This sounds like a lucid report. I wish it had been written two years ago. As things stand, it seems unlikely to be heeded even now -- not by the irresponsible grasshopper-generation cohort manning the levers of power. (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/12/education/12college.html?_r=1)

Increasingly, it's going to be difficult to attract support for the concept of one country, united. Many people are unwilling to sign on to a future of privatized gains and socialized losses; of money corroding democratic institutions; of letting greedy old Fox viewers "balance" the budget on the backs of future generations, and of continued passivity on global warming. 'Fellow Americans'? Forget that.

"If you're not going to lead, get out of the way" seems as apt as ever. Unfortunately, that would leave most of Washington deserted right now. (But if these authors were to stick around and take charge, it would be fine with some of us.)

This is a brilliant article. I'm referring to the actual report filed by the Pentagon. I find it insane that the American public thinks it acceptable to spend so much on defense while at the same time cutting the economic safety nets and slashing education. This should be mandatory reading for every member of Congress and the Washington bureaucracy.

I'm not surprised that military leaders came to such a pragmatic conclusion on the direction of US spending and development. I hope that this kind of thinking will influence our leaders on the Hill and White House, but I don't have much faith it will.

When the DoD says it needs more money, Congress jumps to increase the budget. When the DoD says it can get by with less, Congress jumps to increase the budget. There's clearly a disconnect here.

The Republicans are fighting tooth and nail to cut budgets, but not for defense. Which is strange, given that their hard won $35bln for 2011 largely does nothing to the deficit once full defense spending is taken into account. Yet their 2011 budget didn't reduce defense, and their 2012 budget doesn't either.

But the State Department and Foreign Affairs spending gets a 44% whack by 2016 in Paul Ryan's budget. I guess the reasoning is why bother avoiding conflicts when we can win them?

I'll believe the ideas and objectives behind the "Y Article" when the authors don't feel the need to hide their identity.
We need a new advocacy group in the tradition of President Dwight D. Eisenhower called Ex-Generals Against Military Empire. Why? Because at a time when Republicans and many Democrats are calling for drastic, austere spending cuts to needed poverty reducing programs like Medicare and Medicaid...it is clear, because of our national debt, that we can no longer afford our exorbitantly costly and manifestly unneeded military empire with $800 billion budgets that sucks up half of the federal budget... the Cold War is over and we live in a peaceful neighborhood, Canada and Mexico are not about to invade.
Our military has become big-business...it is the Wall Street military industrial complex which exerts far too much influence over our democracy's priorities and spending at the expense of education, health care, and poverty reduction.
Highly questionable wars in Afghanistan and Iraq is a natural outcome of our a globe-spanning imperialistic military...will not change unless we demand that our unnecessary, extremely costly empire consisting of hundreds of bases around the world, 12 aircraft carriers, thousands of jets and bombers is dismantled...our nation's military and its far too militarized foreign policy will not become more peaceful and less costly as long as bombing via jets and drones or waging undeclared war is so easy...dismantling the costly, wasteful, globe-spanning military empire is long over due.

I believe it's important to manage the budged heavily on education system.
I find it also insane that the American public thinks it acceptable to spend so much on defense while at the same time cutting the economic safety nets and slashing education. I think internet and facebook like sites may be well used for educational purposes.

Since his appointment by Bush, Gates has been in favor of increasing funds to the Dept of State and cutting the defense budget. He's been sensible enough himself to see that our present course is illogical and unsustainable.

The problem is that Congress doesn't see it that way. They continue to see the macho way of doing things through military power, rather than increase the role of diplomacy and other channels.

One reason is rather evident: ideology. Another reason is the lucrative contracts in their districts/states, good earmarks that've brought money to them for years. In addition, it's provided jobs to their areas. For those reasons, they're loathe to reduce the defense budget one iota, even if the SecDef himself pushes for it.

The report's timely, and only confirms what Gates himself has been wanting to do for some time. A fair portion of the defense budget could be better applied to other alternatives, including diplomacy, the building of infrastructure, education and other positive programs, which have been proven to work in the past.

Presently we're becoming more ignorant, and falling behind other nations in many indicators; but boy, we can kill almost anything.

Gates himself has confirmed that we spend as much on defense as almost the rest of the world put together. That is a psychotic, paranoid behavior which must be altered if the United States is to remain a viable, trustworthy and believable state.

It is always important to have a budget. The Pentagon is no exception there.

It is true that by investing energy, talent, and dollars now in the education and training of young Americans -- the scientists, statesmen, industrialists, farmers, inventors, educators, clergy, artists, service members, and parents, of tomorrow -- we are truly investing in our ability to successfully compete in, and influence, the strategic environment of the future.

If there were cheaper alternatives it would even be easier. Maybe it is possible to develop reviews for politics. Yes that may sound strange. I mean making things a little less expensive when the government buys.

I don't know but maybe that would be possible.

There are so many similarities between this and what is being considered in Australia right now. We'll never get the lowest cost labout in businesses such asfurniture removalists melbourne so we need good education.

Human captial is critical to the future success of developed countries.

This article reminds me of one put together by a group of military in Afghanistan who were part of the US military trying to "win the hearts and minds" of the Afghans. The big problem was that all of their seemingly noble attempts with civil affairs had been completely neutralized/sabotaged by the military part that blows things up and the Afghans still hate our guts. The article has a lot of idealistic and practical thoughts but the military Generals and Admirals who blow things up will attempt to keep any cuts to the absolute minimum. They will win unless members of Congress get a backbone.

The ROOT CAUSE of our economic turmoil and social malaise is the gross reduction of rhe tax marginal tax rare on high incomes unwisely begun by Reagan and shamefully extended by Bush and Cheney. This ruinous policy induced CEOs to run their enterprises for maxi um short term gains earning high salaries peeks and bonuses exporting jobs in the process. The manufacturing base has been eroded and the middle class damaged. A host of others followed along with ripoffs with unfortunate effects: College presidents, high tuitions; Professional athletes, high ticket prices; Congressmen, unwise legislation; Manufacturers, exported jobs; Investors, moved funds offshore; Non-profits, building teasuries and etc. A host of additional ruinous policies were added to furher were building: Tax benefits for oil and agriculture, multitudinous tax loopholes to avoid payment and a military/indusrrial complex extravagantly engaged in three long term foreign wars ar gret expense. We need populist leaders to reverse this madness, beginning wih a rollback of rhe Bush tax cuts for high earners and declaring victiory and ending thenthree ways' exept ro keep key hard won bases needed to attack those who attac us. Yes, the y-Article has it right but there is so much more to consider and correct! So, President Obama, take notice and Lead! Voters, take notice and elect only populists who will assist the president.

"Courageously, the authors make the case that America continues to rely far too heavily on its military as the primary tool for how it engages the world. Instead of simply pumping more and more dollars into defense, the narrative argues: "
Their argument was weak. I could not stand while reading this. They really need to improve their argument points.

They are all getting too much onlinelivetv. That is what is wrong with those folks. No, seriously you should all wake up!

The Pentagon's secret plan to slash its own budget. "Courageously, the authors make the case that America continues to rely far too heavily on its military as the primary tool for how it engages the world. " Why is that courageous? That sounds almost like arapid cash tornado review. You can't really tell that it is courageously but it for sure engages the world. "Yet, it is investments in America's long-term human resources that have come under the fiercest attack in the current budget environment . As the United States tries to compete with China, India, and the European Union, does it make sense to have almost doubled the Pentagon budget in the last decade while slashing education budgets across the country? " There are so many similarities between this and what is being considered in Australia right now. We'll never get the lowest cost labout in businesses such asfurniture removalists melbourne so we need good education. Human captial is critical to the future success of developed countries.

The Republicans are fighting tooth and nail to cut budgets, but not for defense. Which is strange, given that their hard won $35bln for 2011 largely does nothing to the deficit once full defense spending is taken into account. Yet their 2011 budget didn't reduce defense, and their 2012 budget doesn't either. reflux The article has a lot of idealistic and practical thoughts but the military Generals and Admirals who blow things up will attempt to keep any cuts to the absolute minimum. They will win unless members of Congress get a backbone.