Sequestration Would Break Faith With 225,000 Troops, Warn Top Generals

CAPITOL HILL: The vice-chiefs of the Army and Marine Corps warned legislators today that sequestration would force the military and the nation to break enlistment contracts with up to 225,000 troops who would have to be precipitately discharged to save money.

via Sequestration Would Break Faith With 225,000 Troops, Warn Top Generals.

Some level of drawdown at the conclusion of major combat isn’t unreasonable.  And given time (and a reduction in mission signal) the services would be capable of drawing down even the larger number of troops mentioned without extreme disruptions in the readiness of remaining troop units.

But if sequestration forces the Army and Marines to lop off that many troops in a very short period of time, readiness across the force will take a major hit.

With time to plan, the Army and Marines can look at just who they want to keep, and who to let go. Not just in terms of picking off the low hanging fruit like overweight soldiers or those with disciplinary histories, but also targeting those Military Occupational Specialties that are overstrength, while protecting those that are understrength.  Leaders have to make  sure that discharges don’t deplete the end strength of one unit, while leaving others untouched.  And it takes some time to set up a screening process to choose which mid level career soldiers will be let go. You can’t just lop off the lowest ranks.

I don’t have a lot of faith that ending the specter of sequestration will be a priority of the current administration. President Obama is just fine with outrageous levels of deficit spending, as long as it isn’t on one of the very few things the Constitution says is a valid expenditure of federal dollars.

4 thoughts on “Sequestration Would Break Faith With 225,000 Troops, Warn Top Generals”

  1. So would discharging soldiers and Marines at the ‘convenience of the government’ count as 225,000 newly unemployed people? But isn’t our current president, Mr. Obama, the great job-maker? Oh the irony. Must be Bush’s fault somehow.

  2. The budget deal that will cause this was a result of the GOP RINO “leadership” that caved to Obama and handed him this opportunity on a silver platter. It would be nice if the RINOs would actually think about what they are doing and the implications of it..

    1. I think they did. This was another one of those situations where there really aren’t any good choices. Refusing to pass a debt ceiling extension would have forced a 40% cutback in government spending, entirely at Obama’s discretion. You could be sure that the economic disruption would be massive and the Democrats and media (BIRM) would hang it squarely on the GOP’s neck. There would be no way Romney would be leading now, and there’s a real possibility we’d be looking at the extinction of the GOP at the national level. Remember, sequestration was never supposed to happen, it was supposed to be a gun to the head of the supercommittee so they would act like adults and make reasonable cuts. Needless to say that was optimistic.

      The House GOP didn’t cave, they were thinking strategically. They have one house of Congress, they can’t set the agenda. Sure, they could pull the temple down around them, but if you recall that didn’t work out too well for Sansom.

      There are a couple of pieces of good news. Right now it looks like the GOP will take back the Senate and White House, and the Senate is going to be much more conservative than it was in ’06. The other is that there isn’t any of this sturm und drang over the half-trillion cut to Medicare.

Comments are closed.