Obama

Report Suggests DoD Should Study Lessons from Failed Anti-sequester Campaign

Faithful Intercepts readers no doubt are familiar with the dire predictions from civilian and uniformed Pentagon leaders about what will become of the U.S. military and American national security if all of sequestration’s $500 billion, decade-spanning cuts are enacted. Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos on Feb. 12 told a congressional panel it would be “ruinous” — though even some pro-military lawmakers and experts are skeptical about such gloomy claims.

When it came to convincing the political system to avoid the sequestration cuts, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey recently admitted to a congressional panel that Pentagon leaders misplayed their hand. Well, Intercepts readers better hope Pentagon brass made a list of what went wrong — you know, ran what military types often (too often?) call a “lessons-learned drill.”

That’s because, according to one nonpartisan Washington think tank, deeper federal spending cuts will be needed to further pare the federal deficit and truly right the American fiscal ship. And, remember, even with sequestration the Pentagon’s baseline budget is projected to approach $600 billion per year later this decade. That’s one GIANT target. As we’ve all learned, when Washington takes on the difficult task that is deficit reduction, the GIANT targets are the easiest ones to hit. More

On Syria, Rep. Adam Smith is the ‘Obama Whisperer’

House Armed Services Committee Ranking Member Adam Smith, D-Wash., says US military action in Syria would be unlikely to tip the balance in that nation's civil war. (Will Seberger/MCT via Getty Images)

President Barack Obama is taking heat from the left and right for what members of both political parties are calling his murky policy toward Syria, where the U.S. intelligence committee believes government forces used “small” amount of chemical weapons.

Many Republicans and Democrats are calling for Obama to steer the United States into the years-old civil war, hopeful American military intervention or other direct actions could tip the balance toward rebel forces and oust Bashar al-Assad’s regime. They are criticizing Obama for carrying out an incoherent strategy on Syria.

Those searching for insights about why Obama so far is reluctant to get directly involved should carefully study the words of Washington Rep. Adam Smith, the top House Armed Services Committee Democrat and an Obama administration ally. On Syria, Smith’s stance appears to capture the commander in chief’s conclusions about a U.S. mission there quite accurately. Just call him the “Obama Whisperer.” More

Syria, Obama, and the Problem with ‘Red Lines’

Members of the Al-Ezz bin Abdul Salam brigade hold their weapons sitting in the back of an open pickup truck on their way from al-Rabeea to the al-Turkman mountains in the Latakia province, western Syria on April 25. ( MIGUEL MEDINA/AFP/Getty Images)

The Obama administration said Thursday U.S. intelligence agencies believe Syrian forces have used chemical weapons in that nation’s civil war, but it remains unclear if officials believe the alleged actions cross a “red line” that will lead to U.S.  military involvement there.

U.S. President Barack Obama has said any evidence that Syrian leader Bashir al-Assad’s forces were using chemical or biological weapons against civilians or rebel forces would cross a “red line” that could cause the U.S. to step in. On Thursday, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said the administration has notified lawmakers in a letter that Assad’s forces have done just that. Lawmakers already are pressuring Obama to get involved in the years-old civil war, revealing, for any commander in chief, the problem with establishing “red lines.” More

Photo of the Day: April 25, 2013

COMMANDERS IN CHIEF -- (L-R) U.S. President Barack Obama, former President George W. Bush, former President Bill Clinton, former President George H.W. Bush and former President Jimmy Carter attend the opening ceremony of the George W. Bush Presidential Center on Thursday in Dallas. All five living U.S. commanders in chief together is among the rarest occasions in politics and national defense. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

On Budget, Congressional Democrats Say Much by Saying Nothing

President Barack Obama speaks Wednesday in the White House Rose Garden with Jeffrey Zients, acting director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Congressional Democrats are not getting behind Obama's 2014 budget plan. (Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Two things are near-certainties on Budget Day: One is likely to have a headache well before noon, and one’s email inbox will be flooded with lawmaker statements. But the latter didn’t occur on Wednesday, at least not with its usual fury.

As one would expect in a two-party political system, the opposition party wasted no time staking out its positions on various parts of President Barack Obama’s 2014 federal budget blueprint. Republican lawmakers’ offices began sending out statements criticizing the spending outline before the plan was formally released. Fair enough. That’s how the American system works.

The Republican statements came in an early wave. Reporters on Capitol Hill scurried to their laptops to write up the opposition party’s take on the budget plan. If one plays Budget Day correctly, by the time one has written up the opposition’s views the second wave — from lawmakers of the sitting president’s party — will have crashed into the inbox.

But that second wave never came. Why? More

One GOP Senator Embraces an Obama Tactic His Party Recently Loathed

Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., leaves the Jefferson Hotel after having dinner with President Barack Obama and 11 other GOP senators on March 6. Corker wants Obama to use campaign-like events to sell a "grand bargain," a tactic the GOP recently panned. (Pete Marovich/Getty Images)

In big-time politics, a politician’s strength is, to his foes, a glaring weakness. Until, that is, a foe becomes something resembling an ally. Then the one-time foe touts the one-time weakness as the right tactic to make the issue that forged the alliance a reality.

Confused yet? Don’t be. This tangled web is merely the latest development in the posturing and prodding to strike a “grand bargain” fiscal deal that likely — probably, maybe — would replace the much-maligned sequestration cuts. Let’s untangle things to see just how quickly enemies can become allies. More

Sequestration, DoD, and the Federal-Deficit Sweet Spot

A U.S. national debt clock is seen at the 2012 Republican National Convention in Tampa, Fla., last August. (Harry E. Walker/MCT/via Getty Images)

For the Pentagon and U.S. defense sector, being so tethered to Washington’s broader debate about spending and the federal deficit has become something of a Catch-22.

That tethering — because politicians could not agree on how to replace a $500 billion cut to planned Defense Department spending — essentially caused the so-called sequestration cuts to be triggered March 1. Yet, there is no sense — for now, at least — on Capitol Hill that anything shy of a “grand bargain” fiscal deal that brings some finality to the deficit/spending debate will be offered to turn them off. More

‘Amigos’ of Senate Have Obama’s Ear. They Are — Officially — Back.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., calls on a reporter during a recent press conference. McCain and Graham have met twice with President Obama in recent days. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

Last month, your correspondent penned an article for the print version of Defense News that somewhat boldly declared the Senate’s “3 Amigos Are Back.”

GOP Sens. John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire were riding high, having just forced the White House into coughing up what Larry Korb of the Center for American Progress said was perhaps an unprecedented level of detail about a president’s actions before and after an attack on U.S. government personnel. And they led the charge in roughing up President Barack Obama’s choice for defense secretary, the since-confirmed Chuck Hagel.

But were the Amigos all the way the back? More

Will Obama’s Charm Offensive Produce ‘Big Deal’ Needed to Turn Off Sequester Cuts?

President Obama makes a call in the Oval Office. Since last weekend, Obama has been making calls to some Republican senators. One topic: a potential Big Deal that could undo big defense budget cuts. (White House photo via flickr)

What’s this odd thing breaking out in Washington? No, not the snow storm the experts say is coming (any minute now…), but Republicans and Democrats mingling, talking about policy and legislation? The president is phoning and planning to wine and dine some GOP lawmakers? Republican and Democratic senators walking together through a throng of reporters, audibly discussing policy?

It can mean only one thing: Pursuit of the “Big Deal” is back. And, for defense wonks, it just might be one of the few paths toward turning off the sequester mechanism — and its Pentagon spending cuts. More

Essay: Did Everyone Misread the Sequestration Narrative?

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., delivers remarks during a news conference with fellow House GOP leaders at the Republican Party Headquarters on Feb. 13 in Washington. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

This is it. The clock is again ticking down toward Washington’s latest, as so many are calling it, “self-inflicted crisis,” also known as sequestration.

But what if it is nothing of the sort? What if the conventional wisdom about sequestration created a flawed narrative? More

Back to top