Quantcast

«

»

Feb 28 2014

OMG! Obama is Disarming America!

I am alternately amused and appalled by the hysterical overreaction from the right to the Obama administration’s proposed Pentagon budget cuts that aren’t really cuts at all. The Worldnetdaily wants you to know that Obama is “unilaterally disarming” the country.

The Obama administration is proposing the biggest cuts to the military in generations, citing an end to the war in Afghanistan and the impact of sequestration, but critics allege the president and Pentagon officials are engaging in a deliberate and dangerous hollowing out of the U.S. Armed Forces.

Retired U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney also said the cuts will further erode already poor military readiness and signal the world that the U.S. will be in no position to defend national security threats on the scale it has in years past…

“There’s no question that this administration has us on a path of unilateral disarmament,” McInerney said. “[Let's] not confuse ourselves. He’s got us on a path of disarmament…

“This was the administration’s plan all along,” he said. “They’re the ones that came up with sequestration. Everybody on the Hill thought people are reasonable and won’t let this happen. The fact is, it was (Senate Majority Leader) Harry Reid’s intent to let it happen. It was clear the Democratic Party was not going to negotiate with the Republicans. So they drove it into sequestration, and they are very happy about sequestration. That’s why the Defense budget is taking the bulk of the cuts.”< ?blockquote>

On Planet Wingnuttia, spending $522 billion a year on “defense,” which is more than three times as much as Russia and China put together, is “unilateral disarmament.” They have nothing to sell but fear itself.

18 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    gshelley

    Do they not pay attention to how much the administration has been complaining that they might have to make slightly bigger cuts than they want?

  2. 2
    iknklast

    I’d love to see them recognize that the worst cuts are those that benefit the non-military, non-rich. Food stamps, welfare, science, education, arts, and now they’re talking about decimating Social Security and Medicare (as they are always talking). Which is interesting, since the older people tend to vote, and they’re one of the most solid bases the Republicans have. They won’t stand by to have their benefits slashed, unless you can convince them it will only hurt the young.

  3. 3
    zero6ix

    OH NO! They’ll only be able to purchase 157 of those new style, high end, ultra fast, bristling with armaments “looks just like a normal jet fighter” drones! THEY WANTED 158! WHAT WILL AMERICA DO?

  4. 4
    Olav

    Good to see that even Ed messes up the blockquotes sometimes… :-P

  5. 5
    Larry

    They’re worried that if and when a republican ever makes it back to the White House, the military will be unable to engage small countries full of brown people and fill them with shock and awe. And you know you need expensive, high tech military gear for that kind of mission.

  6. 6
    John Pieret

    Also on Planet Wingnuttia, it was the moderate, willing to compromise Republicans who were suckered into the sequestration that was aimed only at military spending. And the government shutdown was all Obama’s fault (by definition, everything bad is Obama’s fault), despite the Republican’s best efforts to keep it open.

    Reality should be a valuable commodity on Planet Wingnuttia, given its scarcity, but, unfortunately, demand for it is even lower.

  7. 7
    Marcus Ranum

    cuts will further erode already poor military readiness

    Spend the money smarter. The rest of the world makes do with less on “defense” than the US does.

  8. 8
    Raging Bee

    Obama isn’t disarming America — Republican tax-cutters and libertarian isolationists are. The problem is real (though perhaps exaggerated), but the wrong people are getting blamed for it.

  9. 9
    dugglebogey

    Wait, how can Obama be rounding up all the Christians and putting them on concentration camps if he’s getting rid of the people who would do that for him?

    These people need to get their bullshit conspiracy theories straight.

  10. 10
    fifthdentist

    Exactly, dugglebogey,
    One would think that those people who hate the federal government* and have wet dreams about 100 million teabagger patriots marching on Washington armed with their AR-15s to remove the Negro usurper would be pleased as punch at the possibility of having a weaker military with which they would have to contend. That would make their revolution easier and cut down on their casualties.

    * Hatred of federal government null and void during years there is a “real Republican” in the White House.

  11. 11
    ffakr

    $522 Billion SOUNDS like a lot.. but put it into perspective.
    It’s only $16,552 for every second of that year.

  12. 12
    ffakr

    BTW.. if you’re some minimum-wage earner who thinks $16,552/second still sounds like a lot.. consider what it costs to monitor our vast fields of un-needed multi-million dollar military hardware?

    Mothballing Two Thousand $6+M tanks doesn’t cost nothing..
    http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/09/army-to-congress-thanks-but-no-tanks/comment-page-4/

  13. 13
    Synfandel

    $522 Billion SOUNDS like a lot.. but put it into perspective.
    It’s only $16,552 for every second of that year.

    Or about $1,633.75 for each man, woman, and child in the country.

  14. 14
    eoraptor

    I’m gonna say this one thing about the military budgets of our “allies” in Western Europe. I suspect those governments are comfortable spending so little because they know the big bully on the block has all possible threats awed and shocked. “Why should I spend $10 to protect myself when you’re spending $10,000 to protect the entire block?”

  15. 15
    Greg

    @14,

    Western Europe gains the most from our defense umbrella, but don’t forget about Asia. Qatar, South Korea, Japan and Taiwan benefit as well. The US should charge these countries for defense rendered.

    Japan isn’t allowed to have a large military, so that might be a different case.

  16. 16
    jnorris

    I am sure the president is counting on the well organized militias to pick up the slack.

  17. 17
    dingojack

    If everybody else has such a tiny ‘defence’ force, who are Americans protecting us from, exactly?
    Dingo
    ——-
    PS: When all you’ve got is a sledgehammer, every problem looks like a 9″ nail.

  18. 18
    Azkyroth Drinked the Grammar Too :)

    …promise?

Leave a Reply

Switch to our mobile site