TOPICS
TOPICS
Panel urges overseas base realignment slowdown
An independent panel is raising concerns about the Pentagon's plan to reposition military forces around the globe and is suggesting that the overseas realignment of troops and bases be slowed down.
"The sequencing and pace of the proposed realignments could harm our ability to meet broader national security and could impact both the military's ability to protect national interests and the quality of life of the servicewomen and men affected by the realignment," stated a report from the Overseas Basing Commission, a six-member panel appointed by Congress to review the U.S. overseas basing plans.
The Pentagon is not required to enact the report's recommendations, only take them under advisement.
The report comes the week before the Defense Department is set to announce its recommendations for closing and realigning bases in the United States. The commission did not review domestic basing, but its recommendations on overseas basing could have an impact on whether more space is needed stateside for the 70,000 troops returning from Europe.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has said that the impact of the base realignment and closing process would not be as severe as once expected because more bases would be needed as the military pulled forces out of Western Europe. The report suggests those movements should be smaller and might be years away.
The commission did say that it fully backed the need to reposition forces around the globe in light of new security concerns. But it recommended the efforts be "slowed and reordered" to ensure better coordination across the government.
A chief concern is that the Defense Department has made little effort to coordinate the realignment of forces overseas with other federal agencies that have a stake in national security matters - ranging from diplomacy to commerce. The report says there is no "interagency entity" charged with coordinating the repositioning and determining the impact it would have on all activities related to national security.
Other recommendations and concerns cited by the report were:
- The Pentagon has estimated the costs at $9 billion to $12 billion, but the commission says the tab is probably closer to $20 billion.
- Withdrawing all heavy Army forces in Europe could harm the service if new conflict broke out in the Balkans. The panel recommended keeping a least one heavy brigade in Europe rather than returning it stateside until the Balkan and Iraqi missions are complete.
- The Marine Corps should curtail plans to move large numbers of personnel out of Okinawa, Japan.
- Delaying overseas movements until the Pentagon settles on plans for domestic military base closings (BRAC), completes the Quadrennial Defense Review and other key ongoing studies.
COMMENTS
- In part I respect your position that we have far too much government. However, we also do not have a democracy! We have representative government only in part! The Senate is a joke when it comes to democracy and the non-elected position of judicial baranch is laughable. So your reference to a democracy to lead to your other positions is relatively meaningless here. The country is turning down but not because of government although government certainly could slow the pace. The turn down is economic because of the rapid rise of China! Now all are free trade Congressmen are voting for quotes on textile goods that help third world countries and not really the USA. How about stopping USA airlines from buying planes subsidized by England and France if they expect the US to guarantee their pension funds when they go broke? I see the problem with the government of the USA as covering any loss that any voter may have at the expense of those that generate income that provides taxes or potential taxes. Wait until foreigners stop purchasing USA debt and you will see the real decline of the government! Most of the current Federal Government action is financed with foreign owned debt and not the tax burden on income but that will come. Bush reversed this pattern based on liues and wars that have no benefit for anyone that has a vote in the USA. taxpayer Posted May 27, 2005 8:19 AM
- taxpayer, I am not advocating "no government" just far less federal government than we currently are "blessed" with. One that only provides for a common defense and other areas that are truly interstate in nature. One that reigns in the states only when absolutely necessary and leaves it up to them to decide and tax/not tax, provide services/not provide services, and regulate/not regulate based on their individual citizenry desires. The founders never appear to have intended the massive taxation burden we currently face, and we don't need the government intervention into every aspect of life we currently have. Obviously, my opinion. Get people accountable for their own decision, actions, and well-being. You may be interested in this observation: ------------- In 1787, Alexander Tyler (a Scottish history professor at The University of Edinborough) had this to say about "The Fall of The Athenian Republic" some 2,000 years prior. "A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship." "The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence: From Bondage to spiritual faith From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to complacency; From complacency to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage." ----------------- I believe we are now somewhere leaving "complacency" phase and well into the "apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, primarily because approximately 40 percent of the nation's population has already reached the "governmental dependency" phase. Uber Libertarian Posted May 11, 2005 8:17 AM
- Uber Libertarian Where do you see more government? Government has definite roles and what it does is based on mental intrepretation of constitution. This country would be a definite wasteland without government because the profit motive leads to abuses that only government can attempt to rectify. The only good government is no government is a ridiculous statement because most of the corporation you support only exist because of government. The corporation is a legal individual created by government and the business of the USA only can grow because of the corporate form. The disagreement with government has to do with interpretation of their actions in line with the constitution. It is not a literal intrepretation of the constitutional document per se. A literal intrepretation of the constitution would lead us back to the minute men and stop all the spending on the military as we see it today. Social security and medical care are social issues that the government has undertaken based on the will of the governed. No one has to agree but that is how the consitution is setup so don't cite the consitituion as your great source of authority. You have to rely on your brain as the source - not a document written two hundred years ago by people that never knew business as we see it today, never had need for social security and knew very very little about medical processes and procedures. Times change and so should your party. taxpayer Posted May 10, 2005 7:58 AM
