An email pal sent along two good pieces on the effects of the sequester relating to the military. I’d urge to read both the Defense News and Information Dissemination articles.
With some minor changes for context, here’s my reply to his email:
I hate my position on sequester but it basically comes down to…oh well.
The country can and has survived presidents like Obama, hell we’ve survived worse (think Wilson). It can not long survive an idiotic population. The country has made some disastrous calculations in the last few years (going further back than Obama), it’s time to stop protecting the people from the consequences of their decisions. I hate that the men and women of the US military will bear the brunt of this at first but for the long term sake of the country, it must be done.
I’m all for a smarter way to do sequestration but mostly I’m for an honest set of choices…what kind of country do we want to be? “Charge it” is not a national economic strategy. We can have some things but not all the things. Start picking and start living with the consequences.
The Information Dissemination piece about the CNO is a great analogy for the country writ large. He wanted to pretend this wasn’t happening, that someone would come and save him from the bad man taking away his money. Well….no. Now you’re a year late and you can’t keep pretending that you can run the 5th Fleet like it’s 1997. We aren’t hitting Iran so enough with the two carrier groups already. We fought a 6 year war in Iraq to be able to reduce our presence in that theater, act like it.
Tough choices, doing less with less, welcome to the real world.
We’re discussing this in the context of defense by my real target is entitlements because like banks, that’s where the money is. Until they are on the table, it’s all so much nitpicking. If this gets us to that conversation, it’s worth it.