Just as it looks as if the United States is being dragged back into conflict with radical Islam, the U.S. Congress is poised to fire 25% of the military’s Generals and Admirals.
The reasons for this mass-purge of high ranking military officials has raised many eyebrows across the country and even within the ranks of congress. Those in support of the bill can’t even seem to get the reason straight.
Some are saying the reduction is a necessary course adjustment in relation to the size of the military, while others are claiming that the number won’t change at all. Instead, they’re claiming that the mass layoffs are serving a different purpose — one that serves the ideological needs of the Obama administration and congress.
The United States Congress is nearing completion on a bill that would reduce the number of Generals and Admirals serving in the military, but they can’t seem to agree on why:
The 2017 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) as summarized by the Senate Armed Services Committee proposes a 25 percent reduction in Generals and Admirals across the board.
A summary of the bill provided by the committee states the drawdown in general officers also applies at the 3, 2, and 1 star levels. The committee reasons that “Over the past 30 years, the end-strength of the joint force has decreased 38 percent, but the ratio of four-star officers to the overall force has increased by 65 percent.”
Senator Tim Kaine expressed concern over the reduction in general officers, telling Military.com, “Twenty-five percent was the number that was pulled out of thin air.” The NDAA states that the 25 percent number was agreed upon only by “careful consideration of the existing size of the general and flag officer corps in each service, as well as its unique requirements.”
The bill summary explains that by making heavy cuts at the three and four star level, it can “allow the services a broader base to develop future leaders.” The summary also cites budget concerns as a reason for the reduction, saying the Pentagon must proactively work to “shift as many personnel as possible from staff functions to operational and other vital roles.”
Of course, none of the listed reasons may represent the true intentions of the government. After all, it falls in line with Obama’s recent efforts to fire hundreds of high-ranking officials over the past five years.