Trading Troops for Weapons

Disappointing but not unexpected. With the war winding down in Iraq this is probably OK, but I still think they wouldn't have these problems if they would buy more low-tech weapons ie Stryker, LCS, and F-16s. Read all:

- Eliminating 40,000 Air Force jobs over the next six years, including active duty, civilian and reserves.
- Cutting up to three National Guard brigades, each of which generally has about 3,500 troops.
- Scaling back plans to increase active Army forces

They really didn't have much choice, Congress has so many pet projects:

"All proposals for cutting weapons systems have, one by one, been shot down, so in the end the savings are achieved by minor cuts in many places, rather than big decisions," said Loren Thompson, defense analyst with the Lexington Institute think tank in Arlington, Va.

There's been alot of speculation on what's coming with the QDR, but I don't think there will be any surprises:

The Pentagon's last quadrennial review was released on Sept. 30, 2001, but largely completed before the Sept. 11 attacks. The new review, expected to be finalized this month, maps the people, equipment and structure the military wants for its 21st century wars.
Thompson said the review would discuss the military's need to focus on emerging threats, such as terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. He said it would seek to reduce dependence on traditional weapons systems, but by looking for savings in personnel and not arms, the Pentagon will not reflect such changes in the program budgets.