Quantcast
  

Thursday, April 17, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 12 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

Army cuts result in net gain for Hawaii

By William Cole

POSTED:
LAST UPDATED: 09:41 a.m. HST, Jun 25, 2013

Army soldiers ran out of a helicopter after landing at Marine Corps Training Area Bellows during training exercises last week. Soldiers with the 3rd Brigade Combat Team from Schofield practiced air assault via helicopter at Bellows and moving through a mock Afghan village as they prepare for a deployment to Afghanistan.

Hawaii will gain about 165 soldiers under an Army-wide reorganization that will cut the force from 570,000 soldiers in 2010 to 490,000 by the end of 2017 — a 14 percent reduction across the Army, military officials announced today.

Army brigades of about 3,500 soldiers each will inactivate in Texas, North Carolina, Kentucky, Colorado, New York, Kansas, Georgia and Washington state — with some states seeing a reduction of two brigades. Two brigades in Germany also will be inactivated this year.

The Army will drop from 45 brigade combat teams to 33 overall.

The Army said the reductions reflect reduced budgets, including the 2011 Budget Control Act (separate from sequestration cuts) that trimmed Defense Department budget by $485 billion.

"I am very pleased that the Army decided to leave its force structure in Hawaii untouched for the near future," said U.S. Sen. Mazie Hirono. "This is important because the Army along with the other branches of the armed forces will play a critical role in President Obama's strategy to rebalance to the Pacific. I will continue to work closely with my Senate Armed Services colleagues to ensure that our military has the capability to fulfill this national security imperative."

Schofield Barracks is expected to receive about 110 more soldiers as a result of the reorganization, while Fort Shafter would get about 55 more soldiers.

Brigades at Schofield will gain enhanced engineer and firepower capability, the Army said.







 Print   Email   Comment | View 12 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

COMMENTS
(12)
You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
allie wrote:
Hawaii needs the military spending as it lacks alternatives.
on June 25,2013 | 09:46AM
808comp wrote:
Got to agree with you here. Lots of money is being spent by the military and their personnel. To bad they don't have a small unit up in Pohakuloa Traning Area.
on June 25,2013 | 12:56PM
paintslinger wrote:
'Net gain for Hawaii?' I don't think so. Continuing to stuff this Island with military personel and their families is doing nothing but putting additional burdens on our infrastructure. If the Military wants to do something for us..tell them to fix the bloody roads; our own city people can't seem to get it done. There is so much military here Oahu is starting to feel like its being occupied. Enough already.
on June 25,2013 | 09:48AM
Ewaduffer wrote:
The state of Wisconsin does not have any military bases if you feel the situation here gets unbearable.
on June 25,2013 | 10:08AM
jrboi96786 wrote:
are you sure they don't have military base over there. because in two weeks i'm on my way there for exercise.
on June 25,2013 | 11:37AM
jrboi96786 wrote:
first of all. military money is the only thing that moves hawaii forward. huge work forces here in hawaii is the result of putting the military here. if it wasn't for the military bases here almost half of the population wont have any jobs or any jobs that would probably pay them between $75,000 to $100,000 or more every year. so be thankful because these Soldiers is probably translate to more jobs. hawaii became the 50th state because of its military strategic location nothing else because it has nothing to offer when it comes to natural resources. no we didn't choose to be here, we was told to go here, so don't blame the troops.
on June 25,2013 | 11:46AM
allie wrote:
yup
on June 25,2013 | 12:26PM
paintslinger wrote:
Hey, jrboi96786--seriously, pay attention, I did not imply you soldiers are here because you decided to be here. And yes, everyone is aware that the military conglomerate that exists in the Islands employs a lot of people. ..but it doesn't employ 'half the population'...tourism does though, directly or indirectly. And everytime someone suggests that we have way too much military here, people like you rise up to defend its presence by pulling the economic thing out of you pocket. What you are saying is if the military were not here, in its over inflated proportions that exists now, that nothing else could take its place, no industry, no enterprise would come here to employ people---which is non-sense. The vast military footprint in Hawaii, drives up housing costs, inflates the population and as far as being the 50th State, the only thing that insures is that the State government cannot control who and how many people move here...which has resulted in a concrete fiasco that is assuring an ever widening gap between the haves and have nots.
on June 25,2013 | 12:55PM
paintslinger wrote:
I want to be clear though, I'm not anti-military..Im anti too much military on this Island. Thats all.
on June 25,2013 | 12:59PM
paintslinger wrote:
'Lacks alternatives?' I'll give you some. Reduce the enormous size of already military owned/ used land on this island and use it to grow food! We import over 70% of everything we eat! How about that for an alternative?
on June 25,2013 | 09:54AM
AmbienDaze wrote:
hey, paintslinger, good job, thumbs up.
on June 25,2013 | 01:12PM
HD36 wrote:
Have to agree with you too. The government's historical borrowing binge is coming to an end. Rates on the US Treasury have gone from under 3.0 at the begging of the year to 3.61, despite the Federal Reserve loaning the government $85 billion a month. If they get to 5%, still low historically, the millitary line item budget will drop below the interest payments on the $17 trillion dollar debt. If we can't borrow more money to pay the interest on the money we borrowed before that, we're in for some seriouse government cutbacks.
on June 25,2013 | 04:02PM
IN OTHER NEWS
Breaking News