Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
#1 Sure, like people are in The Service for the money.
Posted by Skidmark 2013-02-07 00:36||
#2 "Panetta will recommend to Congress that military salaries be limited to a one percent increase in 2014," CNN reports, explaining that Panetta is "effectively decreasing troop salaries next year . . .
Pretty much everything that is FUd up with this government is contained in that paragraph.
Posted by Shipman 2013-02-07 00:45||
#3 I remember the Carter years. We do NOT want to let the fkwits put us back there.
Posted by OldSpook 2013-02-07 01:25||
#4 Well, everyone knows it's the soldiers, sailors, Airmen, and Marines [less than one percent who serve our nation] who are responsible for the country being bankrupt. We simply must find the money to pay for SES and congressional pay raises somewhere. While we continue to change the gender and demographics ratios, we know a large percentage of men of the ranks are southern conservatives anyway. [sarcasm off]
Posted by Besoeker 2013-02-07 02:58||
#5 "Panetta will recommend to Congress that military salaries be limited to a one percent increase in 2014,"
This is the joke of Beltwayspeak. Cutting = less future expansion in expenditures.
You don't cut pay, you cut missions.
Pull the remaining ground based commitments to Europe, Japan (Okinawa), and Korea, leave a MAG team. These are first world countries.
Pirates are terrible, but we can't afford to provide the world with a free navy to keep the lanes clear anymore. Your problem. What the heck are any American flag merchants doing in the Indian Ocean? If one is jacked, you go in, burn the port to the ground holding them. It'll reduce recidivism and costs to a minimum.
You want to really cut pay, you cut everyone's pay by the same percentage. That includes Congresscritters, Executive Branch patronage appointments, and even the Judges [the 'no cut in pay' line in the base document is overcome by the Judiciary's 'interpretation' of the 14th and the 'equal before the law' they've been using for decades for the rest of us]. Soldiers understand 'shared' experience, otherwise 4000 years of history usually means they end up running the place when you start playing that game. Considering they rebuilt German, Japan, and Iraq, they have a better track record than the corruption class running this place now. That's the real danger, because if they display competency that these hacks lack, people might actually prefer them to be in charge.
Posted by Procopius2k 2013-02-07 09:28||
#6 Okay Leon - you & the Commander-in-Chief first. Ductus Exemplo, bitchez!
Posted by Broadhead6 2013-02-07 09:59||
#7 P2K - as usual, you bring a solid analysis.
Beso - exactly. Panetta & the DADT repeal & female in combat-arms MOS nonsense will be an albatross for a while. It's not politics, it's biology & mathematics.
Posted by Broadhead6 2013-02-07 10:05||
#8 Not to mention all the non-salaried lifestyle benefits the President gets, like Air Force One to Hawaii.
Posted by Thing From Snowy Mountain 2013-02-07 10:26||
#9 Speaking of USAF free-rides for congresscritters - anyone else hear about SanFranNan having her T-bird taken away by USAF?
Posted by Broadhead6 2013-02-07 10:44||
#10 We'll be shutting down the Washington Monument, too! Happy now?
Posted by Muggsy Mussolini1226 2013-02-07 13:33||
#11 Only if all government staffers, including members of Congress, the White House (including the President) and the Justice Department all take pay cuts as well.
You do not want to see our men and women pissed off at you. Our military hasn't even come close to crossing the Rubicon yet so don't give them a good reason to and throw your worthless butts out of office. Even though I hate everyone of the current Administration's worthless asses that is a precedent I do NOT want to see set.
Posted by DarthVader 2013-02-07 14:43||
#12 5-10% (or more) across the board cut in non-military departments across the entire government.
There are several cabinet dept's that should be cut 100% but I'll take 10% to start.
This regime has given me blood pressure problems and I foam at the mouth and growl all the time.
Posted by AlanC 2013-02-07 17:05||
#13 I've got a very limited amount of sympathy for the DOD on the sequester issue. Pancetta is throwing this out because it is politically unpopular. But the DOD wastes money like no one's business. Just my personal experience saw the USMC choose a paper proposal for a weapons system that was only marginally less expensive than a proven, off-the-shelf alternative (ours). That winning contractor could never deliver a working system. Both they and the USMC spent $millions trying until they exhausted both patience and $$ so the program was dropped. Stupid from the start. Same crap, different day with the DOD (and lots of other federal, state and municipal agencies). So make the cuts. They need to focus on missions and stop pissing money down rat holes. Perhaps having a bit less will force them to do that.
Posted by remoteman 2013-02-07 17:21||
#14 What about the czars? Are they gonna cut the czars?
Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2013-02-07 17:55||
#15 There are literally hundreds of DoD 'pet rock' civilian contract projects that could easily be cut and NO ONE would notice, nor would there be any impact on readiness.
DoD contracting needs an giant enema, has needed one for years.
Posted by Besoeker 2013-02-07 19:08||