Defense Secretary Leon Panetta defends a leaner military

WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon's new plan to cut defense spending means a reduction of 100,000 troops, the retiring of ships and planes and closing of bases — moves that the Defense secretary said would not compromise security.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said Thursday the budget represents the "tough budget choices" needed to reach $487 billion in cuts over 10 years. Panetta said the plan entails risk, but that U.S. forces will remain capable of beating "any adversary, anytime, anywhere."

Critics on Capitol Hill disagreed. The troop reductions "are potentially devastating to our national security," said Sen. Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., a member of the Armed Services Committee. "These reductions are the result of budget pressure, not what is best for America's security."

The cuts must be approved by Congress. And defense spending faces an added $500 billion in cuts in 2013 if Congress does not reach a budget deal with President Obama, who is insisting tax hikes be part of any deal. Among the cuts:

•The Army would lose 80,000 soldiers, for an active-duty force of 490,000. There would be 20,000 fewer Marines, down to 182,000.

•The Air Force would buy fewer of its new fighter, the F-35, and scrap 92 cargo planes and jets. The Navy would lose seven cruisers.

•Pay raises will be limited beginning in 2015, and health care fees for retirees will rise.

•Two Army brigades in Europe will be eliminated, and Obama will ask Congress to begin another round of base closings in the USA.

Funding for special operations forces, such as those involved in the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, will continue to grow as will the military's fleet of drones. There is also funding for a new-generation bomber capable of penetrating modern air defense systems like that of China.

"Capability is more important than size," said Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. "This budget does not lead to a military in decline. Rather, it matches capabilities to needs."

But some experts said size matters a lot. "The problems of the past 10 years were not insufficient quality, but insufficient quantity," said Thomas Donnelly, an analyst with the American Enterprise Institute. "Let's hope we never have to respond to more than one thing at a time."