"Mr. Hagel will take some first steps to deal with the controversial issue of pay and compensation, as the proposed budget would impose a one-year salary freeze for general and flag officers; basic pay for military personnel would rise by 1 percent. After the 2015 fiscal year, raises in pay will be similarly restrained, Pentagon officials say. The fiscal 2015 budget will also call for slowing the growth of tax-free housing allowances for military personnel and would reduce the $1.4 billion direct subsidy provided to military commissaries, which would most likely make goods purchased at those commissaries more expensive for soldiers. The budget also proposes an increase in health insurance deductibles and some co-pays for some military retirees and for some family members of active servicemen. But Mr. Hagel’s proposals do not include any changes to retirement benefits for those currently serving. Under Mr. Hagel’s proposals, the entire fleet of Air Force A-10 attack aircraft would be eliminated. The aircraft was designed to destroy Soviet tanks in case of an invasion of Western Europe, and the capabilities are deemed less relevant today. The budget plan does sustain money for the controversial F-35 warplane, which has been extremely expensive and has run into costly delays. In addition, the budget proposal calls for retiring the famed U-2 spy plane in favor of the remotely piloted Global Hawk." NY Times
I have insisted for several years that cuts of this kind are wise and justified. It is not clear how much the USMC will be cut. Their cuts should be proportional to those in the US Army. We should not fight any more large ground actions anywhere unless the defense of the territory of the United States is invloved. there is some question in my mind with regard to the A-10s. They have always been very useful and continue to be so for the mission of Close Air Support of ground troops. the USAF does not like that mission and prefers to fight the air superiority battle above all else, but, the A-10s are 40 odd years old and the argument was probably easy for the USAF to make. They might have been transferred to the Army, but, I guess that was not "in the cards."
Needless to say, this smaller forces structure should dictate a more modest foreign policy. Will it? pl