WWL>Topics>>2-26-14 12:10pm Garland: on the shrinking military

2-26-14 12:10pm Garland: on the shrinking military

Feb 26, 2014|

Garland talks with Ben Friedman of the Cato Institute about the federal government's plan to shrink the military.

Related Audio:

  1. Think Tank 1210pm drug addiction in the city


    Tue, 28 Mar 2017

    Should drug addiction in the city be treated as a health issue or drug issue? More deaths due to overdose in New Orleans than homicide. This hours guest: Dr. Jeffery Rouse - Orleans Parish Coronor

  2. Think Tank 1110am healthcare plan


    Tue, 28 Mar 2017

    Bernie Sanders said he’s going to push his plan for a single-payer healthcare plan like Europe.  He says Obamacare is costing us too much and the GOP can’t get their bill together to correct the problems. This hours guest: Michael Cannon - Director of Health Policy @ Cato Institute

  3. Think Tank 1010am recreational marijuana


    Tue, 28 Mar 2017

    OH CANADA!  Could Canada be the next country to legalize recreational marijuana? Canada is proposing legislation that would legalize recreational marijuana by 2018.  This hours guest: Chief Larry Kirk - Retired Chief ( Old Monroe Police Department, Missouri & member of LEAP (Law Enforcement Action Partnership)

  4. Think Tank 1210pm select committee


    Mon, 27 Mar 2017

    Is an independent “select committee” necessary in the investigation of Russian hacking & possible collusion with Trump associates? This hours guest: Max Bergmann - Senior Fellow at Center for American Progress Steve Bucci - Director of the Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation


Automatically Generated Transcript (may not be 100% accurate)

Did you won't followed the news at all you'd probably have -- burden. Bad -- on it and interpreter Chuck Hagel. Talk about drinking -- Tuesday's storm is small aside it's it's I think all the way back in 44. World War II. Pentagon officials said this week. And this is the line and that's the question it and get some experts and veterans in this of their quote. They said the willing to assume more rips. The next armed troops called war and currencies -- the risks are freaking norm. But assuming more risk that knowledge and uses a quote. Method more of the troops. Would probably -- -- And in the -- gripped by an important article probably. Because they explain what they're talking about in and basically. It means that. Something pops up that they can't plan for -- they've got reduced hormle the slogan -- there's nobody in this of the money they're gonna. -- equipment and everything else and therefore. -- -- people may be dead or quite constrained as they should be York or news or disclosed there should be some Morgan -- But a commercial for would you say that. What does that add to the debate. Of -- -- Has been nights and up to give some of his busy time members urged fellow. And defense and homeland security studies at Cato Institute been welcomed the show thank you premiered. They listed that that personal question. What they say they'll incidentally probably more troops would. Why in the -- and I saw. In the New York Times that New York Times reporter summarized what the generals that that was it actually. I didn't general MC determine the -- is now saying. That exact phrase but it dated today. I think it gave me the impression that kind of what they -- and we're at least statement did that we have towards a more strange. He did you did say organ guy but he also says quote. Yet -- the sentiment for in the needs excellence and doctors and so American troops certainly called. Wilson them anyway and then some of them and more and going that. At direct. And general ready. And on. That legislation that -- It doesn't actually Mary and lead I remember that you can. See sort of like Ali that they banks former I'd agree a year ago. So. Army is saying is chairman strategies to adapt it and saying we have seen more risky than we have war without you we have a smaller. Military in the region they're saying they'd prefer not to have the smaller military. But also it is sort of a block -- coal truism. Will balance Ingrid here in perfect security. Is not really in the -- so any time he -- Despite the military you'd get rid of some weapons program that the -- would prefer to act in some sense you're taking a risk that that. -- -- -- Planes and aircraft -- tank would be useful in the war and therefore will perform wore street analysts sort of make that statement. It's the sort of it's almost eight politically incorrect thinking today because it is correct that we're treating one out before another. That sort of wondered about Florida I hear there's described in the deprive oracle. Across the board mandatory reductions mandatory reductions. -- every economist of Iran have on set across the board cuts don't make any sense to do they in this kittens. We're not experiencing across the board mandatory reductions here it means. What would. Be -- guys complaining about it which cables complaining about it that under the current law. Were under the cap the -- 26 speed and they wanted to spend more. The end the law will allow they're in the play and they put out partially the other days -- starting that we were we want a lot comply with the caps. Put in place by the law and then to be under current law they'd go bald caps. Daniel is mandatory across the board sequestration yet they don't do. They don't have to be sequestered -- it to comply. With its spending levels that they be given the thing is they don't want to do that that's sort of one of the reasons we're giving the language it's been sort of they're trying to fight their way out of the -- that they find themselves in the Pentagon but I think you know it's really -- -- be the end of the world if the it's 4016 I have to live with these budget numbers you don't want to please -- -- -- This isn't gonna be be -- the war. No -- in my attitude is if it's probably that might even work the opposite way forward talking about here which is the day. -- proclivity for military adventures might be tempered by the fact that -- -- military -- to -- -- -- a -- that's my hope. Probably would be unfortunate if we -- -- -- military that got somewhat smaller and used it for all the Indians were doing but we Marty I think learned. In recent years that we don't want to occupy and try to pacify another large state like Iraq or Afghanistan. So that I think is it's off the table. But many people even start to be commitments from other military commitment which in my mind be a good thing completely have. Big military threat out there in the world that's the kind of -- -- -- -- -- no -- -- to acknowledge were pretty -- Militarily we choose to be. And a small military just fine at least that we don't sort of go out looking for trouble. In Redmond for wrong Orman who would drop to. 440000. For the fifth 2000 somewhere in there by 2019. That wrecked. What what does the or me want to keep it at the two mortar dropped about what what number are they looking. I'm not -- -- -- having that odd numbered lines but it it would be you know closer. About 500000. And I beat army. The regular army would have preferred. That the bargain reserves to cub born David fighting about that in the -- reserves were tight but not as much percentage wise. As a regular duty army. So it made the statement there Brothers Ray -- And the guys -- in the army it would. Concentrated I think more -- on the target reserves. Our. Let me take a break here funeral bottom won't -- -- we were talking with and Friedman. Research fellow defense homeland security studies at Cato Institute. Looks like your committee committees begin shrinking all the way back to what they were in 1940. Lets you -- that means we'll get more -- -- right that it costs. Welcome back where have they get about two proposal. -- of Franco armed forces in particular -- or maids from all the sports and spoke for war ward two and there's always go to the experts veterans and then it's bent -- research fellow in defense and homeland security studies at cable institute. And one of the questions I have when when Matsui that we still have. Eleven aircraft carriers when we have a budget tank battalion and so forth insulin. -- shows here on a regular basis on cybercrime and terrorism. A drug cartels. And looking at everything. Remember that a group by young people from Austin -- -- Texas. That told homeland security and taxes. They can take their big drones that are being used to. What charts southern border and hacked into it and they didn't leave -- it gave them a demonstration. I had a scientists on two days ago that said there they're terrorists that thing better. Looking at hacking into. Internet control of things like heart pacemakers. This kind of thing. It do we need -- the old form the tanks and aircraft carriers are we not. Going into the minute to were is in and hyper. Connected drone in in labor I mean it's cyber. Warfare. What I mean. Sort of in the state. You know as alternatives that apparently. I -- take the import drones -- the future. Uses of drones outside. Counterterrorism missions that they had lately is probably be surveillance platform. That looks for things like anti aircraft missiles and -- news. Missiles from ships there. Fighter aircraft. To go after those things so there's there's a marriage and certainly. Site -- stop it's just the way of going after people's control systems in warfare for. Conventional. Weapons so I don't think of those alternatives I do think however that. There's a gradual process. On the world where. A lot of countries although certainly far from all of them our best last. In. Traditional military architecture basically because they feel more. Secure so. Overtime countries investing lesson there economy and in the military. In hand to. The United States because we need. View ourselves sort of the policemen of the world he'd been a little slower maybe than we otherwise couldn't catch onto that Trent. There are reduced correctly former top pentagon approved through in the Obama administration. -- -- -- -- is unlikely to fund itself engaged to -- some new -- new ground -- like rock and Afghanistan anytime soon. Which is to a hypothetical let's say. The the humanitarian. Problems and -- got to be such war. Wrong and rush were making some with some of the gains and Syrian surrounding areas. We were forcing some former patient go back in and maybe we'll get under conflict -- China over some of those islands that have been. A little bit about shuttle lately. -- small world army responded that kind of thing if that would pop. Well certainly. I think -- -- answers yet the reason being that whatever is gonna happen in the island disputes in Asia. It's probably not going to be a problem that -- primarily -- the responsibility united states army you'll be. Chief -- an issue for the US -- air -- may be -- from the -- I'd like to not be involved and that's right by the way it's occurred. Like we were involved must -- the services that would take the lead. So I think. -- the sort of thing that that might actually. Over straight -- and the occupied could be even just one. Big country like Pakistan's portion of -- war. -- simultaneous situation we have something happened North Korea and Iran or Syria something like that but I think the well you bring it did that it's possible but it's pretty unlikely I think that both those things have happened at the same time so that it had before your short while I was. Balance things -- I don't think that on reasonable. Choice to make -- given the situation and. Remembering correctly the Joint Chiefs of Staff are going along with a group's proposal and if so was it virtually had done the. Ball no because that it did congress has has been updated to -- out. I think were part of generating these proposals in the it's depend on them like it but they understand. Did. All the tapping -- that they are complying with budgetary numbers. They've already been given and that's why -- there I think most of this will be something that congress. Does comply with because they're the ones in. Budget deal that they -- Across party lines with the White House gave the Pentagon. The budgetary top line that the now complying with so the media acting like it is Britney saying. But everything that's happening right now has been very predictable and predicted by the people can pay attention because they're just not that many ways. To get under the budget -- they practice habits. That's why I think that ultimately this will go through yet. Our bid to help me when -- and I'm through this is incumbents and some cool a point and -- -- world. But. Maybe not be -- shipbuilding yards. Factories there making tanks factories in making our moment. Or their throughout the states. Slash private industry army contract facilities. That state governors are -- like Washington. On closing. It's it's blasphemy issue. Contractors like data classification for the army. Because what they do for a living -- compared to the needy. But it air force more manpower intent of their vehicles are not. The platforms of vehicles that weapons are not as. That's that they don't have the Big Apple ships like the navy in these. You know -- 35 type aircraft -- have to employ lots of people and treat contracts all over the place the army does have some big programs. And so you know they're canceling. One of the ground vehicles not sure that will elicit some. Local opposition. And there's also been difficult -- that we've seen lately with the -- banks don't want anymore Abrams tanks. Congress have been making but more because of where it needs. In in Ohio and other places by. Again I think congress will probably you know they'll be individual members -- Jack but on the whole I think congress will go along just because there aren't that many. Other good alternatives would be the Pentagon did. This year in this announcement they've got the last few years for another base realignment -- round. Where they can get rid of some access real -- they have in the United States. -- to congress who probably think noted that this year as they have for the last few years. And again correct me if I'm wrong I think our -- that that. That. Could -- to blame the F 35 or playing. -- and getting money you does that dies or I mean we've got an incredible on the I'm the best in the net -- -- in -- -- we're going ahead with to have 35 but they're warning that -- if if you spam. Track wrong with the budget caps in place under current law. They might have to slow down that the chairman. And in future years and -- made some choices but we're we're sticking with at the moment we're sticking with the F 35 for better or worse. May -- reading this wrong or maybe -- -- got a New York talent. Says the budget plan and drug or actually -- -- that does not sustainment for the controversial. F 35 point. Do they keep funding that thing I mean what's what's the cost of that now billions and billions and billions of dollars. Yup it's it is that it keeps going up. And you know the slightly off for one aircraft are sort of mind boggling the days assure us that you know -- -- enough ball. Those who come down I think you might see it you know in the future but still a decent chance that -- immediately might. Take that the F 35 program by. It's the Air -- sort of out of alternatives for you fighter program so it's hard to -- At this time what would they do instead of -- the F 35 did you you know it think it is a good point because that. A lot of people complaining about the -- of the size of the army a look at that program. And some other things in the Pentagon that. Such as the carriers. Or even nukes because weapons. As an alternative. You know he might be useful to have that debate table we can walk. After some of the other stuff. Bill and I think I understand the -- a whole lot better appreciated time intraday. -- We're right back we'll continue the arms surge in public to. Senior fellow with the center for American -- congress'. National security program former assistant secretary of the -- Rob and with the we called the --