Obama’s Defense Budget Increase
Apr 2, 2009 Political
I wrote recently that Obama was cutting the military budget and the lefties out there informed me that programs were being cut, not the operational budget which Obama has actually increased. We do not know if he has increased it because the people in the Department of Defense (DOD) had to sign non disclosure statements. The public report was a 4% increase but how do we really know this is the case if people were sworn to secrecy? It seems strange to me that the most transparent administration in history (just ask them) would do something like this.
Let us assume there was an increase and that it was 4%. It is now clear why that increase was needed and it is clear that it was not for military operations. An increase was needed so that Obama could use military aircraft to ferry around his 500 person entourage. The Washington Times reports that Obama’s trip to Europe has strained the Air Force because more aircraft were needed to fly all the additional people to Europe. It has so taxed the Air Force that the service had to use private contractors to accomplish its mission to resupply our forces in Afghanistan.
The large delegation traveling with the president in Europe required moving several transports, including jumbo C-5s and C-17s, from sorties ferrying supplies to Afghanistan to European bases for the presidential visit, said two military officials familiar with the issue. They spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid any misunderstanding with White House officials.
The Air Mobility Command, part of the U.S. Transportation Command, was ordered to provide airlift for the president’s entourage of nearly 500 people, including senior officials, staff, support personnel, news reporters and some 200 Secret Service agents for the European visit, which began Tuesday in London.
Airlift for the traveling entourage also was used to move the president’s new heavy-armored limousine and several presidential helicopters used for short transits.
To make up for the shortfall, the Air Force had to increase the number of Eastern European air transport contractors hired to fly Il-76 and An-124 transport jets into Afghanistan loaded with troop supplies, the two officials said.
The airlift crunch comes at a particularly difficult time, as the military is stepping up deliveries of supplies in advance of a surge of 21,000 U.S. troops.
Couple this with Nancy Pelosi’s demands on the Air Force and her use of it as a personal airline and it is no wonder that the budget would need to be increased.
Why did he need 500 people with him? Why was it necessary to take resources away from our war fighters in order to send him and this huge contingent to Europe?
For you liberals who make claims about the military budget and how Obama is so supportive, keep this in mind before you make any claims:
One official said the problem was not only the vehicles and helicopters that were needed for presidential security, but also the unusually large number of people traveling with the president. The official said U.S. taxpayers are paying twice for airlift, once for Air Force jets that are not available for a war zone and again for foreign contractor aircraft that are. [emphasis mine]
No wonder Obama would need to increase the military budget. Taxpayers now have to pay two times for the Air Force to accomplish its mission.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: air force, defense budget, europe, Military, Obama, waste
Can Islam Take Over?
Jan 2, 2008 General
In Pat Buchanan’s latest book, “Day of Reckoning” he makes the argument that Islam poses little threat to the US because they share the same religious ideology but are very diverse otherwise. He also indicates that we could be attacked, as we were on 9/11, but that we could weather those attacks and that Islam, or Muslim nations, could not come into the US and take over. He likens the potential attacks to our dropping nuclear bombs on Japan. They are smaller and yet they were able to recover and become a productive nation. Of course, this idea is only tolerable if you or your family are not caught up in the attack. I imagine that while Japan recovered many family lines were eliminated and no amount of recovery will ever change that (not that I have a problem with what we did back then).
I agree that the nations that are Islamic could not waltz into the US and fight us. We would slaughter them as millions of gun owners took liberties with the enemy’s lives. However, Buchanan seems to base his conclusion on them coming here as aggressors and taking us by force. In reality, they could take over much the same way the Mexicans are retaking the south. They can continue to arrive here and then when they are sufficient in number (their birth rates are way up and ours is barely sufficient to sustain our population) they can exert political pressure in order to achieve their goal of imposing Sharia Law on the world.
Interestingly, Buchanan, in his book “State of Emergency”, discussed the take over of America by our neighbors to the south and he discussed at length how they could eventually retake the south unless we did something to stop the flow. However, he seems to ignore that this very thing could happen with the Muslim population as well. They are well rooted and have their advocacy arm in CAIR, a group that is hell bent on making the mere thought of something bad toward Islam a criminal offense.
Buchanan addressed the heavy Muslim population in Europe and discussed how they are taking over and yet he seems to think this is not something that can happen here. One can argue whether it was wise to go to war over there but the fact remains that they can, and will if we let them, take over this country. It is one thing to say that they cannot beat us in a fight but it is another to ignore the plight of Europe and say it could not happen here. One only needs to listen to the Imams, Clerics and other leaders to realize that world domination is their goal.
Cleric Irshad added: “I’m ready to become a suicide bomber and lay down my life for Islam. My friends are already doing this to the invading British forces in Afghanistan.
“Democracy is wrong. I hope Britain and the rest of the world will have sharia law this century. We will continue to sacrifice our lives to achieve this.†The Sun UK
These are not isolated words. One hears them again and again coming from Mosques all around the world. Some of those very Mosques are right here in America. When one has an enemy it is wise to listen to what the enemy says it wants to do. Failure to pay attention or absolute ignorance leads to complacency and eventually to defeat.
One other thing that is important to remember; our enemies have help from inside the US. The Democrats are invested in our defeat and liberal activist courts continue to make rulings that cause more and more Americans to fear saying anything about suspicious activities that involve Muslims. We continue to placate them so as not to offend them at the expense of the non Muslim people in this country. The Democratic Party is full of socialists and they were full of Communists over 50 years ago. It was, after all, that party that allowed the Communists to get into our government. It is not a stretch to say that the very same party would allow Islam a foot in the door and would help them all in the name of diversity and understanding.
I respect Pat Buchanan and I think he is a great writer with very good insight. However, he misses the boat on this issue and that is dangerous. We should be ever vigilant and work hard to protect this country from those who would hurt us including the enemy within.
