PDA

View Full Version : DoD Axes Joint Forces Command



Apocalypse
08-09-2010, 05:36 PM
http://images.military.com/cs/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobheadername1=Content-Type&blobheadername2=Content-Disposition&blobheadervalue1=image%2Fjpeg&blobheadervalue2=inline%3Bfilename%3DHL_100809_Rob ert_Gates_lg.jpg&blobkey=id&blobnocache=false&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobwhere=1209988574128&ssbinary=true

WASHINGTON - Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Monday that tough economic times require that he shutter a major command that employs some 5,000 people around Norfolk, Va., and begin to eliminate other jobs throughout the military.

The announcement was the first major step by Gates to find $100 billion in savings in the next five years. Gates says that money is needed elsewhere within the Defense Department to repair a force ravaged by years of war and to prepare troops for the next fight.

The plan prompted swift political pushback from lawmakers fearful that jobs would be lost in their districts.

http://www.military.com/news/article/dod-to-cut-joint-forces-command.html

JB
08-09-2010, 05:45 PM
The plan prompted swift political pushback from lawmakers fearful that jobs would be lost in their districts. Must be a good idea then.

PoliCon
08-09-2010, 06:10 PM
money spent in the field is more important than desk jobs in and around Washington.

Odysseus
08-09-2010, 10:31 PM
money spent in the field is more important than desk jobs in and around Washington.

USJFCOM coordinates activities between the different armed forces and provides C2 of combined joint operations. It's a critical combatant command, and it's far more important to the national defense than any of the stimulus projects that Obama flushed money down.

This is a very bad idea.

Rockntractor
08-09-2010, 10:34 PM
If it carries the Obama label you don't want it on the table!

PoliCon
08-09-2010, 10:40 PM
USJFCOM coordinates activities between the different armed forces and provides C2 of combined joint operations. It's a critical combatant command, and it's far more important to the national defense than any of the stimulus projects that Obama flushed money down.

This is a very bad idea.

But keeping it does not buy him or the dems votes.

Zathras
08-09-2010, 11:09 PM
USJFCOM coordinates activities between the different armed forces and provides C2 of combined joint operations. It's a critical combatant command, and it's far more important to the national defense than any of the stimulus projects that Obama flushed money down.

This is a very bad idea.

Which is why it doesn't surprise me that they're doing it.

Odysseus
08-10-2010, 09:41 AM
But keeping it does not buy him or the dems votes.
And cutting it reinforces his leftist street cred.

Which is why it doesn't surprise me that they're doing it.
I can't say that I'm disappointed, since I didn't have any expectations for this administration, but I will say that they do manage to apall me, even after I've thought that they couldn't do any more damage.

djones520
08-10-2010, 09:46 AM
I don't know... USJFCOM seems like one of those bloated organizations that didn't need to be as big as it is. Hell, TRANSCOM doesn't have that many personnel directly assigned to it.

Axing the whole thing, maybe not necessary, but it could definitely be pared down. If TRANSCOM, which arguably has a larger mission, can do what it does with fewer personnel, then why can't USJFCOM?

PoliCon
08-10-2010, 10:23 AM
And cutting it reinforces his leftist street cred.

I can't say that I'm disappointed, since I didn't have any expectations for this administration, but I will say that they do manage to apall me, even after I've thought that they couldn't do any more damage.

You are talking about a man who pledged to unilaterally disarm while running for president - you do know that right?

lacarnut
08-10-2010, 10:28 AM
Look out for more cuts in either personnel or equipment. That is what these sorry ass Democrats do in good times and bad economic times. Obama, Bush and Congress have rang up piles of debt which can never be paid back. Damn shame that our defense capabilities will suffer because of their gluttony for spending.

linda22003
08-10-2010, 10:49 AM
The recommendations Gates is implementing come from a report by the Defense Business Board. They're trying to prioritize defense spending in a difficult economic climate. For more information about the DBB:

http://dbb.defense.gov/members.html

Odysseus
08-10-2010, 11:27 AM
The recommendations Gates is implementing come from a report by the Defense Business Board. They're trying to prioritize defense spending in a difficult economic climate. For more information about the DBB:

http://dbb.defense.gov/members.html

The economic climate is difficult because we are now spending $2 trillion more than we have every year for the next decade. Simply taking back the unspent stimulus would eliminate the need for any cuts and allow us to keep force structure and equipment procurement and maintenance at current levels without impacting any other programs for the next two decades.

linda22003
08-10-2010, 12:01 PM
Not everything deserves to be continued. There are systems which take so long to develop they're obsolete by the time they're finished. I've been in several meetings about this kind of thing that, as a taxpayer, make steam come out of my ears.

Odysseus
08-10-2010, 03:23 PM
Not everything deserves to be continued. There are systems which take so long to develop they're obsolete by the time they're finished. I've been in several meetings about this kind of thing that, as a taxpayer, make steam come out of my ears.

Yeah, but USJFCOM actually serves a purpose. The improvements in coordination between the Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps since Grenada and Desert Storm are the direct result of the emphasis on joint doctrine and the integration of the separate services and their capabilities under joint commands, which come under USJFCOM. Getting rid of the command means reducing the frequency and effectiveness of joint operations.

If the administration is that concerned about the deficit, maybe they can cut some of the $1.8 trillion in new spending that they have imposed in the last year.

lacarnut
08-10-2010, 03:35 PM
If the administration is that concerned about the deficit, maybe they can cut some of the $1.8 trillion in new spending that they have imposed in the last year.

Freeze on new hires, cut all Government agency personnel by 10% and cut bloated government salaries would save some real money. The states have had to make changes like these but Federal government employees think they are special characters.