Goodbye Mildenhall

[Prosuper]

I've noticed that most base CC's usually unrated types are the ones driving this, they have X amounts of funds and the first place they cut is services on transients. Most TA's are contractors who bidded bottom dollar who cut pay,staffing, and hours so they are useless now along with transportation and billeting.

Edited January 10, 2015 by Prosuper

[M2]

Life After the Americans

[Guest]

http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=5563

Q: [...] following this week's announcement about the European base consolidation, is the Pentagon going to make any other different pitches to Congress about its request to close bases in the United States? Or is it going to make the same basic appeal that it has in the past, that this would save money, and it makes sense to do, even though a lot of members of Congress clearly don't agree because they haven't permitted that process to go forward?

REAR ADM. KIRBY: [...] nothing has changed about this department's view, Secretary Hagel's view, that another round of BRAC is required. You know, we're operating right now with what we think is about a 25 percent excess infrastructure here in the Continental United States. And we simply can't afford that. And it's -- it's unnecessary. So, nothing's changed about our position, and another round of BRAC required. And I suspect you'll see that -- that be part of the discussion moving forward into February.

Q: So, does he think and does the department think that the European process announced this week will strengthen the Pentagon's hand when it goes up to the Hill and says, "We've already started this overseas. Now, we have no excuse not to do it here at home"?

REAR ADM. KIRBY: I don't think so, Phil. That wasn't the intent for the European infrastructure consolidation. Wasn't -- wasn't being used -- it wasn't intended to be used as some sort of leverage for domestic BRAC. There are completely two separate processes altogether.

Now, it is the same idea. You want to reduce infrastructure to meet your requirement and your resources. And that's what we're trying to do in Europe. That is exactly what we would -- we want to do here in the United States. But it's a different process altogether. And certainly, the one should not be construed as aiding or assisting or trying to improve our chances of doing the other. We obviously -- as the secretary has made clear, we want to work with Congress to effect another round of BRAC.

We know this is not an easy thing for the Congress to take up and to deal with. We know these are not easy decisions to make. The secretary wants very much to work with the Congress as we move forward to try to get another round of BRAC. It really is necessary.

Deflecting and denying that the European Infrastructure Consolidation (EIC) is related to BRAC plans is obviously a lie, but a lie that must be told. The DOD can't overtly talk about political moves (despite the core motivation being apolitically logistic and financial). Anyway, people are connecting the dots despite the rebuffing. BRAC will be in the national conversation as we build towards the 2016 elections. I'm supremely interested to see if it gathers steam, especially with a Republican majority in the Houses, sizaeable Tea Party caucuses, and a term-limited President.

Here's my speculation: The stars align and a BRAC authorization passes in early 2016, allowing 2018-2020 committee studies, HASC and SASC release findings and recommendations in 2021 as the EIC is in its' final stages. Final BRAC measures approved in 2022 and bases begin shuttering in 2024, finalizing in 2030. Do I win a tinfoil hat?