On the recordFebruary 18, 2011
The gentleman from Colorado says that there is no strategic rationale for these troops; but, in fact, there is no strategic rationale for this amendment. This amendment is completely arbitrary in the cuts that are proposed, and there is no basis for these levels of cuts that are proposed. In fact, the strategic rationale is for the support of our troops that are currently serving in Europe. Secretary Gates just Wednesday appeared before the Armed Services Committee; and while he was there, he testified that it is the presence of our military on the ground in Europe and other places that assures our allies and provides a deterrent effect to would-be aggressors. These troops are not just staring down a past Soviet Union. They are, in fact, providing wartime support currently. They are also providing an effective deterrent both for our allies and for the United States. This amendment would reduce the Army by more than 5,000, the Navy by more than 500 and the Air Force by more than 5,000 from programmed end-strength levels for fiscal year 2011. These are planned troop deployments and presence. This is not something that was done 10 years ago. The limits on this end strength would damage wartime operational capability. To reduce manpower halfway through the fiscal year would likely require the abrupt involuntary separation of many servicemembers, sending the message, thank you for your service, but now please leave.
