iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Obama Unveiling Defense Strategy, Military Cuts

Obama Defense Strategy

ROBERT BURNS   01/ 5/12 08:36 PM ET  AP

WASHINGTON — Looking beyond the wars he inherited, President Barack Obama on Thursday launched a reshaping and shrinking of the military. He vowed to preserve U.S. pre-eminence even as the Army and Marine Corps shed troops and the administration considers reducing its arsenal of nuclear weapons.

The changes won't come without risk, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said. But he called it acceptable and, because of budget restraints, inevitable.

In a presentation at the Pentagon, Obama said the U.S. is "turning a page" after having killed Osama bin Laden, withdrawn troops from Iraq and begun to wind down the war in Afghanistan. He outlined a vision for the future that some Republican lawmakers quickly dubbed wrong-headed.

"Our military will be leaner, but the world must know the United States is going to maintain our military superiority," Obama said with Panetta and the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, Gen. Martin Dempsey, at his side.

In a presidential election year the strategy gives Obama a rhetorical tool to defend his Pentagon budget-cutting choices. Republican contenders for the White House already have attacked him on national security issues including missile defense, Iran and planned reductions in ground forces.

Obama unveiled the results of an eight-month defense strategy review that is intended to guide decisions on cutting hundreds of billions from planned Pentagon spending over the coming decade. The eight-page document contained no details about how broad concepts for reshaping the military – such as focusing more on Asia and less on Europe – will translate into troop or weapons cuts.

Those details will be included in the 2013 defense budget to be submitted to Congress next month.

In about every major war or defense speech Obama hits themes intended to resonate with American voters – mainly, that the United States is turning a page from two wars, and that any nation-building will focus on improving the United States, not strategic allies abroad.

The economy is more likely to determine Obama's re-election fate than national security. To keep his promises to shrink the deficit and to prove he is serious about fiscal management to voters wary of enormous government spending, Obama must show the oft-protected Pentagon is not exempt.

The political danger, though, is that his opponents will use any slashing of spending to paint the president as weak on security.

Both Panetta and Dempsey said they anticipate heavy criticism of their new strategy, which was begun last spring by then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates after Obama called for defense spending cuts. The Pentagon now faces at least $487 billion in cuts in planned defense spending over 10 years.

The criticism from Republicans came quickly.

Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, issued a statement saying, "This is a lead-from-behind strategy for a left-behind America." He called it a "retreat from the world in the guise of a new strategy."

Panetta said that smaller military budgets will mean some trade-offs and that the U.S. will take on "some level of additional but acceptable risk." But in a changing world the Pentagon would have been forced to make a strategy shift anyway, he said. The money crisis merely forced the government's hand.

Obama wants the new strategy to represent a pivotal point in his stewardship of defense policy, which has been burdened by two expensive wars begun under President George W. Bush. The drag those conflicts placed on military resources has deferred other priorities.

Obama said his administration would not repeat the mistakes made after World War II and Vietnam when defense reductions left the military ill-prepared.

"As commander in chief, I will not let that happen again," he said. "Not on my watch."

Obama's involvement in the defense review and his decision to personally announce it at the Pentagon underscore that he is not just a commander in chief coping with a slimmer military in debt-ridden times. He is also an incumbent president seeking a second term and wanting to show who's in charge.

Dempsey praised the military strategy and the work of crafting it, calling it inclusive and comprehensive.

"It's not perfect," the general said. "There will be people who think it goes too far. Others will say it doesn't go nearly far enough. That probably makes it about right. It gives us what we need."

Obama said the military will be reshaped between now and 2020 with an emphasis on countering terrorism, maintaining a nuclear deterrent, protecting the U.S. homeland and "deterring and defeating aggression by any potential adversary."

Those are not new military missions, and Obama announced no new capabilities or defense initiatives. He described a U.S. force that will retain much of its recent focus, with the exception of fighting a large-scale, prolonged conflict like the recently ended Iraq mission or the ongoing war in Afghanistan.

"U.S. forces will no longer be sized to conduct large-scale, prolonged stability operations," the strategy document said, referring to Iraq and Afghanistan.

Left unsaid: The military was not sized for those unexpectedly long wars when they began. The Army had to be expanded by tens of thousands of soldiers and the Marine Corps also grew. The military at the time of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks was being shaped in somewhat the same form as Obama's vision for 2020: agile, flexible, reliant on high-tech weaponry and dependent on allies.

The new strategy moves the U.S. further from its longstanding goal of being able to successfully fight two major regional wars at the same time.

It said the U.S. will maintain a robust nuclear arsenal but hinted at reductions.

"It is possible that our deterrence goals can be achieved with a smaller nuclear force, which would reduce the number of nuclear weapons in our inventory as well as their role in U.S. national security strategy," the strategy said.

The new strategy strongly suggests a reduced U.S. military presence in Europe, notwithstanding a continuing close relationship with NATO, and says Asia will be a bigger priority. It also emphasizes improving U.S. capabilities in the areas of cyberwarfare, missile defense, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.

NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen praised the U.S. strategy, calling it consistent with the alliance's vision for collective defense.

___

Associated Press writers Ben Feller and Pauline Jelinek in Washington contributed to this report.

_ Robert Burns can be reached on Twitter at http://twitter.com/robertburnsAP

Earlier on HuffPost:

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON — Looking beyond the wars he inherited, President Barack Obama on Thursday launched a reshaping and shrinking of the military. He vowed to preserve U.S. pre-eminence even as the Army ...
WASHINGTON — Looking beyond the wars he inherited, President Barack Obama on Thursday launched a reshaping and shrinking of the military. He vowed to preserve U.S. pre-eminence even as the Army ...
Filed by Meghan Neal  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 9,181
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (130 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Alex Fidelibus
Give reason a chance.
02:05 PM on 01/14/2012
Even with the cuts, the budget is still higher than it was in 2007 when Bush was in charge.
photo
rivertrat2
Cuomo's SAFE act is just wrong
12:02 PM on 01/11/2012
obamajustsucks
01:50 PM on 01/09/2012
Cut military spending. We also need to cut executive pay (across the board), judicial pay, congressional pay, etc. Suspend Presidential parties and functions and other needless expenditures.
Further, we need to disallow successive terms of office for life long politicians. If you are voted into public office for a term, you must sit out of that political office for the next term.

I would take the job as a Congressman or Senator and at a reduced salary. I would only do it for one term because I love my real job. Being a politician is not something people should want to do, it is a necessary evil of having a free state. Career politicians are not a true representation of and are usually disassociated from the people.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Kritikos
Intelligence is not a science
11:07 AM on 01/08/2012
One thing is certain--O or No, future ground wars in foreign theaters (especially two simultaneously) will not be able to sustain themselves. The numbers won't allow for it. Multiple deployments, casualties, burn out and public outcry, along with no possibility of a draft are real obstacles; and, are matters of fact. So, a new 'Strategy' is in order.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
l78lancer
Wisdom is the principal thing
12:12 AM on 01/08/2012
"Left unsaid: The military was not sized for those unexpectedly long wars when they began. The Army had to be expanded by tens of thousands of soldiers and the Marine Corps also grew. The military at the time of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks was being shaped in somewhat the same form as Obama's vision for 2020: agile, flexible, reliant on high-tech weaponry and dependent on allies."
--------------------------------------------------->

The republican objection to the reduction in the size of the military is as bogus as it is political. It very is convenient how the reduction process actually started years before, yet republicans choose to not remember. Donald Rumsfeld touted the reduction in military as a centerpiece in his vaunted "asymetric warefare" vision. The hawks in congress were not happy but the reductions had alread started.

There is little if any credibility to the criticisms being offered by the republicans to justify their resistance. Further, they have not put forth a budget model that maintains the size of the military yet is economically feasible and permits the deficit to be reduced.

Therefore, on the part of the republicans it's obfuscation as usual.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dianaghughes
12:22 PM on 01/08/2012
Great comment! I admit that I've not been personally involved with any military people other than my Dad (WWII) who NEVER talked about the war; my high school friends (Vietnam) who NEVER talked about the war; my son-in-law who only expresses his pride in the Marines; and now all the ads about mental & physical difficulties our returning vets are going to endure for years to come. So ... I conclude that war is something our country should do everything to avoid! And, because wars seem to come about because of greed and the desire to "rule," I truly believe that America needs to STOP paying for fights that are none of our business -- unless, of course, America wants to be that greedy country that rules the world (a goal of our Republican party?). Think about it. As an elderly American who worked hard for 50 years, who reared 3 children, who paid taxes for the purpose of taking care of our land and our public properties and -- hopefully -- my old age, I'm really angry about the fact that my tax dollars are and have been paying for wars and their catastrophic affects on our troops, along with paying to support lazy people. Americans should understand that we ALL must work and pay a fair share for the care of OUR country!! And, we need to "butt out" of the business of other countries and stop paying to support those who don't contribute to our country's needs.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
l78lancer
Wisdom is the principal thing
06:28 PM on 01/08/2012
Thank you. F/F.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
joemensa
07:32 PM on 01/07/2012
I for one wold much rather have illegals and welfare recipients go hungry and cold rather than have my family killed in a terrorist bombing that cold have been prevent with proper military or intelligence funding
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jmz4gtu
07:53 PM on 01/10/2012
Maybe if we stop mucking about in other people's countries so much your family will be safer.
Complete security is impossible, and any crazy with a grudge is going to be able to build and detonate a conventional bomb. The goal should be to limit the numbers of crazies in our borders, and the number of grudges against us, and completely nullify the possibility of a non-conventional weapon getting into the crazies' hands. Therefore, the priorities for homeland defense should be securing the ports and borders, securing nuclear weapons and materials, freezing terrorist funds in international banks, and providing international relief to build goodwill abroad.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
joemensa
08:13 PM on 01/10/2012
I agree with everything you say...except the part about providing international relief
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ron Weaver
Whatever it takes
09:48 AM on 01/11/2012
Does this rant include welfare children you would like to see go cold and hungary?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
joemensa
10:18 AM on 01/11/2012
Ron...yes...absolutely...if it came down to a choice between the safety of myself and my family from terrorist attack and feeding the children of the leeches on society..I would, without hesitation, choose to have my tax dollars spent on the former...Are you suggesting that you would rather see my child dead in order to feed someone's kid? If so, how callous of you. Thankfully there appears to be enough money to provide security and feed the children of those who cause a drain on society, whether intentionally or not...so now let me ask you Ron...if in fact the situation were such that you had to choose between doing all that you could as a parent to protect yourself and your wife and children or feed someone elses kid, what would you do? Also, does your answer change at all if I were to say that in scenario #1, the welfare recipients are children of hard working American citizens who for the first time in their lives, lost their jobs an despite their concerted effort, could not find work...or Scenario #2 the recipients are the children of illegal immigrants who specifically came to this country to take advantage of our government largess without any intention of becoming legal, or working or providing for themselves.
photo
JPT Longgolf
Just the Facts Please
11:15 AM on 01/07/2012
Destroyed our Economy, Then our Health Care System, Now it's time to destroy our Military and our security so the demise of the United States of America, (The Greatest and most benevolent Nation this planet has ever seen), Will Be Complete. All in less than 4 Years. Thanks O
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jmz4gtu
08:03 PM on 01/10/2012
How on earth did Obama destroy the economy?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ron Weaver
Whatever it takes
09:52 AM on 01/11/2012
In 2001 our unemployment was at 4.4% In 2008 it was 7.8% Facts speak louder than Fox. The ignorance on these blogs astounding.
06:53 PM on 01/20/2012
Ron, the unemployment rate was increasing under Bush, then Obama took office as the real problems were starting. As overvalued asset prices were plummeting and banks were becoming insolvent (not enough money to meet required reserve ratio/ pay demand deposits), it was clear that there was a systemic problem. This caused a problem in both banking (so lending was drastically reduced, hurting economic activity greatly) and in the housing market, which employs millions of people to build, sell, help finance (a market that makes up about 1/6th the economy). housing prices fell, taking away equity, making it harder for people to take out loans and hurting their net value, making them save more and spend less, further hurting the economy. This all happened at the end of 2007/ start of 2008. If anything, you should be reprimanding Bush for a complete lack of leadership in this situation. This was the biggest recession since the great depression and they waited for the stimulus. So no wonder the unemployment was increasing in 2008! Since then it peaked at 10% in 2009, and has been trending down since then. Look at the great depression as an example. The unemployment went from 4.2% in 1928 to peaked at 23 in 1932, but stayed above 15% until 1940. It was 11 years after the depression started that ww2 ended it. To blame Obama because the economy hasn't fixed itself in 3 years is childish, also shows a lack of knowledge on your part.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CaraMia82
Its The Economy,Vote Romney!
10:19 AM on 01/07/2012
the military vote went out the window with this one for sure,not that he had it anyway.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
grouston
author My Mind has A Mind Of Its Own
07:29 AM on 01/07/2012
It all comes from the top down, our military and our citizens must have respect for our leaders and their agendas or we lose all around. Obama has no clue what he is doing and everyone can see that, thus no respect. Our military must have all the equipment they need to prosecute any war, anywhere in the world and they must be treated failry and compensated for thier service, especially after they have served and need help. The defence budget is ay out of whack, the needless expenditures are astronomical and the real needs are not being met. The projects or let contracts are a joke in most cases, we pay way too much for wht we get and for the most part the stuff we do get is substandard at best thus placing our troops in harms way needlessely.
Bottom line we need to revamp the netire government from top to bottom, get our priorities straight and stop all the pork and waste. Set term limits on senators and congressman so they don't become entrneched and we have the present good old boy network of cronies and rip off artists lining their own pockets.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CaraMia82
Its The Economy,Vote Romney!
10:28 AM on 01/07/2012
so true, take clintons administration for instance where they depleted the forces and when 9/11 came around our troops were not battle ready.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dianaghughes
12:47 PM on 01/08/2012
You are soooooooooooooooooooooooo right!!!!!! You last 2 sentences are especially true!! To begin, let's STOP multi-term political positions ... from cities all the way up to the US Congress!! I'm among many Americans who think this way; but, I need help on figuring out how to do this. Even though you may not believe in Obama, and I certainly don't agree with everything he is doing, I must say that the Democratic Party is doing more to help correct political mistakes around our country -- state by state -- than any other group. Our country didn't get into this mess overnight and we're not going to get out of this mess in the blink of an eye. Each of us must listen and learn and then TRY to determine what to do and how to vote for the changes we believe are necessary to bring our country back to "we the people." Each of us must stand up for our own rights and stop bowing down to politicians and corporate bureaucrats who are telling us what to do. For example: corporations that are paying politicians should be boycotted; corporations that are paying foreign countries and foreign people to produce products that should be made in America should be boycotted; corporations that are illegally forcing people out of their homes should be boycotted; corporations that are fraudulently doing business by having people sign a paper for "installation of equipment" that is actually a long-term "contract" should be boycotted.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
firstad
03:08 AM on 01/07/2012
Our Country is going bankrupt according to the GOP. Everything must get cut back. The Pentagon and Defense are going to get their part of it. The heady days of the Iraq war are over GOP. The world and its nations are going to evolve, while we build our economy back. Stay the course with Obama and watch the evolution of our country back into a great nation instead of one struggling to overcome two wars and a recession. McConnel and Boehner need to support the remake of the nation, not their party which drove us all into the ditch. Never again GOP. Never again.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dianaghughes
07:10 PM on 01/07/2012
HURRAH!!!! I'm with you allllllllllllllllllllllll the way!!! Even though Obama isn't right in everything he's doing, he's really TRYING to help America get back on its feet. After all, Obama inherited years and years and years of horrible decisions made by previous politicians (most paid by fraudulently run greedy corporations). We Americans need to "hang on" and try to "endure" the difficulties that will occur during these times when needed changes are made to help our country once again become strong -- economically and morally -- with "leadership by the people and for the people."
12:12 AM on 01/07/2012
more theatre from obumbles, psyops to keep the masses confused and
bewildered, and apathetic to how futile involvement in the processes will and
can be. all we can do is keep trying to play paul revere to wake up the sheeps
11:53 PM on 01/06/2012
psyops, this is how they keep us in a state of confusion and defeat, most just
want to eat, drink, play, hang out, copulate, and live. they don't bother with the
details, but the devil is in the details, they just hope you don't care enough about
your liberty and freedom, did i mention the ndaa bill they just passed, didn't mean
to wake you from yer stupor
10:37 PM on 01/06/2012
4 more years-I vote O!!!!!!!!!!
12:01 AM on 01/07/2012
anyone but paul and you will have yer wish sh(*& can
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
joemensa
07:36 PM on 01/07/2012
socialism and communism have never worked anywhere it has been tried...while Obama works hard to convert this county into Europe....Europe, which has had many decades of failed socialist policies is now trying to become more like the America we once were...boy oh boy is this country on the wront path unde this President
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dianaghughes
10:24 PM on 01/06/2012
Aren't you sick and tired of America being involved in wars around the world? Do you really think people in other countries should live ONLY according to America's rules? If a foreign power came to America and told us we MUST speak a new language, live a certain way, follow certain rules/laws and believe in certain religious/non-religious ideas, what would you do? Do you think it was "right" for foreigners from other countries to come to this land and take it away from the people who lived here first -- the Indians -- and then force them to live on reservations according to new rules? Do you really think we should be changing Italy, India, Japan, Germany, China, Spain, Africa, et al.? Seriously, do you really think that America is the only country to "rule" the world? Americans need to stay in their own country, protect their country's borders and protect those people who work hard and pay taxes in their efforts to survive "comfortably." Americans need to look at each other and recognize that their own country is in a shambles because of expensive wars, bad governmental leadership, fraudulently run corporations and self-centered politicians. Obama inherited all these horrific conditions and deserves time to TRY to fix the mistakes of his predecessors. Let's bring Americans HOME and TRY to "make friends" with people around the world so that ALL can live in peace!!
10:36 PM on 01/06/2012
If you were in some of those other countries, you might appreciate NATO! :))
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dianaghughes
05:27 PM on 01/07/2012
All I can say is ... how many countries are represented in NATO? How much $$$ and how many lives have NATO countries lost since WWII compared to America? Why does America pay for and have military stationed in countries around the world? Do the other NATO countries pay for and have military stationed in America to help us? Why do only American taxpayers have to pay to "protect the world"?? Why does America think it has the right to tell others how to live their lives??
06:00 PM on 01/07/2012
NATO is an international political and military affiliation focused on consultation and cooperation for the mutual security and safety of member nations and surrounding nations. Operating with diplomatic and military arms, it seeks to resolve disputes in as peaceful a manner as possible, while simultaneously maintaining troops to enforce peaceful intents. It is made up of 28 countries. See the bigger picture. You have to give something for others to gain something. So, money to help a suffering nation is not a big deal to me, although we bite off more than we can chew. Nevertheless, we give to celebrities and sports’ stars with millions of dollars daily. We wouldn’t blink to invest in what we desire…I am sure there are many reasons that we both cannot answer about everything in Politics. However, if there is a slight good cause (to me), then I don’t mind supporting it. Sometimes, big brother comes to the rescue, and that involves risk. Things are not perfect I know, and some things are much more sensitive to a person than another. Yet, this one is not pressing, only due to the outcome that I have noticed to be beneficial for some. We still might not agree, but I appreciate your thoughts. Hope we can respect each others’ mutually.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
4thefree
09:34 PM on 01/06/2012
Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, issued a statement saying, "This is a lead-from-behind strategy for a left-behind America." He called it a "retreat from the world in the guise of a new strategy."

He hit the nail right on the head.

In the words of Reagan, "Peace through Strength." Obama's radical ideology and policies are weakening our armed forces and making the U.S., as well as our allies, vulnerable.

I never felt so unsafe as I do under this Administration.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jmz4gtu
07:57 PM on 01/10/2012
Cause we only spend 10 times as much as any other country on defense instead of 15 times as much?
America will retain it's military edge. There's no need to keep up the ability to fight protracted, nation building endeavors because this generation of Americans has lost its taste for it and won't stand for it.