from Politico:

Even though Obama is sympathetic to the desire to curb the negative impacts of a global U.S. military posture, he “doesn’t want to lose a war on his watch.”

Emphasis mine. Translation: Obama loathes the military, what it stands for, and its core purpose. Oh, but he doesn’t want to lose a war. Ha. He would have no better liberal bona fides than pulling out of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya to embolden the likes of bin Laden, who, by the way, figured he could win a protracted war against us after watching Clinton abandon the mission in Somalia–a humanitarian mission initially–after the Mogadishu fiasco.

 

Cynical me wonders if this is what Michelle and Jill’s magical military tour is really all about, i.e. “supporting military families” through the transition to civilian life. Won’t it be grand not to have to worry about deployments? Just apply for that unemployment super-hero cape instead!More via Politico:

“Considerable cuts, beyond even the $400 billion-over-12-year target that President Obama announced earlier this month, will require a fundamental rethinking of the military’s role, something that Gates was unwilling to do,” said Christopher Preble, director of foreign policy studies for the libertarian Cato Institute. “It remains to be seen whether Panetta will tackle this challenge, or whether he will defer to others within the administration.”

As if there’s any question whether he will be an Obama hack or not. Pogues.

Bear in mind the military already faces cuts of 47,000 troopies.

 

 

 

Advertisement