Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
'Peace Prize' President Submits Largest War Budget Ever
Obama Seeks Record $708 Billion in Defense Budget
WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama on Monday asked Congress to approve a record $708 billion in defense spending for fiscal year 2011, including a 3.4 percent increase in the Pentagon's base budget and $159 billion to fund U.S. military missions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The White House budget request also included $33 billion in additional funding for fiscal 2010 to pay for increasing military and intelligence operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and drawing down U.S. forces in Iraq. That comes on top of $129.6 billion already provided for the current fiscal year, which ends September 30.
The Pentagon's base budget request of $549 billion is up $18 billion from $531 billion in fiscal 2010, and will pay for continued reforms of defense acquisitions, development of a ballistic missile defense system and care of wounded soldiers.
The budget also calls for cancellation of several major weapons programs, including Boeing Co's C-17 transport plane, saving $2.5 billion, and a second engine for the Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 fighter jet, saving $465 million in fiscal 2011 and more than $1 billion longer-term. The White House tried to kill both programs last year, but lawmakers revived them during the budget process.
The second engine is being developed by General Electric Co and Britain's Rolls-Royce as an alternate to the main engine built by Pratt & Whitney, a unit of United Technologies Corp.
The proposed budget also kills plans for development of a new Navy cruiser, scraps plans to replace the Navy's EP-3 intelligence aircraft and halts work on a missile early-warning satellite, opting instead to upgrade the Space Based Infrared System satellite already being developed by Lockheed.
The budget proposal also calls for a delay in replacing two new Navy command and control shops until after 2015, a move the White House said would save $3.8 billion across the Pentagon's five-year defense plan. The Navy had planned to buy one command ship in 2012, and a second one in 2014.
Procurement of a new amphibious vehicle being built by General Dynamics Corp for the Marine Corps would be delayed by one year, saving $50 million in fiscal 2011 and cutting risk by allowing more time for testing.
The Pentagon also said it would further reduce its use of high-risk contracts in areas that related to time, material and labor hours by 17 percent through the end of 2011.
The budget underscored the administration's commitment to a "robust defense against emerging missile threats," saying it would pay for use of increasingly capable sea- and land-based missile interceptors and a range of sensors in Europe.
The Pentagon's budget continues to fund new weapons already under development, including the F-35 fighter, a new ballistic missile submarine, a new family of ground vehicles and the P-8 surveillance aircraft built by Boeing.
It will also pay for more unmanned planes, helicopters, electronic warfare capabilities and cybersecurity measures.
Overall, the budget includes $112.8 billion for weapons procurement, up from $104.8 billion in fiscal 2010, and $76 billion for research and development, down from $80 billion.
Reporting by Andrea Shalal-Esa; Editing by Lisa Von Ahn
- Posted in



111 Comments so far
Show AllSince no Congressperson will vote to cancel a weapons program, the solution to cancelling weapons program is to form a commission, similar to the base closure commission which actually worked very well.
They can first get rid of Trident submarines and ICBMs and focus on effective box-cutter detector.
Jeevee
You're a good positive thinker!
Obama is too busy forming a commission to dismantle social security, medicare and other domestic programs that reduce the amount of money for war programs.
The US Government's consumer price index tells us that the rate of inflation was only a little above zero during the past year and our COLAs need to reflect that (or worse for most of us). Why does the war budget get a 3.4% COLA?
"'Peace Prize' President Submits Largest War Budget Ever"
- So, any of you still waiting on the sweet and lovable messianic Obama to END the WARS and bring Peace and Unity to the world?
Or have you all seen the reality, the glint of G.W. Bush's soul in the eyes of Obama. Or even really, since W was as much a puppet as O is, do you see the glint of the upper echelon elites, the Banksters, Fed Res, Government Subsidized corporate CEO's, the souls of the truly evil reflecting deep in the eyes of Obomber.
This man cares not for the little guy. Since before he was elected he was all over the Embezzlement scam aka the TARP Bailouts. Within his first two weeks of office, the same two weeks he was being nominated for the PEACE Prize, he was ordering DRONE Attacks on Pakistan, killing innocent civilians, bombing wedding parties, killing children.
Not to mention he is all about growing the Civil Liberties destroying Bills like FISA and the Patriot Act. Obama is a madman, working for the likes of even madder men.
These people use words like National Security, America's Interest, In the name of Safety, In the name of the good for ALL people, for Peace and Democracy - But everything they do is for them. They restrict us at every corner, taking away our Rights, watching us, recording us, and they say its for us, and so many people buy into the madness and Lies - They give the Billionaires more Billions and they say it is for the Benefit of the Main St. - But in reality it is only the Wall St. CEOs getting the Bonuses, and the Too Big to Fail Insurance companies and Banks are the only ones getting Bailed out - While we continue to Lose our jobs, our homes our life savings. The too small to save Local Businesses they go out of Business, get shut down repossessed etc.
People the Government is NOT here to help us, Not the Democrats Not the Republicans.
Then they tell us the economy is fine. It's a JOBLESS Recovery. What the heck is a Jobless Recovery? There is NO SUCH THING.
We gotta get smart people. We need to Wake Up. We need to Stop fighting each other -
We Need to Get All The Bums out of Office, keep the few good ones like Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich and take back out government. De-Centralize the power and start creating more localized economies, businesses etc.
Obomber is NOT Our friend. Obomber is going to be the President of WWIII if we do not do something to stop this madness.
peace. love. anarchy.
Obummer....did anyone read the piece about the process for getting the peace prize? It is so laughable.
This is all a shill game, down to the last piece of happy crap Plouph asking for more money on OFA while he toddles into the WH, the DNC asking for more money, the RNC asking for more money. New World Order is in control. Do you understand? Unless America backs away from that scenario, there is no hope, none, nada, zilch, zip, boom.
Come on peeps...when we gonna shut down the town?
yes, i read the criteria for nomination for the peace prize; and i commented on it at the time...............(it'll be here somewhere on c.d.)
any fool can read the directives for the prize online...............
what a farce..............
Since they gave Henry Kissenger a Peace Prize, they will give ANYBODY a Peace Prize. It means absolutely nothing.
Your seeing the sociopath inside both.
Here's an idea: How about if a large group of us gets together and petitions the Nobel Committee to rescind the Peace Prize award to Obama? If we could get 100,000 or more to sign a petition like that, even if it didn't work, it would at least show that there are many in this country who don't think Obama deserves the peace prize.
I'd sign it, and I voted for Obama.
Bakunin: I think there is an on-line petition place to do your own start up. Go for it. The email address for NPP is on-line. Many of us already sent letters or emails. No one answered...go figure. But a few 100,000 for cryin out loud. They got 700,000 sigs to make pot legal, surely they aren't in favor of more bombs!!!
:-)) It might be aplace to start.
Jeevee
...Or else tell the truth and declare it the Nobel War Prize.
Good idea! Will you compose the petition and get it on line for us and our friends to sign?
(Shades of Howard Zinn)
postmaster@nobel.no That is their on-line listed contact.
gl@nobel.no The director Geir Lundestand
on@nobel.no The research guy Olav Njolstad These two had a (a)instead of @ in the epost so I converted it...not sure about these things
If you want phone nos. and addresses... http://nobelpeaceprize.org/en_GB/institute/staff/
You might want to go there and see more...
"The Fellowship Program for 2009 had as theme "The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: Past experiences and future challenges".
Due to the Institute's financial situation it has been decided to close down the Fellowship Program by the end of 2009."
In other words...BLOW IT ALL TO HELL WE REALLY DON'T CARE AS LONG AS WE HAVE SOME MONEY TO MAKE OUR PAYCHECKS
Interesting, I went 53 pages deep into a search on Lundestad and it seems the only thing he ever published was an article in the Peace Journal called "Empire by Invitation" about the cold war stuff 1945-52, in 1986 and became the Nobel director in 90. Big whoop. Maybe the rest of the time he sits on corporate boards...for no compensation of course. I actually thought the Nobel thing was a bigger deal than all this...guess not. Maybe we are being taken for another ride, it's just politics as usual.
OK I agree with Coco and John Ellis and that we have been duped by the NPP as if it means something. I also agree that the attempts to fix this situation with non-violence requires more civil disobedience. We have to be willing to take the baton like Howard Zinn, endure prison like Ardeth, Carol, and Jackie, and be more aggressively vocal when we arrive in DC...Detroit...LA...Oak Ridge, SOA,...
I like the new site that is organizing all the peace and justice orgs together as well as the zines etc.
The imperial evils are organized. Aren't we smarter than them?
please give an idea of what the title of the petition would be............
i'm willing to start it, but need guidance on the wording..........
Here is one petition:
http://nobelpeace.eu/
Good petition. Let's all sign it.
Gary
“To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.”
-- Abraham Lincoln
Glad to see he's declared 'war' on the deficit.
Obama's war on the deficit means he is forming a commission to justify cutting social security, medicare and other domestic programs in order to make more war funding available.
History will record that Obama responded to the Nobel Peace Prize with all of the humility and grace that may be expected from a narcissist:
1.) I didn't ask for this award;
2.) I don't deserve this award;
3.) I'm keeping this award.
· Yr Obd't Servant
It's a response worthy of Richard Nixon.
Agreed, peaceful is preferred, but I'm afraid that when the betrayal of the public by the propaganda machine becomes clear, as it will, saving humanity may not be as peaceful as we would like.
I can see why American banks don't want to cancel Haiti's huge debt. If the US banking community were to stop collecting interest from the third world countries whose dictators it does business with, how in the world could they afford to pay the army that helps them control these countries in the first place?
Once the rubble is cleared, US banks and MBAs will be back to being "smart" in Haiti.
The people that sit on the Nobel Committee must be suffering from terminal thought-disorders. They deserve what they're getting. Anyone here at CD could have told them not to give the Peace Prize to this demagogue and servant of Empire.
Let them thoroughly discredit themselves and the institution of Nobel Prizes.
Jeevee
It all boils down to the transliterated Sanskrit word "Lobha (greed), which our guruji reminds us, destroys knowledge.
i couldn't agree more jeevee....................
My contempt for this man increases by the day.
Nothing else need be said...
If the Democratic Party were to oppose wars of aggression, would not they be in power forever?
For our Empire would go bankrupt without wars to sustain that plunder of weak nations, and Republicans without the terror of wars would never be able to force the public into submission.
Once Obama put that stupid flag lapel on it was obvious where he was going. He then invited that idiot right wing preacher to speak at his inauguration and so he embraced the two most important institutions of repression in american society; the military and religious cults.
Yes that flag lapel pin. Now all the sports geeks have it. It is so fucking bullshit. Next will be all the stick-on bible verses like the football players.
Or those Bible verses on gun-sights? Surprised no one is marketing those yet. Praise the lord and pass the ammunition.
Gary
"The direct use of force is such a poor solution to any problem, it is generally employed only by small children and large nations."
-- David Freidman
Don't forget the health insurance cartel, Wall St. and Pig Pharma--Obama embraced them too and they're pretty repressive too.............
UPPER CLASS LOVE ---- LOWER CLASS HATE
20% country club class hand picked Obama.
40% intelligent middleclass campaign funded Obama.
50% laboring class did not even show up at the polls for their dictator Obama.
Please. That's 110% percent.
110% -- sounds like the "funny numbers" the Prez is tossing around to justify his phony freeze while expanding the war budget.
Gary
"In peace the sons bury their fathers, but in war the fathers bury their sons."
-- Croesus
The war and related industries generate as much or more corporate wealth for politicians as most corporations. The corrupted government will not shut down the war machine. The one way to do it, though, would be to reinstitute the military draft and expand it to cover all loopholes.
Of course, the privatization of the wars would have to be discontinued, as well. With all America's youth serving in some capacity (not too much to ask of patriotic Americans), many who for some reason are not suitable for combat could perform the work done by most private contractors. The fighting would be left to the military...like in the wars we won.
And the wars would end. The draft more than the protests ended the Vietnam war. Even the hawks grew sicked by all those body bags. So many gold stars.
Gary
"Warmaking doesn't stop warmaking. If it did, our problems would have stopped millennia ago."
-- Colman McCarthy
Where do I sign up? Has the Nobel commitee really even commented on this travesty? I understand that they were trying to nudge him in the right direction. Now that they have realized their MISTAKE, where is the outrage? Where is MY outrage?
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
Meanwhile, yesterday, 1/31/2010, on NBC's Meet the Press:
GREGORY: "The question of spending and common sense steps that could
be taken, you heard [Obama top advisor & press spokesman] David
Axelrod say, 'Look, the Republicans voted against paying as you go.
They voted against a commission to control the debt.' They suggest a
spending freeze, the president’s budget will. And Speaker Pelosi has
said that should not exempt defense spending, it should include it.
What do you say? Should the spending freeze be a good start but be
expanded?"
REPUBLICAN SENATE MINORITY LEADER JOHN BOEHNER: "I think the
President’s proposal on freezing nonsecurity domestic spending is a
good first step, but it’s only $15 billion for each of the next three
years. I think we can do much better than that. I don’t think any
agency of the federal government should be exempt from rooting out
wasteful spending or unnecessary spending. And I, frankly, I would
agree with it at the Pentagon. There’s got to be wasteful spending
there, unnecessary spending there."
Now, when the second most vicious SOB in the GOP advocates Pentagon
spending cuts in this economy and the DLC Dimocrat president doesn't?
What's the matter with this picture? Boehner (pronunciation in German
is closer to "boner" than "baynor") may be using the typical
Republican trick of inoculating the GOP against criticism down the
line (if Obama proceeds without Pentagon cuts). The GOP can rely on
the corporate media these days not to blow up Boehner's quote into the
major issue it deserves to be. But if enough small "d" Democrats,
progressives and cable TV comedians pointed out Boehner's remarks it
might compel Obungle to wince into action.
Why Afghanistan is re-charred toast no matter what happens:
U.S. Geological Survey: Afghanistan's Geological Reserves Worth a
Trillion Dollars:
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/02/01-6
"While Afghanistan is not renowned as a resource-rich country, it has
a wide range of deposits, including copper, iron ore, gold and
chromite, as well as natural gas, oil and precious and semi-precious
stones...Little has been exploited because the country has been mired
in conflict for 30 years..."
Foreign players are already cutting mining deals in there but I don't
see how any of the world's big resource extractors are going to secure
any of these facilities, let alone the old Unocal pipeline route they
still want to build.
The situation in Pakistan is rapidly getting out of hand and will blow
back into Afghanistan the more foreign interests try to move into that
region. Pakistan is the real nightmare coming to fruition. We need
to remove the Pakistani nukes and A.L. Kahn, get the hell out of
Pakistan and do a treaty to restrain India from taking advantage of
the situation AFTER we've removed the Pakistani nukes.
Our pressure on the Pakistani military to go after the Taliban plus
our growing presence there with drone missile strikes and incursions
are splitting the population in the spreading Taliban-infested areas
into what may become a civil war. Friends are turning on friends
because one family in the same village has family members maimed or
killed by the Taliban and another family has family members maimed or
killed by the Pakistani Army or U.S. missiles. The Taliban's
madrasses are proliferating in poor over-populated urban areas
around Pakistan and indoctrinating legions of child suicide bombers
for generations of conflict. There are already a million Pakistanis
displaced from the Tribal Agencies and the Swat Valley.
PBS Frontline World (ironically sponsored by Royal Dutch Shell oil
company) sent a female Afghani reporter fluent in all the dialects
into Pakistan and did a riveting and very grim report on the situation
in Pakistan. Every policy maker in the U.S. should watch this thing.
She went into areas no Westerner could get into. One of her
interviews was especially important: She interviewed a Taliban
fighter and asked him why the Taliban decided to stop focusing on
Afghanistan and begin fighting so much inside Pakistan. His reply
basically boiled down to 'We once thought the Pakistani Army were our
Muslim brothers, but then they started attacking us in our Pakistani
villages so we must do jihad."
The Pakistani ISI (CIA equivalent) used to train and equip Taliban and
there were several generals in the Pakistani military who were also
sympathetic with them. Many of these same figures held the old
Generalissimo/President Musharif as an enemy. I think they did this
to help impede Western ambitions in the region and also to inoculate
themselves against becoming future targets of the inter-wed Taliban
and Al Qaeda so they could focus on what they conceived of as their
primary enemy, India. Now the Taliban see the new Pakistani government as an
outright military puppet of the U.S. and this is why we should have
refrained from pushing the Pakistani government and military to
attack the Taliban in their home villages in the Pakistani Tribal
Agencies.
In other words, since the U.S. stupidly chose to treat terrorism as a war issue
instead of an international police problem, the war hawks and Pentagon
should control their military/foreign policy hubris
enough to sufficiently resolve one war with one country before we bite
off more than we can chew by igniting another major civil war next
door. That would, in turn, depend on following the Powell Doctrine of
overwhelming force and a coherent end game--which we jettisoned at the
front end of these wars. We needed a military draft regarding all
this mess years ago if we really had intentions of a decisive military
victory and successful rebuilding and democratization. By Gen.
Petraeus' own math we should have 600,000 troops in Afghanistan. We
would need somewhere between 2 to 3 times that many in Pakistan.
The Republicans, if they get into power again in 2012 may try for a
Draft and claim it's the only way to rebuild the U.S. economy out of a
second Depression. If these were just wars with coherent occupation
plans, then I'd agree with them to the degree that a Draft and full
economic mobilization around a Draft would be half of the economic
solution. But we still more urgently need a Green New Deal to
rebuild our peacetime manufacturing sectors or we will just be fiscally
accelerating the probably already inevitable decline and fall of our
economy. Big expensive war efforts like these cannot go on
forever, no matter how many social programs are cut and how many oil,
munitions and mercenary companies are enriched.
Whew, what a great post, BUT: >>AFTER we've removed the Pakistani nukes.<<
How in the dickens do you figure the US can do any such thing anyway? Just ask, "Pretty please, can you hand over the nuclear bombs you developed for yourselves to protect yourself against India's own nuclear devices," hmm?
Take them by force? When we don't know where they all are at? Without further inflaming a bad situation and the Muslim world even more?
Buy them from the Pakistanis?
So how do we remove the nukes my friend, how?
Gary
"Can anything be stupider than that a man has the right to kill me because he lives on the other side of a river and his ruler has a quarrel with mine, though I have not quarrelled with him?"
-- Blaise Pascal
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
This is all hypothetical but if I were in Obama's position I would meet simultaneously with the Pakistani president, ISI chief and top generals and put it to them this way: If you dislike the pressure we have increasingly put upon you to attack the Taliban inside Pakistan and feel that it has turned the Taliban against your government and military, helped displace a million Pakistanis, grown the Taliban madrasses movement in your urban centers and threatens civil war, then you probably want us to cease leaning on you and for us to get out of Pakistan with our drone bombers and JSOC incursions, right? We will do so if you: (1) Allow us to prevent the threat of the Taliban or other regional terrorist groups from overrunning your nuclear weapons equipped military installations by letting us in to peacefully remove those weapons for permanent storage in the U.S. domestic arsenal, (2) remove A.L. Khan for interrogation and house arrest at a location of our choosing. In return, we will initiate treaty guarantees that India will not attack you and if it does we will provide for your conventional defense, and we will cease drone bombing and ground force incursions inside Pakistan. If you insist on retaining those nuclear weapons in the increasingly destabilized situation inside Pakistan along with "special" protection for A.L. Khan, then we will take those weapons by force, cease ground force incursions, reserve the right to carry out a smaller number of more select drone attacks and let you deal with India as you may or may not be able to do.
*** Comment deleted by site administrators for violating our Comment Policy. ***
see: http://www.commondreams.org/comment-policy
Gore Vidal: "Think of the earth as a living organism that is being attacked by billions of bacteria whose numbers double every forty years. Either the host dies, or the virus dies, or both die."
Cosmetic (for media consumption) tweaks aside, all the economic and foreign policies being pursued by the Democratic & Republican two headed beast are now a full on direct assault on what's left of the middle- and lower middle-class. The only thing standing between them and an inevitable bleed-out of what is left of the bottom two thirds of the middle-class is the TARP-inflated stock market bubble. How long are the suckers in this TARP-inflated fantasy bubble going to buy the sustainability of these policies with respect to their own exposed necks? Many scream they should remain protected at all costs. I say the sooner these people have to try to find a real job the better. We won't get progressive change until enough of the middle-class gets its teeth kicked in by the very same effed up policies it voted for for decades. They have to have their noses rubbed in their own shit to get the concept. The rest of us on the downscale side of the economy are going to suffer whether they get their overdue ass kicking or not so they might as well suffer with us. Plenty of those fools have wiped their cozy asses for years using dividends from blood for oil and munitions investments. Screw 'em into the streets, I say.
Worst. President. Ever.
God all-mighty, Obama makes one ALMOST wish back for the good old days of Tricky Dick and (god help us) Ronnie boy. At least they were straight-forward about being creeps to anyone paying attention -- like for a short while the media. Obama is managing to play both hands against the middle, appearing almost conservative to conservatives while still fooling many liberals into supporting him. While the media either fawns over him yet, or is so poisonous in their attacks one feels sorry for him.
One smart dude.
Too bad he's a tool for the MIC hook, line, and sinker. Speaking of sinkers, how much more can America sink into the depths of debt anyway? The clock is ticking.
And we get a freeze that's no freeze at all -- and the Congress will probably buy into to that one as well. Just as they will this war budget.
Gary
"Now these questions are not new. War, in one form or another, appeared with the first man. At the dawn of history, its morality was not questioned; it was simply a fact, like drought or disease -- the manner in which tribes and then civilizations sought power and settled their differences."
-- Barak Obama
imagine if obama pulled all troops from iraq(because we had learned a few years ago that there were no WMDs and saddam hussein and iraq were not a threat to our security) and then explained to the american people that the cost savings would be used to either reduce federal spending( a big item on the republican wish list) or to help pay for a health care system overhaul. in a clear and simple story line he would regain the support of his base supporters and reduce the republican obstructionists into choosing between perpetuating the wrong war or being against reducing government spending and health care reform. seems like a win-win situation. but of course, the democratic party couldn't accomplish this act even if a republican laid it out for them! the democratic party doesn't know what it wants to do and thus can't talk to the american people coherently. the republican party only seems to misrepresent the facts and thus mislead the american people. what a quandary that leaves this country in!
It would seem that the weaker the U.S. gets economically, the more borrowed money its government throws into its military. Is this a mere coincidence or is there a connection between these two phenomena?