Hagel plans to shrink Army to pre-World War II level

[orenbus]

Hagel to propose big cuts in Army in 2015 budget

WASHINGTON — A U.S. official says that as part of the proposed 2015 defense budget, Pentagon chief Chuck Hagel is recommending shrinking the Army to its smallest size in decades.

Hagel is expected to announce that and other recommendations Monday in a speech at the Pentagon outlining his priorities for next year’s defense budget.

Army leaders have been saying for months that they expected to absorb additional troop reductions as the nation prepares to end its combat role in Afghanistan this year. The Army is already scheduled to shrink to 490,000 active-duty members from a wartime peak of 570,000. Hagel is expected to propose cutting it further to between 440,000 and 450,000.

That’s according to a defense official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the official was not authorized to be identified discussing the proposals before Hagel’s speech.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/hagel-to-propose-big-cuts-in-army-in-2015-budget/2014/02/24/7ddb380e-9d51-11e3-878c-65222df220eb_story.html



Pentagon Plans to Shrink Army to Pre-World War II Level
WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel plans to shrink the United States Army to its smallest force since before the World War II buildup and eliminate an entire class of Air Force attack jets in a new spending proposal that officials describe as the first Pentagon budget to aggressively push the military off the war footing adopted after the terror attacks of 2001.

The proposal, described by several Pentagon officials on the condition of anonymity in advance of its release on Monday, takes into account the fiscal reality of government austerity and the political reality of a president who pledged to end two costly and exhausting land wars. A result, the officials argue, will be a military capable of defeating any adversary, but too small for protracted foreign occupations.

The officials acknowledge that budget cuts will impose greater risk on the armed forces if they are again ordered to carry out two large-scale military actions at the same time: Success would take longer, they say, and there would be a larger number of casualties. Officials also say that a smaller military could invite adventurism by adversaries.

“You have to always keep your institution prepared, but you can’t carry a large land-war Defense Department when there is no large land war,” a senior Pentagon official said.

Outlines of some of the budget initiatives, which are subject to congressional approval, have surfaced, an indication that even in advance of its release the budget is certain to come under political attack.

For example, some members of Congress, given advance notice of plans to retire air wings, have vowed legislative action to block the move, and the National Guard Association, an advocacy group for those part-time military personnel, is circulating talking points urging Congress to reject anticipated cuts. State governors are certain to weigh in, as well. And defense-industry officials and members of Congress in those port communities can be expected to oppose any initiatives to slow Navy shipbuilding.

Even so, officials said that despite budget reductions, the military would have the money to remain the most capable in the world and that Mr. Hagel’s proposals have the endorsement of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Money saved by reducing the number of personnel, they said, would assure that those remaining in uniform would be well trained and supplied with the best weaponry.

The new American way of war will be underscored in Mr. Hagel’s budget, which protects money for Special Operations forces and cyberwarfare. And in an indication of the priority given to overseas military presence that does not require a land force, the proposal will — at least for one year — maintain the current number of aircraft carriers at 11.

Over all, Mr. Hagel’s proposal, the officials said, is designed to allow the American military to fulfill President Obama’s national security directives: to defend American territory and the nation’s interests overseas and to deter aggression — and to win decisively if again ordered to war.

“We’re still going to have a very significant-sized Army,” the official said. “But it’s going to be agile. It will be capable. It will be modern. It will be trained.”

Mr. Hagel’s plan would most significantly reshape America’s land forces — active-duty soldiers as well as those in the National Guard and Reserve.

The Army, which took on the brunt of the fighting and the casualties in Afghanistan and Iraq, already was scheduled to drop to 490,000 troops from a post-9/11 peak of 570,000. Under Mr. Hagel’s proposals, the Army would drop over the coming years to between 440,000 and 450,000.

That would be the smallest United States Army since 1940. For years, and especially during the Cold War, the Pentagon argued that it needed a military large enough to fight two wars simultaneously — say, in Europe and Asia. In more recent budget and strategy documents, the military has been ordered to be prepared to decisively win one conflict while holding off an adversary’s aspirations in a second until sufficient forces could be mobilized and redeployed to win there.

The Guard and Reserves, which proved capable in their wartime deployments although costly to train to meet the standards of their full-time counterparts, would face smaller reductions. But the Guard would see its arsenal reshaped.

The Guard’s Apache attack helicopters would be transferred to the active-duty Army, which would transfer its Black Hawk helicopters to the Guard. The rationale is that Guard units have less peacetime need for the bristling array of weapons on the Apache and would put the Black Hawk — a workhorse transport helicopter — to use in domestic disaster relief.

The cuts proposed by Mr. Hagel fit the Bipartisan Budget Act reached by Mr. Obama and Congress in December to impose a military spending cap of about $496 billion for fiscal year 2015. If steeper spending reductions kick in again in 2016 under the sequestration law, however, then even more significant cuts would be required in later years.

The budget to be presented Monday will be the first sweeping initiative that bears Mr. Hagel’s full imprint. Although Mr. Hagel has been in office one year, most of his efforts in that time have focused on initiatives and problems that he inherited. In many ways his budget provides an opportunity for him to begin anew.

The proposals are certain to face resistance from interest groups like veterans’ organizations, which oppose efforts to rein in personnel costs; arms manufacturers that want to reverse weapons cuts; and some members of Congress who will seek to block base closings in their districts.

Mr. Hagel will take some first steps to deal with the controversial issue of pay and compensation, as the proposed budget would impose a one-year salary freeze for general and flag officers; basic pay for military personnel would rise by 1 percent. After the 2015 fiscal year, raises in pay will be similarly restrained, Pentagon officials say.

The fiscal 2015 budget will also call for slowing the growth of tax-free housing allowances for military personnel and would reduce the $1.4 billion direct subsidy provided to military commissaries, which would most likely make goods purchased at those commissaries more expensive for soldiers.

The budget also proposes an increase in health insurance deductibles and some co-pays for some military retirees and for some family members of active servicemen. But Mr. Hagel’s proposals do not include any changes to retirement benefits for those currently serving.

Under Mr. Hagel’s proposals, the entire fleet of Air Force A-10 attack aircraft would be eliminated. The aircraft was designed to destroy Soviet tanks in case of an invasion of Western Europe, and the capabilities are deemed less relevant today. The budget plan does sustain money for the controversial F-35 warplane, which has been extremely expensive and has run into costly delays.

In addition, the budget proposal calls for retiring the famed U-2 spy plane in favor of the remotely piloted Global Hawk.

The Navy would be allowed to purchase two destroyers and two attack submarines every year. But 11 cruisers will be ordered into reduced operating status during modernization.

Although consideration was given to retiring an aircraft carrier, the Navy will keep its fleet of 11 — for now. The George Washington would be brought in for overhaul and nuclear refueling — a lengthy process that could be terminated in future years under tighter budgets.


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/24/us/politics/pentagon-plans-to-shrink-army-to-pre-world-war-ii-level.html?hp&_r=0

[AngryCanadian]

And whats the issue with this?

[eduardo89]

And whats the issue with this?

How will we invade Iran?

[erowe1]

What's the catch?

There's no way his boss is for this.

[donnay]

They have drones and mercenaries for hire.

[WM_in_MO]

What's the catch?

There's no way his boss is for this.

I am also expecting a catch.

[Cleaner44]

They have drones and mercenaries for hire.

This. Expect more outsourcing to contractors that aren't bound by the rules our military members are.

If we weren't wasting so many resources occupying so many nations around the globe, we would need much less for our national defense. Oh that's right, our military isn't really in place for our national defense, it's to protect "our interests".

[RJB]

I am also expecting a catch.

The catch is that DHS will take its place.

[osan]

This is either nonsense or very worrisome.


Over all, Mr. Hagel’s proposal, the officials said, is designed to allow the American military to fulfill President Obama’s national security directives: to defend American territory and the nation’s interests overseas and to deter aggression — and to win decisively if again ordered to war.


What, exactly, are the "nation's interests"? Of which aggression does he speak? While it may seem clear, I suggest that in the context of the typical spin we encounter these days that it is anything but.

We had 450K men in uniform in 1940? I thought it was on the order of 20K. I must be wrong.

We have a certfiable psychopath in the Oval Office whose masters are equally dangerous with whatever madness drives them to do what they do. Forget foreign enemies and keep your eyes peeled on the ones right here, our very own political fifth column.

When a spendthrift such as Obama starts talking reductions in military force, one needs to pay some non-trivial attention because he is not seeking to reduce spending, but to rechannel it. The question arises, "to what?" One particularly disturbing possibility is DHS. As he and Congress squeeze us and hem us in ever further, even stupid Americans may reach a point of tolerance. If that day comes, the shit-or-get-off-the-pot moment will have arrived for those running the circus and the gloves will come off all the way because I see no way they will be backing down at this stage of the game. The US military is a wildcard for them at best, so why not whittle them down, take the "savings" and invest it in the means to better ensure the final victory over that last remaining vestige of humanity that is far too free to be tolerated by despots seeking more perfect global dominion?

[RJB]

Add to that all the civilian contractors (mercs) and start looking forward to the USSA, comrades.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s

[Brett85]

I wish we could just bring our troops home. Our government will probably close down a bunch of domestic military bases and lay off troops, rather than closing down a single foreign military base.

[AngryCanadian]

The nation's interests are.
-Israel
-Gas Pipes/OIL Pipes
-Protecting the Arab Gulf Tyrants and there dictatorship.
-replacing & reinstalling tyrants.

[Feeding the Abscess]

I wish we could just bring our troops home. Our government will probably close down a bunch of domestic military bases and lay off troops, rather than closing down a single foreign military base.

Do both.

[Ronin Truth]

Maybe they could get a good deal on renting some part-time Hessians.

[enoch150]

What's the catch?

There's no way his boss is for this.

It will make Obama appear pro-military when he overrules the cuts.

[erowe1]

It will make Obama appear pro-military when he overrules the cuts.

I can't imagine that it would get to that point. Congress would have to agree first.

I think it might be more like the opposite. It will falsely make Obama look pro-peace, since he can take for granted that his proposals won't actually happen.

[oyarde]

This is either nonsense or very worrisome.



What, exactly, are the "nation's interests"? Of which aggression does he speak? While it may seem clear, I suggest that in the context of the typical spin we encounter these days that it is anything but.

We had 450K men in uniform in 1940? I thought it was on the order of 20K. I must be wrong.

We have a certfiable psychopath in the Oval Office whose masters are equally dangerous with whatever madness drives them to do what they do. Forget foreign enemies and keep your eyes peeled on the ones right here, our very own political fifth column.

When a spendthrift such as Obama starts talking reductions in military force, one needs to pay some non-trivial attention because he is not seeking to reduce spending, but to rechannel it. The question arises, "to what?" One particularly disturbing possibility is DHS. As he and Congress squeeze us and hem us in ever further, even stupid Americans may reach a point of tolerance. If that day comes, the shit-or-get-off-the-pot moment will have arrived for those running the circus and the gloves will come off all the way because I see no way they will be backing down at this stage of the game. The US military is a wildcard for them at best, so why not whittle them down, take the "savings" and invest it in the means to better ensure the final victory over that last remaining vestige of humanity that is far to free to be tolerated by despots seeking more perfect global dominion?
Kind of depends on how you look at it . Really it was more than that , but not by todays standards .The Army was divided between Regular , Guard and Reserve , all were counted by the Army .About 244K Regular Army( 130 Posts) , 207K Guard , 105k Reserve ,of nine Inf divisions , only three were full strength.By July of '41 the Guard units were rolled into the Regulars and it was expanded to 607k total with additional that were mostly added in June , July of 1941. Prior to 1940 , I think there were about 16 other world Armies larger.

[Lucille]

and to win decisively if again ordered to war.

LOL


Uh, yeah (http://www.fredoneverything.net/TeaParty.shtml). In ten years the Pentagon can't beat a few tens of thousands of peasants armed with AKs. Nobody else's army could do it either. Thing is, everybody else has figured out that such wars don't work too well. Not us.


The military (http://www.fredoneverything.net/FuckedGummint.shtml). A trillion withering green ones a year and we get forces that can’t beat a few pissed-off goat-herds with AKs. Which actually is a good thing since they shouldn’t be trying. A chronicle of unmitigated failure, and always for the same reason: trying to use shiny toys to whip whole countries that don’t want us there. Hey, if it doesn’t work, let’s do it again.

And now Washington wants wars with Iran and China, when it can’t beat Yemen. You have to concede a certain logic here: if you can’t defeat Afghanistan, a billion Han Chinese will be a cakewalk.

[pcosmar]

This is the same guy that wants to bring back the Draft.

http://www.wnd.com/2004/04/24280/

[anaconda]

Latest Council On Foreign Relations strategy?

[FindLiberty]

Hagel plans to shrink Army to pre-World War II level

...in order to set the stage for WWIII

The country just needs a lot of broken windows to get us over this economic slump!

[Danke]

Want to increase profits for companies producing expensive weapons. I doubt any army troop would like to see the A-10 disappear.

[oyarde]

Want to increase profits for companies producing expensive weapons. I doubt any army troop would like to see the A-10 disappear.

No FO in would want to see that .

[Antischism]

Fox News is currently going ape-shit over this, stating that we'll be less safe now.

[Danke]

No FO in would want to see that .


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rGcn2XGr48

[Lucille]

Defense Cuts Are Welcome, “Pre-WWII Levels” Headline Is Deceptive
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/millman/defense-cuts-are-welcome-pre-wwii-levels-headline-is-deceptive/


I am pleased to see that the Pentagon is looking at meaningful force reductions and making some tough choices about what equipment is necessary, and that there is some recognition that this will necessitate some change in mission. But I strongly suspect that the “pre-World War II Army” headlines are designed to alarm, rather than inform.

A few reasons why:


The Army is the service branch that is being shrunk significantly. There are cuts elsewhere, of course, but we’re hardly going back to a pre-World War II Navy.
A much bigger reduction in the size of the Army took place after the end of the Cold War and the Gulf War. Over the course of the 1990s, active personnel shrank by roughly 1/3. There was some ramp-up over the course of the 2000s, but the service never approached the Cold War levels of the late 1970s and 1980s, to say nothing of the wartime peaks of Vietnam or Korea. ”Win-hold-win” was a doctrine that took hold in the 1990s, and is not a consequence of the proposed reductions.
The proposed reduction takes active Army personnel down to a level only modestly below its 2000 level. That level is more than twice the size of the active Army circa 1940.
Comparisons to the pre-World War II Army are specious anyway because the modern Army operates in such a wildly different technological environment.

So what’s the reason for describing the proposed reductions that way? My base-case assumption is that “lowest levels since 1940″ is just a lot more dramatic than “below the levels of 2000″ or “largest reductions since 1992.” But it is potentially deceptive precisely because it is more dramatic.

The proposed changes in forces structure do not imply a shift non-interventionism. They will make it even more difficult to contemplate long-term, large-scale occupations, but such would have been difficult to contemplate even at a 500,000-person Army. That still leaves very much open the use of force in more “discrete” ways – drones, Special Forces, etc. – that have been the hallmark of the Obama Administration...

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/hagel-begins-trimming-army-to-1940-levels/


The military-industrial complex is not likely to take the cuts lying down, as there are many interest groups targeted for outright cuts or reductions in growth. And already, the Times reports, the lobbies are ramping up:


For example, some members of Congress, given advance notice of plans to retire air wings, have vowed legislative action to block the move, and the National Guard Association, an advocacy group for those part-time military personnel, is circulating talking points urging Congress to reject anticipated cuts. State governors are certain to weigh in, as well. And defense-industry officials and members of Congress in those port communities can be expected to oppose any initiatives to slow Navy shipbuilding.

The cuts come across the board, including the Air Force’s entire fleet of A-10 “Warthogs,” which Kelley Vlahos recently profiled in depth.

Post-Iraq, and soon to be post-Afghanistan, the Army was already “scheduled to drop to 490,000 troops from a post-9/11 peak of 570,000,” but “Under Mr. Hagel’s proposals, the Army would drop over the coming years to between 440,000 and 450,000.” The Times reports that Hagel has the sign-off of all the Joint Chiefs, but in a recent Hagel profile, Kelley Vlahos mentioned that such a number “conflicts directly with what Army Chief of Staff Raymond Odierno says is an acceptable readiness level.” This will require a transition away from the Cold War-era “two wars” doctrine that required the military to maintain the capacity to wage two simultaneous land wars. Now, according to the Times report, “the military has been ordered to be prepared to decisively win one conflict while holding off an adversary’s aspirations in a second until sufficient forces could be mobilized and redeployed to win there.”

[Danke]

They have pared back the F-22 to just over 100 combat ready airframes.

It should be back to over 700. (and then the price per unit goes way down).

We can't win a war without air superiority.

[pcosmar]

We can't win a war without air superiority.

Haven't been able to win one with it either. (in quite a while)

but then, none of them have been in defense.

[PierzStyx]

How will we invade Iran?


We don't plan to occupy Iran. Just annihilate it.

[WM_in_MO]

We don't plan to occupy Iran. Just annihilate it.

You're not thinking long term enough, friend.

[Pericles]

Want to increase profits for companies producing expensive weapons. I doubt any army troop would like to see the A-10 disappear.

Other than the Warthog drivers doing brass dumps on us for giggles, no. It is an awesome CAS platform.

[69360]

Because now drones = troops.

Let me know when they close overseas bases and I'll be interested.

[osan]

We can't win a war without air superiority.

Thus far we haven't been able to win one with it, either.

[osan]

Haven't been able to win one with it either. (in quite a while)

but then, none of them have been in defense.

O shit... In B4me.

I hate you, though I do admire the fact that great minds think alike. In this case, disturbingly so.

[tangent4ronpaul]

We had 450K men in uniform in 1940? I thought it was on the order of 20K. I must be wrong.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004598.html

1940 Active Duty Military Personnel:
Army: 269,023 (includes Army Air Corp)
Air Force: 0
Navy: 160,997
Marine Corps: 28,345
Total: 458,365


The nation's interests are.
-Israel
-Gas Pipes/OIL Pipes
-Protecting the Arab Gulf Tyrants and there dictatorship.
-replacing & reinstalling tyrants.

Close but no cigar:
http://wikileaks.org/cable/2009/02/09STATE15113.html

AFRICA

Congo (Kinshasa):
Cobalt (Mine and Plant)

Gabon:
Manganese - Battery grade, natural; battery grade,
synthetic; chemical grade; ferro; metallurgical grade

Guinea:
Bauxite (Mine)

South Africa:
BAE Land System OMC, Benoni, South Africa
Brown David Gear Industries LTD, Benoni, South Africa
Bushveld Complex (chromite mine)
Ferrochromium
Manganese - Battery grade, natural; battery grade,
synthetic; chemical grade; ferro; metallurgical grade
Palladium Mine and Plant
Platinum Mines
Rhodium

EAST ASIA AND THE PACIFIC

Australia:
Southern Cross undersea cable landing, Brookvale,
Australia
Southern Cross undersea cable landing, Sydney,
Australia
Manganese - Battery grade, natural; battery grade,
synthetic; chemical grade; ferro; metallurgical grade
Nickel Mines
Maybe Faulding Mulgrave Victoria, Australia:
Manufacturing facility for Midazolam injection.
Mayne Pharma (fill/finish), Melbourne, Australia: Sole
suppliers of Crotalid Polyvalent Antivenin (CroFab).

China:
C2C Cable Network undersea cable landing, Chom Hom Kok,
Hong Kong
C2C Cable Network undersea cable landing Shanghai,
China
China-US undersea cable landing, Chongming, China
China-US undersea cable landing Shantou, China
EAC undersea cable landing Tseung Kwan O, Hong Kong
FLAG/REACH North Asia Loop undersea cable landing Tong
Fuk, Hong Kong
Hydroelectric Dam Turbines and Generators
Fluorspar (Mine)
Germanium Mine
Graphite Mine
Rare Earth Minerals/Elements
Tin Mine and Plant
Tungsten - Mine and Plant
Polypropylene Filter Material for N-95 Masks
Shanghai Port
Guangzhou Port
Hong Kong Port
Ningbo Port
Tianjin Port

Fiji:
Southern Cross undersea cable landing, Suva, Fiji

Indonesia:
Tin Mine and Plant
Straits of Malacca

Japan:
C2C Cable Network undersea cable landing, Chikura,
Japan
C2C Cable Network undersea cable landing, Shima, Japan
China-US undersea cable, Okinawa, Japan
EAC undersea cable landing Ajigaura, Japan
EAC undersea cable landing Shima, Japan
FLAG/REACH North Asia Loop undersea cable landing Wada,
Japan
FLAG/REACH North Asia Loop undersea cable landing Wada,
Japan
Japan-US undersea cable landing, Maruyama, Japan
Japan-US undersea cable landing Kitaibaraki, Japan
KJCN undersea cable landing Fukuoka, Japan
KJCN undersea cable landing Kita-Kyushu, Japan
Pacific Crossing-1 (PC-1) undersea cable landing
Ajigaura, Japan
Pacific Crossing-1 (PC-1) undersea cable landing Shima,
Japan
Tyco Transpacific undersea cable landing, Toyohashi,
Japan
Tyco Transpacific undersea cable landing Emi, Japan
Hitachi, Hydroelectric Dam Turbines and Generators
Port of Chiba
Port of Kobe
Port of Nagoya
Port of Yokohama
Iodine Mine
Metal Fabrication Machines
Titanium Metal (Processed)
Biken, Kanonji City, Japan
Hitachi Electrical Power Generators and Components
Large AC Generators above 40 MVA

Malaysia:
Straits of Malacca

New Zealand:
Southern Cross undersea cable landing, Whenuapai, New
Zealand
Southern Cross undersea cable landing, Takapuna, New
Zealand

Philippines:
C2C Cable Network undersea cable landing, Batangas,
Philippines
EAC undersea cable landing Cavite, Philippines

Republic of Korea:
C2C Cable Network undersea cable landing, Pusan,
Republic of Korea.
EAC undersea cable landing Shindu-Ri, Republic of Korea
FLAG/REACH North Asia Loop undersea cable landing
Pusan, Republic of Korea
KJCN undersea cable landing Pusan, Republic of Korea
Hitachi Large Electric Power Transformers 230 - 500 kV
Busan Port

Singapore:
C2C Cable Network undersea cable landing, Changi,
Singapore
EAC undersea cable landing Changi North, Singapore
Port of Singapore
Straits of Malacca

Taiwan:
C2C Cable Network undersea cable landing, Fangshan,
Taiwan
C2C Cable Network undersea cable landing, Tanshui,
Taiwan
China-US undersea cable landing Fangshan, Taiwan
EAC undersea cable landing Pa Li, Taiwan
FLAG/REACH North Asia Loop undersea cable landing
Toucheng, Taiwan
Kaohsiung Port

EUROPE AND EURASIA

Europe (Unspecified):
Metal Fabrication Machines: Small number of Turkish
companies (Durma, Baykal, Ermaksan)

Austria:
Baxter AG, Vienna, Austria: Immune Globulin Intravenous
(IGIV)
Octapharma Pharmazeutika, Vienna, Austria: Immune
Globulin Intravenous (IGIV)

Azerbaijan:
Sangachal Terminal
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline

Belarus:
Druzhba Oil Pipeline

Belgium:
Germanium Mine
Baxter SA, Lessines, Belgium: Immune Globulin
Intravenous (IGIV)
Glaxo Smith Kline, Rixensart, Belgium: Acellular
Pertussis Vaccine Component
GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA, Wavre, Belgium:
Acellular Pertussis Vaccine Component
Port of Antwerp

Denmark:
TAT-14 undersea cable landing, Blaabjerg, Denmark
Bavarian Nordic (BN), Hejreskovvej, Kvistgard, Denmark:
Smallpox Vaccine
Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Bagsvaerd, Denmark:
Numerous formulations of insulin
Novo Nordisk Insulin Manufacturer: Global insulin
supplies
Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark: DTaP
(including D and T components) pediatric version

France:
APOLLO undersea cable, Lannion, France
FA-1 undersea cable, Plerin, France
TAT-14 undersea cable landing St. Valery, France
Sanofi-Aventis Insulin Manufacturer: Global insulin
supplies
Foot and Mouth Disease Vaccine finishing
Alstrom, Hydroelectric Dam Turbines and Generators
Alstrom Electrical Power Generators and Components
EMD Pharms Semoy, France: Cyanokit Injection
GlaxoSmithKline, Inc. Evreux, France: Influenza
neurominidase inhibitor RELENZA (Zanamivir)
Diagast, Cedex, France: Olympus (impacts blood typing
ability)
Genzyme Polyclonals SAS (bulk), Lyon, France:
Thymoglobulin
Sanofi Pasteur SA, Lyon, France: Rabies virus vaccine

Georgia:
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline

Germany:
TAT-14 undersea cable landing, Nodren, Germany.
Atlantic Crossing-1 (AC-1) undersea cable landing Sylt,
Germany
BASF Ludwigshafen: World's largest integrated chemical
complex
Siemens Erlangen: Essentially irreplaceable production
of key chemicals
Siemens, GE, Hydroelectric Dam Turbines and Generators
Draeger Safety AG & Co., Luebeck, Germany: Critical to
gas detection capability
Junghans Fienwerktechnik Schramberg, Germany: Critical
to the production of mortars
TDW-Gasellschaft Wirksysteme, Schroebenhausen, Germany:
Critical to the production of the Patriot Advanced
Capability Lethality Enhancement Assembly
Siemens, Large Electric Power Transformers 230 - 500 kV
Siemens, GE Electrical Power Generators and Components
Druzhba Oil Pipeline
Sanofi Aventis Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Lantus
Injection (insulin)
Heyl Chemish-pharmazeutische Fabrik GmbH: Radiogardase
(Prussian blue)
Hameln Pharmaceuticals, Hameln, Germany: Pentetate
Calcium Trisodium (Ca DTPA) and Pentetate Zinc
Trisodium (Zn DTPA) for contamination with plutonium,
americium, and curium
IDT Biologika GmbH, Dessau Rossiau, Germany: BN Small
Pox Vaccine.
Biotest AG, Dreiech, Germany: Supplier for TANGO
(impacts automated blood typing ability)
CSL Behring GmbH, Marburg, Germany: Antihemophilic
factor/von Willebrand factor
Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics GmbH, Marburg,
Germany: Rabies virus vaccine
Vetter Pharma Fertigung GmbH & Co KG, Ravensburg,
Germany (filling): Rho(D) IGIV
Port of Hamburg

Ireland:
Hibernia Atlantic undersea cable landing, Dublin
Ireland
Genzyme Ireland Ltd. (filling), Waterford, Ireland:
Thymoglobulin

Italy:
Glaxo Smith Kline SpA (fill/finish), Parma, Italy:
Digibind (used to treat snake bites)
Trans-Med gas pipeline

Netherlands:
Atlantic Crossing-1 (AC-1) undersea cable landing
Beverwijk, Netherlands
TAT-14 undersea cable landing, Katwijk, Netherlands
Rotterdam Port

Norway:
Cobalt
Nickel Mine

Poland:
Druzhba Oil Pipeline

Russia:
Novorossiysk Export Terminal
Primorsk Export Terminal.
Nadym Gas Pipeline Junction: The most critical gas
facility in the world
Uranium
Nickel Mine: Used in certain types of stainless steel
and superalloys
Palladium Mine and Plant
Rhodium

Spain:
Strait of Gibraltar
Instituto Grifols, SA, Barcelona, Spain: Immune
Globulin Intravenous (IGIV)
Maghreb-Europe (GME) gas pipeline, Algeria

Sweden:
Recip AB Sweden: Thyrosafe (potassium iodine)

Switzerland:
Hoffman-LaRoche, Inc. Basel, Switzerland: Tamiflu
(oseltamivir)
Berna Biotech, Berne, Switzerland: Typhoid vaccine
CSL Behring AG, Berne, Switzerland: Immune Globulin
Intravenous (IGIV)

Turkey:
Metal Fabrication Machines: Small number of Turkish
companies (Durma, Baykal, Ermaksan)
Bosporus Strait
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline

Ukraine:
Manganese - Battery grade, natural; battery grade,
synthetic; chemical grade; ferro; metallurgical grade

United Kingdom:
Goonhilly Teleport, Goonhilly Downs, United Kingdom
Madley Teleport, Stone Street, Madley, United Kingdom
Martelsham Teleport, Ipswich, United Kingdom
APOLLO undersea cable landing Bude, Cornwall Station,
United Kingdom
Atlantic Crossing-1 (AC-1) undersea cable landing
Whitesands Bay
FA-1 undersea cable landing Skewjack, Cornwall Station
Hibernia Atlantic undersea cable landing, Southport,
United Kingdom
TAT-14 undersea cable landing Bude, Cornwall Station,
United Kingdom
Tyco Transatlantic undersea cable landing, Highbridge,
United Kingdom
Tyco Transatlantic undersea cable landing, Pottington,
United Kingdom.
Yellow/Atlantic Crossing-2 (AC-2) undersea cable
landing Bude, United Kingdom
Foot and Mouth Disease Vaccine finishing
BAE Systems (Operations) Ltd., Presont, Lancashire,
United Kingdom: Critical to the F-35 Joint Strike
Fighter
BAE Systems Operations Ltd., Southway, Plymouth Devon,
United Kingdom: Critical to extended range guided
munitions
BAE Systems RO Defense, Chorley, United Kingdom:
Critical to the Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW) AGM-154C
(Unitary Variant)
MacTaggart Scott, Loanhead, Edinburgh, Lothian,
Scotland, United Kingdom: Critical to the Ship
Submersible Nuclear (SSN)

NEAR/MIDDLE EAST

Djibouti:
Bab al-Mendeb: Shipping lane is a critical supply chain
node

Egypt:
'Ayn Sukhnah-SuMEd Receiving Import Terminal
'Sidi Kurayr-SuMed Offloading Export Terminal
Suez Canal

Iran:
Strait of Hormuz
Khark (Kharg) Island Sea Island Export Terminal
Khark Island T-Jetty

Iraq:
Al-Basrah Oil Terminal

Israel:
Rafael Ordnance Systems Division, Haifa, Israel:
Critical to Sensor Fused Weapons (SFW), Wind Corrected
Munitions Dispensers (WCMD), Tail Kits, and batteries

Kuwait:
Mina' al Ahmadi Export Terminal

Morocco:
Strait of Gibraltar
Maghreb-Europe (GME) gas pipeline, Morocco

Oman:
Strait of Hormuz

Qatar:
Ras Laffan Industrial Center: By 2012 Qatar will be the
largest source of imported LNG to U.S.

Saudi Arabia:
Abqaiq Processing Center: Largest crude oil processing
and stabilization plant in the world
Al Ju'aymah Export Terminal: Part of the Ras Tanura
complex
As Saffaniyah Processing Center
Qatif Pipeline Junction
Ras at Tanaqib Processing Center
Ras Tanura Export Terminal
Shaybah Central Gas-oil Separation Plant

Tunisia:
Trans-Med Gas Pipeline

United Arab Emirates (UAE):
Das Island Export Terminal
Jabal Zannah Export Terminal
Strait of Hormuz

Yemen:
Bab al-Mendeb: Shipping lane is a critical supply chain
node

SOUTH AND CENTRAL ASIA

Kazakhstan:
Ferrochromium
Khromtau Complex, Kempersai, (Chromite Mine)

India:
Orissa (chromite mines) and Karnataka (chromite mines)
Generamedix Gujurat, India: Chemotherapy agents,
including florouracil and methotrexate

WESTERN HEMISPHERE

Argentina:
Foot and Mouth Disease Vaccine finishing

Bermuda:
GlobeNet (formerly Bermuda US-1 (BUS-1) undersea cable
landing Devonshire, Bermuda

Brazil:
Americas-II undersea cable landing Fortaleza, Brazil
GlobeNet undersea cable landing Fortaleza, Brazil
GlobeNet undersea cable landing Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Iron Ore from Rio Tinto Mine
Manganese - Battery grade, natural; battery grade,
synthetic; chemical grade; ferro; metallurgical grade
Niobium (Columbium), Araxa, Minas Gerais State (mine)
Ouvidor and Catalao I, Goias State: Niobium

Chile:
Iodine Mine

Canada:
Hibernia Atlantic undersea cable landing Halifax , Nova
Scotia, Canada
James Bay Power Project, Quebec: monumental
hydroelectric power development
Mica Dam, British Columbia: Failure would impact the
Columbia River Basin.
Hydro Quebec, Quebec: Critical irreplaceable source of
power to portions of Northeast U. S.
Robert Moses/Robert H. Saunders Power, Ontario: Part of
the St. Lawrence Power Project, between Barnhart
Island, New York, and Cornwall, Ontario
Seven Mile Dam, British Columbia: Concrete gravity dam
between two other hydropower dams along the Pend
d'Oreille River
Pickering Nuclear Power Plant, Ontario, Canada
Chalk River Nuclear Facility, Ontario: Largest supplier
of medical radioisotopes in the world
Hydrofluoric Acid Production Facility, Allied Signal,
Amherstburg, Ontario
Enbridge Pipeline
Alliance Pipeline: Natural gas transmission from Canada
Maritime and Northeast Pipeline: Natural gas
transmission from Canada
Transcanada Gas: Natural gas transmission from Canada
Alexandria Bay POE, Ontario: Northern border crossing
Ambassador Bridge POE, Ontario: Northern border
crossing
Blaine POE, British Columbia: Northern border crossing
Blaine Washington Rail Crossing, British Columbia
Blue Water Bridge POE, Ontario: Northern border
crossing
Champlain POE, Quebec: Northern border crossing
CPR Tunnel Rail Crossing, Ontario (Michigan Central
Rail Crossing)
International Bridge Rail Crossing, Ontario
International Railway Bridge Rail Crossing
Lewiston-Queenstown POE, Ontario: Northern border
crossing
Peace Bridge POE, Ontario: Northern border crossing
Pembina POE, Manitoba: Northern border crossing
North Portal Rail Crossing, Saskatchewan
St. Claire Tunnel Rail Crossing, Ontario
Waneta Dam, British Columbia: Earthfill/concrete
hydropower dam
Darlington Nuclear Power Plant, Ontario, Canada.
E-ONE Moli Energy, Maple Ridge, Canada: Critical to
production of various military application electronics
General Dynamics Land Systems - Canada, London Ontario,
Canada: Critical to the production of the Stryker/USMC
LAV Vehicle Integration
Raytheon Systems Canada Ltd. ELCAN Optical Technologies
Division, Midland, Ontario, Canada: Critical to the
production of the AGM-130 Missile
Thales Optronique Canada, Inc., Montreal, Quebec:
Critical optical systems for ground combat vehicles
Germanium Mine
Graphite Mine
Iron Ore Mine
Nickel Mine
Niobec Mine, Quebec, Canada: Niobium
Cangene, Winnipeg, Manitoba: Plasma
Sanofi Pasteur Ltd., Toronto, Canada: Polio virus
vaccine
GlaxoSmithKile Biologicals, North America, Quebec,
Canada: Pre-pandemic influenza vaccines

French Guiana:
Americas-II undersea cable landing Cayenne, French
Guiana

Martinique:
Americas-II undersea cable landing Le Lamentin,
Martinique

Mexico:
FLAG/REACH North Asia Loop undersea cable landing
Tijuana, Mexico
Pan-American Crossing (PAC) undersea cable landing
Mazatlan, Mexico
Amistad International Dam: On the Rio Grande near Del
Rio, Texas and Ciudad Acuna, Coahuila, Mexico
Anzalduas Dam: Diversion dam south of Mission, Texas,
operated jointly by the U.S. and Mexico for flood
control
Falcon International Dam: Upstream of Roma, Texas and
Miguel Aleman, Tamaulipas, Mexico
Retamal Dam: Diversion dam south of Weslaco, Texas,
operated jointly by the U.S. and Mexico for flood
control
GE Hydroelectric Dam Turbines and Generators: Main
source for a large portion of larger components
Bridge of the Americas: Southern border crossing
Brownsville POE: Southern border crossing
Calexico East POE: Southern border crossing
Columbia Solidarity Bridge: Southern border crossing
Kansas City Southern de Mexico (KCSM) Rail Line,
(Mexico)
Nogales POE: Southern border crossing
Laredo Rail Crossing
Eagle Pass Rail Crossing
Otay Mesa Crossing: Southern border crossing
Pharr International Bridge: Southern border crossing
World Trade Bridge: Southern border crossing
Ysleta Zaragosa Bridge: Southern border crossing
Hydrofluoric Acid Production Facility
Graphite Mine
GE Electrical Power Generators and Components
General Electric, Large Electric Power Transformers 230
- 500 kV

Netherlands Antilles:
Americas-II undersea cable landing Willemstad,
Netherlands Antilles.

Panama:
FLAG/REACH North Asia Loop undersea cable landing Fort
Amador, Panama
Panama Canal

Peru:
Tin Mine and Plant

Trinidad and Tobago:
Americas-II undersea cable landing Port of Spain
Atlantic LNG: Provides 70% of U.S. natural gas import
needs

Venezuela:
Americas-II undersea cable landing Camuri, Venezuela
GlobeNet undersea cable landing, Punta Gorda, Venezuela
GlobeNet undersea cable landing Catia La Mar, Venezuela
GlobeNet undersea cable landing Manonga, Venezuela

Ahem... I don't think I have to point out why cable landing points are considered critical infrastructure.

interesting, though that FOREIGN infrastructure is critical to the USA... - that's not a good thing.


...in order to set the stage for WWIII

The country just needs a lot of broken windows to get us over this economic slump!

Who needs broken windows? - 20% of our bridges are broken!!! :eek:

-t

[Henry Rogue]

Want to increase profits for companies producing expensive weapons. I doubt any army troop would like to see the A-10 disappear.Yes, but the army doesn't operate the A-10, the air force does and at least the old air force brass hated the A-10 and didn't want anything to do with Close Air Support and Anti Tank. Maybe things are different now that Warthog Drivers are moving into Pentagon brass position. If it wasn't for the "Fighter Mafia" the A-10 wouldn't even exist.

[enoch150]

I can't imagine that it would get to that point. Congress would have to agree first.

I think it might be more like the opposite. It will falsely make Obama look pro-peace, since he can take for granted that his proposals won't actually happen.

What makes you think Congress would have to agree to it before Obama weighed in? It actually works better for Obama if they drag their feet on it.

All Obama needs is for the press to talk about Hagel's proposal for a while in "the sky is falling" terms. Then Obama can step in and say how he's not going to do those cuts, and the military must maintain an adequate budget, blah, blah, blah. That way he appeals to the pro-military center and, if he does all of this before Congress does anything, then he looks like the leader and the Republicans in Congress look like they are just following him around (when they eventually refuse to cut so deeply). Or, if they protest for a while after Obama comes out with his "moderate" position, then the Republicans look like they're just reacting negatively for the sake of being obstructionist.

Obama and the Democrats have taken for granted that they have the entirety of the pro-peace vote locked up no matter what they do, outside of the Ron Paul crowd and some 3rd party voters. What they want now is a big chunk of the flag waving, military worshiping center. They want to undermine some weak areas of the voting block that the Republicans rely upon.

[Danke]

Haven't been able to win one with it either. (in quite a while)

but then, none of them have been in defense.

That gets so tired.

If our military was unleashed, any country would be leveled.

But they don't do that for MIC profits.

[tangent4ronpaul]

Dear Secretary Hagel,

please reconsider retiring the A-10. This aircraft excels at close air defense of our troops on the ground. It's a flying tank, able to fly low, slow and dish out a world of hurt. It's a bullet magnet and shrugs them off. It's designed to fly home when missing engines, parts of wings and so on as well as make belly landings. It can hover in an area for hours protecting downed airmen, rescue personnel as well as regular ground troops. The F-35 is a disaster, designed to do everything, and performing none of those tasks well. This is the weapons system in most need of being cut. At a minimum, how about giving the A-10's to the air guard?

So you want to save money? how about dry docking a lot of the navy? Keep them upgraded, and train reservists on them. Have them ready to roll out quickly, but not in active service. Closing or downsizing overseas bases would also have major returns. Keep some. Those with pre-positioned war supplies and in strategic areas. Staff them with areas studies personnel and linguists as well as quartermasters. Maintain optional leases for other bases, but vacate them.

Get rid of the contractors. Especially those that fill specialist positions. That just puts things on a different ledger, makes the country vulnerable and increases costs.

The CMP is one of the least expensive programs out there and yields great returns. It is currently defunded. How about funding it and expanding it. The military needs people that can shoot and hit their target. That is exactly what CMP does - train people to be marksmen.

Thank you for your consideration,

-t

if anyone else wants to write him: https://kb.defense.gov/app/ask

[Henry Rogue]

A-10 started out its career in the air guard

[tangent4ronpaul]

In related news, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Merchant marines, the Coast Guard and the CDC all saw swells in the numbers of their uniformed personnel, exceeding 100,000 per agency.... :D

So, on a serious note - does this mean we are going to stop being the worlds police man?

-t

[tangent4ronpaul]

Thank you for contacting the Department of Defense. We have received your message. We read every message and will take the appropriate actions in response to your question or comment. Use this reference number for follow up: #140224-000077

We are the Citizen Queries branch of The Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs, Community Relations and Outreach.

Please monitor your email for our response...


Take a look at that number... That's just over 1 e-mail a day and these folks, if it gets kicked upstairs (part of my subject line was "attn: Secretary Hagal"), and sways them - well, dang! - this guy has the ear of the prez, congress, the joint chiefs of staff, etc. Contrast that with congress critter SOP - 2 sheets of tick marks. pro and con issue. Did enough ppl write to be significant to my re-election? Which way is opinion leaning in my district, etc. Thousands of e-mails, each reduced to a yah or nay tick count on a piece of paper.

This strongly suggests that different targeting of messaging would be more effective.

-t

[phill4paul]

Without such a mechanism, to insure my freedom, I am already feeling deprivation. Something must be done.

[fr33]

Peasants with AKs and IEDs have held out for over a decade creating the longest war in American history.

Fighting for nobody's freedom.

[anaconda]

I want Chuck to go find the $2 trillion that Rumsfeld lost on 9-10-2001.

[phill4paul]

I want Chuck to go find the $2 trillion that Rumsfeld lost on 9-10-2001.

Damnit! A fire destroyed the receipts. Ain't that a bitch.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

In related news, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Merchant marines, the Coast Guard and the CDC all saw swells in the numbers of their uniformed personnel, exceeding 100,000 per agency.... :D

So, on a serious note - does this mean we are going to stop being the worlds police man?

-t

When I RELAD'ed in 2011 USCG personnel numbered less than 45,000 and we were all ready voluntarily downsizing at that time. There's no way AD CG is anywhere near 60k let alone 100k.

[tangent4ronpaul]

When I RELAD'ed in 2011 USCG personnel numbered less than 45,000 and we were all ready voluntarily downsizing at that time. There's no way AD CG is anywhere near 60k let alone 100k.

I was being sarcastic, as usual. Don't you know me yet?

-t

[Carson]

This is suppose to be what?

We were in a world war then.

Now we are not at war...

well except for the war we are all in in our side of the economy trying to make ends meet while the pompous spend and spend and spend on their side.


So what do you figure their new titles or designations will be?

[osan]

If our military was unleashed, any country would be leveled.

While I would agree that altered rules of engagement, coupled with genetically corrected objectives would give dramatically different results, the implication that these would of necessity lead to success is flatly contradicted by reality. The best and most recent counter example is the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Unlike the US command, the Soviets were not fighting for "containment" or "counterinsurgency", nor were they particularly concerned with public opinion. They went in whole-hog and dressed for naked brutality, which they served with generosity. They were there to utterly subjugate the Afghans and they got their asses handed to them in what was at best an unaffordable stalemate, leading them to slither back to Moscow in rank defeat at the hands of goat knockers. Yes, the Afghans had help from the US, but if one carries the analysis through, it becomes fairly evident that the Soviet loss was a foregone conclusion that would only have taken years longer to realize. Either way, they were not going to prevail - and that was in their own backyard. We are in a far worse position, what with the interposing ocean and some 6000 miles between us.


But they don't do that for MIC profits.

I would be more inclined to call those a perk. The real goals are far deeper than mere quarterly earnings reporting would have one believe. Why chase token and ephemeral fortunes when you can go for the entire planet?

[Pericles]

While I would agree that altered rules of engagement, coupled with genetically corrected objectives would give dramatically different results, the implication that these would of necessity lead to success is flatly contradicted by reality. The best and most recent counter example is the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Unlike the US command, the Soviets were not fighting for "containment" or "counterinsurgency", nor were they particularly concerned with public opinion. They went in whole-hog and dressed for naked brutality, which they served with generosity. They were there to utterly subjugate the Afghans and they got their asses handed to them in what was at best an unaffordable stalemate, leading them to slither back to Moscow in rank defeat at the hands of goat knockers. Yes, the Afghans had help from the US, but if one carries the analysis through, it becomes fairly evident that the Soviet loss was a foregone conclusion that would only have taken years longer to realize. Either way, they were not going to prevail - and that was in their own backyard. We are in a far worse position, what with the interposing ocean and some 6000 miles between us.



I would be more inclined to call those a perk. The real goals are far deeper than mere quarterly earnings reporting would have one believe. Why chase token and ephemeral fortunes when you can go for the entire planet?

I was in the room when Ted Heath (former Prime Minister of the UK) remarked - "We British have fought 3 wars in Afghanistan and lost each of them. I would be disappointed to think that the Soviets will win on their first attempt."

When 2001, came around, I knew it would be our turn.

[Zippyjuan]

The nation's interests are.
-Israel
-Gas Pipes/OIL Pipes
-Protecting the Arab Gulf Tyrants and there dictatorship.
-replacing & reinstalling tyrants.

Most of our oil comes from Canada, Mexico, and domestic production. Just under 20% of our imports come from the Middle East. http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_ep00_im0_mbbl_m.htm

Given that 35% of our oil consumed is imported http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/11/13/us-oil-production-exceeds-imports/3518245/ that means that seven percent of the oil we actually use comes from the Persian Gulf so we rely less on them than some may think.

[kcchiefs6465]

Most of our oil comes from Canada, Mexico, and domestic production. Just under 20% of our imports come from the Middle East. http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_ep00_im0_mbbl_m.htm

Given that 35% of our oil consumed is imported http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/11/13/us-oil-production-exceeds-imports/3518245/ that means that seven percent of the oil we actually use comes from the Persian Gulf so we rely less on them than some may think.
What we are doing in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, etc. is more than simply oil acquisition.

The loans. Entire cities built up in the desert. Electric plants. Each with American companies guaranteed the contracts.

It is welfare. Bechtel, MAIN, Halliburton, KBR etc.

[Zippyjuan]

Would have to check the numbers again, but if I recall correctly, they still expect military spending to be something like $150 billion higher at the end of the cuts (than they would have been under the sequester budget agreement which called for mandatory cuts across the board). Note too that they always toss in things they expect Congress to put back in (like the Warthog) to try to get other changes through. Any military hardware program is always spread over many congressional districts in order to ensure support for it.