Huge MDA Cuts Loom; GOP Worries about Russia

Huge MDA Cuts Loom; GOP Worries about Russia

Before Christmas I quoted a GOP Senate staffer who confidently — if ruefully — predicted a $1 billion cut to the Missile Defense Agency’s budget under a new Congress. At the time this seemed a lot. Well, that amount apparently has doubled and it doesn’t seem such a large cut any more.

The GOP is not standing still. One of the Senate’s top missile defense advocates, Sen. Jeff Sessions, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee, has written SecDef Robert Gates saying a 20 percent cut to missile defense spending would just be too much.

“While I realize the competition for funding among defense programs will be intense, I respectfully caution the Department that it would be imprudent to take any premature action” before the QDR and a missile defense review required by last year’s defense authorization bill are completed, Sessions wrote. At the end of the letter, Sessions hauls out the North Korean launch preparations for good measure, saying major missile defense cuts would be “disturbing… at the very time our potential adversaries are demonstrating the ability to reach US territory and that of our allies with ballistics missiles.”


A Senate aide said that funding for the coming budget should include about $500 million (including milcon) in European missile defense research and development since this would signal our commitment to the Poles and Czechs and would not disrupt talks with the Russians since it would not immediately result in hardware deployment.

Meanwhile, the New York Times is trumpeting that the Obama administration has reached out to Russia and is offering a deal — you help us with Iran and we may trim our European anti-missile capability.

But a Senate GOP aide questioned whether the Times has the story right. “I think the New York Times is blowing this out of proportion,” the aide said. “Essentially, this is what we’ve been telling the Russians all along. Having said that I’m sure there are Obama staff who would contemplate giving up the European sites in return for a number of things with the Russians.”

The effect of the apparent Obama position is that “you are pulling rug out from under our allies in return for dubious promises from the Russians,” this aide argued.

Tags:

Join the Conversation

This is pure BS.
The missile shield has been reported by the government to deter states like Iran and N. Korea.
Publicly, the Russians have been told it’s got nothing to do with them.
Now, Sen. Sessions is making it about them.
If the purpose of spending billions is to buy bargaining chips, we’ve all been fleeced.

The GOP sure ain’t what it use to be. You guys need help. Times have changed, the whole world have changed, if it were up to those guy’s(GOP)we would still be riding horse and buggie.

wtpworrier March 5th, 2009 at 3:51 pm: ” The GOP sure ain’t what it use to be. You guys need help. Times have changed, the whole world have changed, if it were up to those guy’s(GOP)we would still be riding horse and buggie.”

Are you kidding? Did you even read the article? I am guessng that you didnt. Obama is going to cut defense spending to support his BS porkulass package. The whole world changed ? LMAO uh huh the United States got suckered into supporting a lemon for President.

why not use their promotion against the taliban

our forefathers were wise and chose the Lord to lead them in battle and they won naturally, but now our so called leaders choose men and cost thousands of lives for their ignorance.if America truly wanted bin laden why they not enquired of me a true Prophet of the Lord, proven over 20 years now i again make the challenge without malice that the entire intelligent resources of America and the world can’t prove me wrong!!!!! I’m still not in hiding. innocent lives lost because of pride of a few is so sad!!!!!!!

We need to cut this program and many other like it as they do not contribute to the common defense of this country.. Wasteful military spending is killing the economy.

…I’m not really sure how ABMs don’t contribute to the defense of the country. Could you maybe explain that further?

*required

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement