1) War is not conventional anymore. Having (and paying for) a standing army is not necessary like it used to be. Having fewer, more specialized forces is worth more than deploying a whole army. This has been the trend since Vietnam. You mean to say that we cant have the army you want even though we are outspending the next 10 countries combined?
2) "The reasons behind the grounding of these aircraft include the toll of long wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the fight against ISIS. These planes were returning from 15 years of war, suffering from overuse and extreme wear and tear. Many highly trained mechanics in the aviation depots left for jobs in the private sector."
--Fox News.
Thats not to say that this point doesnt have merit. But why fix them unless they are needed?
3) Maybe this money could have been spent more wisely. See also: A significant amount of defense spending (HFS needs an audit)
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/07/littoral-combat-ship-congress-navy-pentagon-400-million-pork-214009
Look, the U.S. military spending has dropped from $691 billion in 2010 to $560 billion in 2015, and that will take a toll upon returning from war. But I dont understand how Republicans want spending cuts, less govt, and more accountability for every branch of govt EXCEPT defense, which is widely known to be the least accountable with the money it is given. Makes no sense to me.