Military Review

US defense budget for 2017 g can be reduced

33
US military spending in the 2017-th fiscal year may be reduced and amount to $ 580 billion, transmits RIA News Reuters message.




It is noted that this amount is $ 27 billion less than that approved by the legislators for the current year. According to the agency, "it is this amount that will be indicated in the budget proposal of US President Barack Obama."

Moreover, "this is 15 billion dollars less than the Pentagon had originally planned," Reuters said, adding that in this case, the military will have to cut some major programs.

"(Secretary of Defense) Ashton Carter would like to direct part of this money to the creation of new generation fighter jets, submarines, and also to increase the effectiveness of the actions of the American military in cyberspace," said Politico.

The draft budget for 2017 will be officially presented by the White House 9 February. After that, he will go to the discussion in Congress.

The defense budget for the current year amounted to more than $ 607 billion.
Photos used:
EPA / TOM REYNOLDS / TASS
33 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Inok10
    Inok10 27 January 2016 12: 04
    +6
    .. mattress covers have been dealt .. laughing .. did the printing press break? .. wink
    1. Ami du peuple
      Ami du peuple 27 January 2016 12: 07
      +4
      Quote: Inok10
      .. mattress covers have been dealt .. laughing

      Well, they did it. So what? All the same, they have an exorbitant military budget. The declared five percent sequestration is a fairly small amount (although this reduction is 2/3 of Russian defense spending). The question is the rationality of spending such astronomical sums. And with this, the United States is far from all right.
      1. Pig
        Pig 27 January 2016 12: 28
        0
        "" Well, we spent a bit. So what? They still have an exorbitant military budget ""
        it's good ... faster resources run out! exorbitant military spending tore the USSR well now the US
        1. Aleksandr69
          Aleksandr69 27 January 2016 12: 34
          0
          one or two percent is enough for them to create a ring of "fires" around Russia ...
          We will have to "extinguish" them proportionally, but there are not always enough funds for this
        2. Hon
          Hon 27 January 2016 13: 32
          0
          Quote: Pig
          it's good ... faster resources run out! exorbitant military spending tore the USSR well now the US

          for 2014, US defense spending of 620 billion, which equals 3,5% of GDP, Russia's spending 84 billion 4,5% of GDP. By 2016, the US economy has grown and stagnation in Russia, so for whom are exorbitant costs?
    2. kil 31
      kil 31 27 January 2016 12: 08
      0
      Ashton Carter would like to spend part of this money on the creation of a new generation of fighters, submarines, as well as on improving the effectiveness of the US military in cyberspace, ”the publication Politico clarifies.
      Well, they’ll leave money for the plane and submarines, but they probably won’t buy new computers.
    3. Finches
      Finches 27 January 2016 12: 09
      +1
      Now the pinny .. generals will conquer that they were deprived of their livelihood, and they will start to frighten the inhabitants with a Russian bear who is about to burst into the white and fluffy USA and gobble up all the babies! laughing
      1. amirbek
        amirbek 27 January 2016 12: 30
        +1
        degemotov’s vicious games say end ... on the way preparatory nastaldzhirezhirovanie to cowboy times
    4. vlad66
      vlad66 27 January 2016 12: 28
      14
      Damn the mattresses, would you regret that McCain’s senility, because he will hang himself from anger. fellow
  2. newcomer
    newcomer 27 January 2016 12: 09
    +4
    I wonder if this reduction f35? or it’s just dust in the eyes, the programs for the top of the pentagon are decreasing.
    1. Lt. Air Force stock
      Lt. Air Force stock 27 January 2016 12: 17
      0
      Quote: newbie
      I wonder if this reduction f35? or it’s just dust in the eyes, the programs for the top of the pentagon are decreasing.

      In the fall, there was an article in the Western media in which McCain himself admitted that they would not be able to produce 2443 F-35s for money.
  3. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 27 January 2016 12: 09
    +1
    The more it shrinks, the better for the whole World.
  4. A1L9E4K9S
    A1L9E4K9S 27 January 2016 12: 14
    +1
    Well, for them, these twenty-seven lard, a grain of sand on the beach, you think the printing press will work for two weeks in two shifts.
  5. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 27 January 2016 12: 14
    0
    Down and Out trouble started. So, and not once a year, but once a month. You look, and the world will become calm.
    1. amirbek
      amirbek 27 January 2016 12: 45
      0
      one misfortune does not roll its kents let it drag
  6. V.ic
    V.ic 27 January 2016 12: 15
    +2
    It would be nice if there was no need to cut back on the budget and USA.
  7. russmensch
    russmensch 27 January 2016 12: 27
    +1
    But the crisis and nicknames are not sickly. Previously, for our containment and ruin, they only inflated defense spending. Today is not it ... Balloons are blown away ...
    1. Hon
      Hon 27 January 2016 13: 37
      0
      Quote: russmensch
      But the crisis and nicknames are not sickly. Previously, for our containment and ruin, they only inflated defense spending. Today is not it ... Balloons are blown away ...

      in 2015, the US economy grew by about 5%, which is a very good indicator for a developed state. how did the crisis strike at them?
      1. V.ic
        V.ic 27 January 2016 19: 01
        0
        Quote: Hon
        in 2015, the US economy grew by about 5%, which is a very good indicator,

        Of course, they installed five new machines for printing dollars and another machine for cutting sheets into banknotes.
  8. Andrey_Antonov
    Andrey_Antonov 27 January 2016 12: 27
    0
    Here, damn bad luck. What will they cut now?
  9. Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 27 January 2016 12: 30
    0
    Interestingly, how much would the military budget be if the state were deficit-free? If you spent only what you really earned? What would be circumcised - a populist social network or military-industrial complex?
  10. midashko
    midashko 27 January 2016 12: 32
    0
    Good news.
    But in light of the appreciation of the dollar, in the light of the fact that part of the components are being purchased in other countries (for example, titanium components for aircraft in Russia), will not such a small reduction actually increase financing?
    That is, did not the strengthening of the dollar make it possible to fulfill all the plans and plans of the Pentagon with less money, to save, and to release the released funds, say, for financing the CIA?
  11. pts-m
    pts-m 27 January 2016 12: 33
    0
    Yes, it’s necessary to build a pendeostan for all kinds of fantastic projects by introducing into their sphere the “Russian” warehouse managers and dvoeshniks from universities.
  12. APASUS
    APASUS 27 January 2016 12: 35
    +4
    Now we will witness the amazing SHOW in essence fellow repeat , American generals, politicians and analysts lobbying the interests of the Pentagon will begin to give long analytical speeches and praises to Russian weapons, the power of the Russian army, and in every way to doubt the capabilities of the US Army crying .Russian weapons will step forward in various ratings and publications in the press, in a place with the ability of our state to achieve its goals MILITARY tongue
    At the end of the submission, the senators, worried about the fall in security before an unimaginable force, simply OBLIGATE to take the Pentagon financial resources to develop and equip the US army with advanced weapons in the right amount.
    The whole circle closed.
    Although this concert is for the inner ear and eye, it’s sometimes interesting to see how the financial system in the USA works request .
    1. Stirbjorn
      Stirbjorn 27 January 2016 12: 51
      -3
      Quote: APASUS
      Russian weapons will step forward in all kinds of ratings and publications in the press, in a place with the ability of our state to achieve its goals MILITARY
      And how many, at cheers-patriotic posts, here the marshals will increase soldier laughing
      1. APASUS
        APASUS 27 January 2016 14: 44
        0
        Quote: Stirbjorn
        And how many, at cheers-patriotic posts, here the marshals will increase

        Who did I promise to throw hats here, can you explain?
        And so that it does not look like tryndezh
        “The risk of war in Europe has never been greater after the end of the Cold War than it is today,” writes Andrew Micht, professor at the US Naval College, in Politico. Despite “harsh rhetoric” and “warnings” to Vladimir Putin from NATO leaders, the general combat readiness of Europe does not correspond to the level of danger, the expert believes
        According to Micht, after many years of military budget cuts, Europe provides only a quarter of NATO’s defense capabilities, and some countries are unable to conduct military operations outside their borders if necessary. “There is no doubt that the military weakness of Europe played a role in Russia's plans, not only during the annexation of Crimea and the aggravation of the situation in the Donbass, but also in the 2008 war against Georgia,” the author of Politico believes. According to Micht, it was precisely the weakness of Europe that allowed Putin to succeed in "restoring the Russian sphere of influence in Eastern Europe."

        This analysis just appeared by the redeployment of American troops to the Baltic states, under the guise of exercises that will last a whole year.
        What is my URA-patriotism here do not tell my dear?
        1. Stirbjorn
          Stirbjorn 27 January 2016 18: 37
          0
          Quote: APASUS
          Who did I promise to throw hats here, can you explain?
          And so that it does not look like tryndezh

          I'm not talking about you at all. Check out any comments on a topic where some American general talks about "the resurgent Russian power." And which are teeming with cheers-slogans, about the Anglo-Saxons, and so on, with a bunch of enthusiastic pluses.
          1. Stirbjorn
            Stirbjorn 28 January 2016 08: 52
            0
            You don’t need to follow an example, a fresh article http://topwar.ru/89930-the-national-interest-vklyuchil-podvodnyy-flot-rf-v-chisl
            o-glavnyh-ugroz-dlya-vms-ssha.html
  13. shelva
    shelva 27 January 2016 12: 43
    0
    Quote: Ami du peuple
    The question is the rationality of spending such astronomical sums. And with this, the United States is far from all right.

    Nothing, they still draw themselves, this green paper is untranslatable. It is already a question of raising the public debt ceiling, so another release of legitimate fakes in the foreign exchange market is expected.
  14. Alexez
    Alexez 27 January 2016 12: 50
    0
    Reduced by less than 5% and noise by 100% ... As a result of the entire show, the program will increase the budget in proportion to the "planned reduction"!
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 27 January 2016 13: 07
      0
      Obama is cutting his military budget for the sixth consecutive year.
      He vowed to cut federal debt - a stubborn fellow ... belay
      1. Mikhail Krapivin
        Mikhail Krapivin 27 January 2016 13: 37
        0
        His successors are unlikely to appreciate it. Woe to the vanquished, in this case, to the departed. All the same, all the dogs will be hanged on him. And not closed Guantanamo will not be forgotten.
  15. kostyan77708
    kostyan77708 27 January 2016 13: 04
    0
    Quote: APASUS
    Now we will witness the amazing SHOW in essence fellow repeat , American generals, politicians and analysts lobbying the interests of the Pentagon will begin to give long analytical speeches and praises to Russian weapons, the power of the Russian army, and in every way to doubt the capabilities of the US Army crying .Russian weapons will step forward in various ratings and publications in the press, in a place with the ability of our state to achieve its goals MILITARY tongue
    At the end of the submission, the senators, worried about the fall in security before an unimaginable force, simply OBLIGATE to take the Pentagon financial resources to develop and equip the US army with advanced weapons in the right amount.
    The whole circle closed.
    Although this concert is for the inner ear and eye, it’s sometimes interesting to see how the financial system in the USA works request .

    Let them give their speeches and so on, advertising will not be superfluous to our weapons (although Syria does not really need it, Syria is an example), so long as they gums wrinkle contracts to us there will not be superfluous