Why did Rumsfeld shut down so many bases?

Question

A recent report from the Pentagon-said Rumsfelds base closing are hurting our current War effort-training -logistics-etc? I guess it would have been alright if the War Bush and his neo-con chickenhawks turned out as planned.

Answer 1

BRAC has been going on since the late 80's. Clinton took it a little too far, but much of the realignment has been good. It could go further yet.

Answer 2

Another fairy tale on your part....I'm not surprised. You show your utter ignorance with every single thing you post here.

For the record, genius, Rumsfeld has not closed any military bases. The recommendations for base closures comes from BRAC - the Base Re-Alignment and Closure Committee. This committee examines the missions of each of the bases being considered for closure and the budget that would be required to keep the base open (among other things, naturally) and then make up a list with the recommended closings. The list must be approved by Rumsfeld and the President, and even then a base can be removed from the list and kept open.

So contrary to what you think and what you'd like others to think, it isn't Rumsfeld or the President - it's the BRAC.

Get your facts straight, skippy, before you open your big mouth.

Answer 3

You're way off with this report. The program used to close the bases was BRAC (Base Realignment and Closure). This was passed into law During President Clinton and a democratic run congress. The Democrats felt there was too much spending on military and part of their way of getting the budget under control was to initiate BRAC. This law forced the military to evaluate all military installations and try to find efficiency to reduce operating costs. This forced hundreds of bases to close severely affecting local economies of the communities around these basses, and caused the reduction in the civilian working force on military installations, increasing the strain on the welfare system. This wasn't the doing of Rumsfeld, or a republican congress. This is what happens when the democrooks control congress, weaker military, less training, less spending on research and equipment. As it is, the democrooks are wanting to lower the military spending, and threaten those that are in combat now by not attaching stipulations to the military budget that are just counter productive. Look at history, and how when ever the democrats control congress our military is weakened until it is time to fight, then the democrooks try to point fingers away from them.

Answer 4

Rumsfeld's actions were part of the BRAC system, or Base Realignment And Closures. The purpose of BRAC is to increase the efficiency of today's military against a new threat. The dramatic increase in military installations in the US in past was in response to a Cold War threat of direct Nation on Nation warfare. Today's conflicts require a different type of military, and as such, BRAC was designed to streamline the military and focus our efforts and spending on more appropriate targets. *Side Note* My base nearly got closed due to BRAC, so I'm not a fan of it or especially of Rumsfeld for more reasons than that, but I understand what they are trying to accomplish.

Answer 5

Wow, here's yet another set of liberal lies.

The Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process is run by the CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES.

Rumsfeld didn't have a choice, nor did any of his predecessors in the office of the Secretary of Defense. Congress cut off the money, so they had to close bases. Anyone with a brain knows that.

When Congress refuses to fund the bases, and then orders them closed, they have to be shut down, and the units moved elsewhere. It is the typical penny-wise and pound-foolish antics of a Congress that is too busy buying themselves votes to be concerned about the real job of the Federal government -- protecting the nation from enemies foreign and domestic.

Answer 6

The story goes that Donald was keen on making the military a more streamlined organization, more in a business model than a traditional system.

By closing the bases he chose, he felt that the government would save millions every year, money that would go toward development of new weapons systems and tactics for the wars our military would face in the 21st century.

Every time a base closure was proposed, the money saved was the key issue.

Answer 7

Pray for Peace, Train for War.

You are right, everything would have been just hunky dory if we NEVER had to to fight anyone!!!

HELLO??? Believe it or not, Netanyah was right.

Netanyahu: "Iran is gearing up to produce 25 atomic bombs a year, 250 bombs in a decade...they are building missiles
that will reach the Eastern seaboard of the United States. Like Nazism, they start with the hatred of the Jews, they
want to annihilate the Jews, but that is only the first stop. The goal is Western civilization"

Iraq is just a place to start to stop this scourge.

Answer 8

Clinton has been responsible for more Military base closings than Rumsfeld!!!

Answer 9

Rumsfeld had a master plan unlike all others -- use paid mercenaries instead of US soldiers (Blackwater USA) for ground assaults that are not subject to war crimes tribunals -- AND fight war from the sky and upper atmosphere.

Both objectives have been disastrously expensive. The mercenary companies received $900 per day per paid soldier and there are hundreds of thousands that have been overlooked by the Senate in their funding of the war. The authentic US soldiers get paid less than $100 a day.

War from the air causes untold civilian deaths and friendly fire deaths against the troops, as well as MASS destruction. But when Rumsfeld is going out for oil for his friends, he doesn't care about the surface of the earth.

You're talking about the annihilation of the planet in fits and spurts.

Stop it now by telling your senators that mercenary soldiers are HIDDEN IN WAR COSTS and should never fight for the US.

Answer 10

Actually, KKKlinton started it. He shut down waaaaaaaaay too many bases in the 90's.