Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced on Thursday a proposal to slash $78 billion from the defense budget over the next five years.

Under the proposal, the Army and Marine Corps would eliminate a total of 47,000 people—the first scaling back of ground forces since the 1990s. The Marine Corps will be the most heavily impacted by the cuts—shrinking by 10 percent (or 20,000 people). Surface-launched advanced medium-range air-to-air missiles and the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (an armored boat designed to move Marines rapidly onto shore) would also be axed.

Defense affairs analyst Thomas Donnelly at the American Enterprise Institute said, “This really calls into question the future of the Marine Corps, whether the Marine Corps can function as it has since World War ii as a kick-down-the-door force. The combined effect of the Marine Corps program cuts, weapons cuts and personnel cuts is to raise the question about whether the Marine Corps can continue this role.”

Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and potential presidential candidate John Bolton also responded negatively to the proposal. “We’ve got a lot of threats out there that we’re not ready for. Not just nuclear proliferation, but chemical and biological weapons,” he said. “This is not the time to cut back. I understand there’s a lot of pressure to get deficits down. I’m all in favor of it. But national security comes first, pure and simple, as far as I’m concerned.”

Congress must still approve the defense cuts, but the proposal alone reflects Washington’s shifting focus from national security to the budget deficit. After the previous round of defense cuts in August, the Trumpetpointed out the folly of the Pentagon’s direction.

Washington Post writer Max Boot wrote at that time, “It might still make sense to cut the defense budget—if it were bankrupting us and undermining our economic well-being. But that’s not the case. Defense spending is less than 4 percent of gross domestic product and less than 20 percent of the federal budget. That means our armed forces are much less costly in relative terms than they were throughout much of the 20th century. Even at roughly $549 billion, our core defense budget is eminently affordable. It is, in fact, a bargain considering the historic consequences of letting our guard down.”

Ironically, headlines about U.S. defense cuts coincided with headlines about China’s new stealth fighter. How symbolic as America descends from its superpower status to watch a Gentile power rise up quickly to take its place. Columnist Stephen Flurry wrote in August, “This lack of U.S. national will reflected in its diminishing emphasis on defense is destined to have far-reaching consequences. Already, nations around the world are acting differently as they become more and more comfortable challenging America. According to Bible prophecy, this trend will intensify until the U.S. becomes besieged.”