"Worst Nightmare In The Pentagon"

 

After a decade of war, the Pentagon had its way over budget, because Congress was reluctant to refuse many requests for spending units on the battlefield. It was here billions of IED detection, and where billions of weapons, such as the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, Virginia-class submarine, or the Predator drone.

Sometimes, defense officials even had the money for projects not requested, such as armored vehicles known as MRAP (mine resistant ambush protected to) who said that senior military n 'has not been a good investment. The end result was the Pentagon's budget base inflated by $ 307 billion in 2001 to $ 529 million this year, up 72 percent over 10 years

And while the Pentagon began to cut spending over the past year, the debt deal approved by Congress this week raised the possibility of further cuts of between $ 350 billion and $ 800 dollars over the next decade. And that has left even seasoned observers of the Pentagon budget surprised.

"It's the Pentagon's worst nightmare," says Travis Sharp of the Center for a New American Security.

"It is chaos," said Mackenzie Eaglen Heritage Foundation. "Upside-Down Since Day at the Pentagon."

Pentagon officials are already in the fiscal years of playing the scenarios, while lobbyists for defense contractors plot how to protect their pet projects.

"Historically, defensive companies spend a lot of money for their programs, personal messaging, PET-stones," said Michael Kherson, the president of the United States Defense International, the lobbying firm with clients such as Northrop Grumman and Raytheon. "But now people are realizing that we are going to have to work together to fight for the top line."

It is clear that the defense budget will be cut, though modest or dramatic depending on how things play. Even with minor injuries, military products can not be lost, including the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, "a program of $ 300 billion the cost is both late and over," says Travis Sharp, an analyst budget of the Center for a New American Security. In addition, Pentagon officials decided to review current plans and money, 200 billion needed to modernize their nuclear stockpiles.

As part of a compromise in Washington, the Select Joint Committee on deficit reduction have received up to Congress to find savings of $ 1.5 billion deficit by the end of the year. This is more than $ 900 billion deficit in savings already identified in the legislation passed by Congress and signed by President Barack Obama on Tuesday. Committee will have six Democrats and six Republicans, and strive to achieve their goals in part, by cutting funds to the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security and other agencies that help protect national security.

The committee was created as a way to smooth the budget negotiations, but it creates a dangerous situation for the defense personnel. If the committee can not agree in the fall, an automated system for reductions known as a "trigger mechanism" will be adopted. It would be bad news for Pentagon officials, as it means they will bear a larger share of the cost savings, as much as $ 500 billion.

Fortunately, at least to boost military, the Ministry of Defence is headed by one of the pillars of the Washington establishment. Defense Secretary, Leon Panetta, is "a hell of a good manager," says Gordon Adams, American University, who worked for him in the Office of Management and Budget in the 1990's. Panetta also "liked to Congress, on both sides of the aisle." These features are useful in the "trench warfare budget," as described by Adams.

Almost everyone in Washington, including Panetta has long been known that the defense budget would be cut to Al Qaeda has been won, or almost, as Americans have learned recently, White House officials, and the troops are coming home from Afghanistan. Defence analysts believe that the cuts in the short term, is small, and that the cuts in the next decade or so may seem boring, but they are determined by the next president, so that it can never be set.

Undoubtedly, the Pentagon can be cut through attrition, for example, or by removing the F-35.

However, it is hard not to wonder about the concerted efforts to slash the defense budget, accompanied by the barely concealed joy of some analysts. ("These guys have been benefiting from a gold mine," said Chris Hellman of the National Priorities Project). His enthusiasm highlights the gap between them and the men and women fighting in Southeast Asia, Africa and the most there.

In fact, their world is seen in Hinesville, Georgia, Fort Carson, Colorado, and elsewhere around the country, where soldiers were sent to four or five times, leaving behind cars destroyed, abandoned pets, and children " do not stop crying, and I do not know why "as a school counselor Patriot Elementary School in Fort Carson, once told me. The cuts make sense of debates on Capitol Hill might seem insensitive to Hinesville.

In fact, say many analysts in Washington hacking the defense budget is a bad idea, not only for military families, but also for the nation, unless, as Thomas Donnelly American Enterprise Institute, said, "you can promise that there will be nothing but peace, love and tie-dye for the next 12 years. "Otherwise, he says, Americans are in trouble, because the reduced budget would mean that the U.S. will withdraw from its role as a superpower.

"Would you share the world with the Chinese or nuclear weapons in Iran?" He said. "The only thing worse than the Americans running the world is another driver in the world."

For many Pentagon officials and defense analysts, a dark scenario much worse than any fiscal crisis.