{"id":392084,"date":"2010-03-04T18:50:37","date_gmt":"2010-03-04T23:50:37","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.disinfo.com\/?p=24012"},"modified":"2010-03-04T18:50:37","modified_gmt":"2010-03-04T23:50:37","slug":"assessing-the-qdr-and-2011-defense-budget","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/392084","title":{"rendered":"Assessing the QDR and 2011 Defense Budget"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Gordon Adams at the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\n

The new Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) and the fiscal year 2011 defense budget request have arrived. Unfortunately, they miss the mark: The QDR vastly expands the military<\/a>\u2019s missions, and the budget responds in kind by expanding for the fourteenth consecutive year.<\/p>\n

Defense Secretary Robert Gates<\/a> argued that the two documents were \u201cshaped by a bracing dose of realism\u201d with regard to risk and resources. I respectfully disagree. The QDR\u2019s risk assessment piles on missions like a short-order cook stacks pancakes at IHOP, setting no priorities between near-term challenges and long-term requirements. And the budget continues to accommodate such a limitless agenda. The bottom line: This lack of discipline will broaden the country\u2019s defense requirements and expand military<\/a> spending in ways that will make establishing budget and mission discipline in the future even more difficult.<\/p>\n


\n<\/strong>\"http:\/\/nw0.eu\/wp-content\/uploads\/HLIC\/4ed4d3c47d8dfecb847cc303cadd05ee.jpg\"<\/p>\n

The lack of budget discipline deconstructed.<\/strong><\/p>\n

First, some context: The $708 billion defense budget request is higher than at any point in our post-World War<\/a> II<\/a> history<\/a>. It is 16 percent higher than the 1952 Korean War<\/a> budget peak and 36 percent higher than the 1968 Vietnam War<\/a> budget peak (in constant dollars).<\/p>\n

Gates argues that the budget plan \u201crebalances\u201d spending by putting an emphasis on the near-term challenges of counterinsurgency, counterterrorism, and stabilization operations. Indeed, it does request funding for special forces, unmanned aerial vehicles, and other equipment useful in the prosecution of the current wars in Iraq<\/a> and Afghanistan<\/a>. But the current budget plan makes no effort at prioritizing these near-term commitments against funding for longer-term commitments. Instead, it increases funding for both near-term and long-term programs and activities\u2026<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

[continues at at the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists<\/a>]<\/p>\n

\n

Possibly Related Posts:<\/h3>\n