Iraq isn't the only war going on. Proposed cuts for the Georgia made F/A-22 Raptor & C-130J face battle in D.C. from Georgia delegation.

President Bush doesn't unveil his fiscal 2006 budget until next week, but he already faces strong opposition within his own party to Defense Department cuts that target marquee weapons systems.

Defense Department budget documents leaked in December propose cutting about $55 billion over six years from weapons programs, mostly in the Navy and Air Force. At the same time, the Army budget for weapons would rise by about $25 billion. But the stealth fighters, submarines and cargo planes on the chopping block have powerful Republican allies, who intend to protect their states -- and the military -- from the hit.

Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R., Ga.) says he understands the pressure to find savings, given the cost of the Iraq war and Mr. Bush's goal of halving the federal budget deficit, which rose to record levels during the president's first term. "They've got to find numbers," the freshman senator says of Defense Department bean counters. "I'm a budget hawk and I appreciate that."

Still, Sen. Chambliss wants major war hardware off the table. Lockheed Martin Corp. Corp. builds the F/A-22 Raptor, the Air Force's next-generation stealth fighter, and the C-130J cargo plane in Georgia. Proposed cuts to the two programs total $15 billion over six years. "We're in the middle of a war," says Sen. Chambliss, who is pressing the White House, the Office of Management and Budget and the Defense Department to "rethink the numbers. When you immediately look at cutting weapons systems first, I think that's the wrong approach."

As the military shifts its thinking on what sort of weapons will be needed to fight wars, senior Defense Department officials warn that these cuts are just the beginning. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who took office four years ago with the goal of transforming the military, wants to shift resources from big-ticket ships and aircraft such as the F/A-22 designed for conventional war to personnel and low-technology weapons needed to fight terrorists in guerrilla-style combat.

That pits military planners against Republican lawmakers who represent states -- particularly in the Southeast -- that stand to lose thousands of jobs. The battle is likely to escalate in coming months when the Defense Department unveils a quadrennial review of its long-term plans and a recently convened commission considers base closings.

The most vulnerable of the traditional programs may be shipbuilding.

[As discussed in a 01-17-05 post, the Navy is considering mothballing the carrier USS John F. Kennedy as part of its plan to reduce the carrier force from 12 to 11.]

(02-01-05 wsj.)
_______________

Rumsfeld is right on what he is about, and we will see more of his influence as BRAC unveils this year.

Rumsfeld and Cheney botched Iraq big-time; they would not listen to Colin Powell who has been there and done that in military matters.

But Rumseld very much understands and is the architect of preparing our military for the years to come. He wants to make it meaner and leaner, and more mobile so that it can move out on moment's notice.

He knows that it is tough to cut major weapons systems, and that it will take time. But he is starting.

What about Georgia and all our jobs with Lockheed Martin?

The F/A-22 is a likely survivor because the Air Force considers it a top priority. And cutting the C-130 at this particular time is going to be a tough sell because of the strain to the military-transport system in Iraq. Bottom line: on this hardware, Georgia jobs avoid a hit.

But BRAC still looms . . .