Defense Secretary Robert Gates will disregard possible job losses when deciding the fate of weapons programs and systems in the Pentagon's 2010 budget, a spokesman said on Tuesday.
19-03-2009 - Wasington, the Pentagon -- "It's not the responsibility of this building to worry about the economic impact of budgetary decisions," Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell told reporters.
"It's the responsibility of the secretary and this building to provide recommendation to the president about what's in the best interest of our national security. And that's the advice he will give," Morrell said.
Some defense firms have highlighted the number of jobs they say depend on their big-ticket programs as they lobby against potential cuts in the budget for fiscal year 2010, which begins on Oct. 1 this year.
Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N), for example, is running an advertising campaign which states that 95,000 jobs across the United States are linked to its advanced F-22 fighter jet.
"If there is a determination made at the White House that there needs to be greater consideration for the economic impact of individual decisions or the budget as a whole, that is their prerogative," Morrell said.
"But the secretary and his staff are charged with providing a budget that protects the American people and our interests around the world," he added.
The Obama administration has stated that the Pentagon's base budget for 2010 will be $534 billion. Now Gates is working out how that top line figure should be distributed.
He has pledged to make tough choices because the economic crisis and big cost overruns in weapons programs demand them and also to give more emphasis to irregular warfare.
CNN's Newsroom item about budget cuts and the F-22
Morrell said Gates had not made any decisions so far and expected to continue working on the budget until at least the first week of April.
"He does not anticipate making decisions until the very end of this process," Morrell said.
As well as the F-22, other major items believed to be under threat include the U.S. Army's Future Combat Systems high-tech network of weapons systems, led by Boeing Co (BA.N).
Vulnerable Navy programs include the new DDG-1000 destroyer, built by Northrop Grumman (NOC.N) and General Dynamics Corp (GD.N); the Littoral Combat Ship program, which includes Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics; and presidential helicopters being built by Lockheed.
Source: Reuters Photo: NYTimes
COMMENTS:
national security of a country does not depend on budget but the NECESSSITY and REQUIREMENT! if the airforce said they need the F-22A raptor, by all means give it to them, they know more than you do Mr Secretary. its the best multi-role fighter in the world. it has all the good quality and perfomance of a fighter you need! most of your plane is already obsolete, it cost more to maintain old aircraft. the plane git expensive because you only buy few, but if you buy in large number it be CHEAPER! For pete sake dont cancel it, you will regret it in the future! Russia is building its fifth generation fighter, china is doing so! SO KEEP THE F-22 FOR YOUR AIRFORCE!
what you need in the afganistan is all the inventory is the A-10, apaches and cobras attack helicopter, if its not enought put rocket pods and miniguns in your Blackhawk helicopter! as what one special force guys said,you dont need more troops but more helicopter! its MOBILITY that counts
if you want heavy hitter use the bomber, one bomber can hit many target with precision because you have smart bomb today! the advantage of it is dont need base from from foreign base:
there are three combat aircraft you need:
FIGHTER F-22A its a multi role fighter, it can fight air to air and air to ground role. it can bomb with precision with 1,000 lbs. it can bomb surgically all radar. air suppression and other things its a long range fighter, you can improve it by lightening by means of lighter composite material and improve engine
Bomber well this is the heavy hitter, the advantage of it, can fly long range distance, it can carry more bomb than the tactical ones1 you dont need foreign base. you aleready have the B-2, accelerate the development of the 2018 bomber, but with range of 3000 nautical mile and a capacity of 30 tons bomb! B-52 and B-1 is already old, will not survive the modern surface to air missile
Close air support Well you still have the A-10, i heard the troops love it but it growing olds. Accelerate the development of the F-35B, this is the only F-35 variant that the airforce needs make it lighter in the latest blocks and equip it with powerful fuel efficient engine
By the way i forgot fighterjet fly DIFFERRENTLY than other aircraft
nonito antonio cabato | posted on Apr 02, 2009 @ 10:39
I believe Mr. Gates is short-sighted about the intentions of "our peaceful neighbors." On a much smaller level, we all know that friends and family can and do have arguments which result in the termination of friendly feelings. We also know, that historically, we have had quite violent disagreements with our neighbors, ie. WWI, WWII - to name a couple. Just because our intent is good and we only wish a continuance of friendliness, it does not mean that this will always hold true. We do not know our neighbors' hearts - how can we - we are not our neighbors. We do not know what will happen in the future. Based on that, shouldn't we be prepared to do whatever it takes to defend our country? Why would we not have every tool available to us to defend our countrymen and women? We currently have a tool that is far superior to our neighbors', the FA-22. Shouldn't we make sure we have a ready supply of these defense tools? We certainly should not be caught short. Once our neighbors' minds and feelings of friendliness change, it may be too late. Shouldn't we make absolutely sure that we continue to reinforce our ability to protect our home, our nation, the best in the world, the U.S.A.
