General: Budget cuts would give N. Korea an advantage
WASHINGTON — Impending budget cuts could hamper efforts to deter North Korea from taking hostile action and stymie plans to upgrade America's nuclear arsenal, top military officers told senators on Tuesday.
Army Lt. Gen. Curtis Scaparrotti told the Senate Armed Services Committee that reducing the number of aircraft carriers in the Pacific could undercut deterrence and increase the possibility of miscalculation in the tense Korean peninsula. Scaparrotti, who has been nominated to command forces in South Korea, added that cuts in training will also erode combat readiness there.
He said Pyongyang is putting more money into development of intercontinental ballistic missiles, special operations forces and cyberthreat capabilities. And he added that if forces had to be deployed to Korea as a result of a provocation there, “we would probably take some time here in the States to train that unit to the readiness level that we believe they need to be at to do the job before they deploy. So arriving forces might be delayed as a result.”
During the same hearing, Navy Adm. Cecil Haney said that the nation must continue plans to upgrade its primary nuclear bomb and replace the aging fleet of nuclear-capable submarines to counter threats from other nations and non-state actors. Haney, the nominee to take over U.S. Strategic Command, said that cost savings have contributed to the delay in development of the new Ohio Class ballistic missile submarine, adding that additional delays would be unacceptable.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.