The money observation from the President’s plan to split the drawdown baby in Afghanistan:
Nor should the president shy away from establishing the centrality of the U.S. economy in U.S. national security. Saving money in Afghanistan is nothing to run away from, as White House press secretary Jay Carney sought to do last week. “Obviously every decision is made with a mind toward cost,” he said, “but this is about U.S. national-security interests, primarily.”
Quite the contrary—reducing America’s debt is essential to maintaining U.S. military strength and diplomatic power. Obama could save more than $100 billion a year on the Pentagon budget just by sequestering savings after exiting the Iraq and Afghan wars.
National security: if it ain’t funded, it ain’t.
However, I’d guess the “savings” from Iraq and Afghanistan have probably already been accounted for. This is because of the inauditable and creative nature of government accounting where reductions in growth rates are cuts and savings (or is that cuts?) are almost always in the the out years (and are projected on assumptions like reduced inflation rates, military members serving less time, making more of their own retirement/medical contributions, etc.).