| Opinion/The Review

Larger text Larger text Smaller text Smaller text | Order Photo Reprints

Cutting the military: Unacceptable strategy

Email Newsletters

Click here to sign up for one of our email newsletters.

Letters home ...

Traveling abroad for personal, educational or professional reasons?

Why not share your impressions — and those of residents of foreign countries about the United States — with Trib readers in 150 words?

The world's a big place. Bring it home with Letters Home.

Contact Colin McNickle (412-320-7836 or

Daily Photo Galleries

Monday, Aug. 12, 2013, 9:00 p.m.

Budget-cutting must not weaken national security. But that's what the Pentagon's new 10-year plan for dealing with sequestration would do. And defense-budget experts from both ends of the political spectrum agree.

The Pentagon's Strategic Choices and Management Review lays out $500 billion in cuts that would shrink the Army to fewer than 400,000 troops, retire but not replace more than half of Air Force bombers and eliminate two or three Navy aircraft-carrier strike groups. Speaking at the liberal Brookings Institution, both Brookings' Michael O'Hanlon and the conservative American Enterprise Institute's Mackenzie Eaglen criticized the plan.

Both said it would render the Pentagon unable to fight two conflicts at once. With China increasingly flexing its military muscle, Iran, North Korea and the Syrian situation still threatening and new threats sure to arise, that's not an acceptable strategy.

Defense, about 20 percent of federal spending, nevertheless bears more than 40 percent of sequestration cuts — cuts in addition to nearly $1 trillion that this administration already has cut from military spending, The Heritage Foundation notes. Talk about penny-wise and pound-foolish.

The congressional counterparts of the liberal Mr. O'Hanlon and the conservative Ms. Eaglen must emulate their consensus and act to prevent these disastrous sequestration cuts to the military — “a budget-driven exercise devoid of any strategic planning,” as Heritage puts it.

Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.



Show commenting policy

Most-Read Editorials

  1. Pittsburgh Tuesday takes
  2. Tuesday takes
  3. Greensburg Tuesday takes
  4. Tracking cellphones: Warrants, first
  5. Secret Service scandal
  6. U.N. Watch: Chelsea’s words
  7. Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances
  8. How to counter Putin in Syria
  9. The Box
  10. The Pennsylvania budget: Wolf’s costly ploy
  11. The Kane case: Charges upon charges