The NYT had a peculiar front page article in which it portrayed Defense Secretary Robert Gates as a budget cutter even though he wants to increase the defense budget by 1.0 percent a year in excess of inflation. It notes that he doesn't want the government to buy some of the weapons system being pushed by Congress. It then comments:
"In one of the paradoxes of Washington budget battles, Mr. Gates, even as he tries to forestall deeper cuts, is trying to kill weapons programs he says the military does not need over the objections of members of Congress who want to protect jobs."
It is not clear what the article views as paradoxical. Increasing the defense budget by 1.0 percent a year in excess of inflation does not imply an austere budget. Nonetheless it also doesn't imply an infinite budget. There is nothing paradoxical about the defense secretary having to set priorities in this context.
The article also includes the peculiar comment that defense spending:
"has averaged an inflation-adjusted growth rate of 7 percent a year over the last decade (nearly 12 percent a year without adjusting for inflation), including the costs of the wars."
Inflation has not averaged anywhere near 5 percent over the last decade, so the 12 percent nominal growth rate is inconsistent with the 7 percent real growth rate.
(Only one link allowed per comment)