I get what you're saying, but with F-35 unit costs eclipsing $337 million each I'm not really feeling like the place to start cutting is the support and pension structure for the guys who signed up to get shot at. I mean, let's just look at this from a pilot/plane perspective. The machinery with the landing gear costs more than the latest Transformers movie each. It burns more in gas just getting it from the hangar to the runway than the pilot's pension will cost in six months. Never mind what it costs if one of them crashes. I want that pilot fat'n'happy, thank you very much. The primary thing that sets the US military apart from all others is an all-professional fighting force - the tech is just gravy.
I agree that it's the wrong place to begin cutting; these benefits are the primary draw of enlistment. But we still have a large OIF/OEF force that is transitioning to civilian now and in the near future. These compensation benefits are relatively new in their advertisement -- a lot of Vietnam era veterans don't even know about them, whereas every modern veteran is doing their best to receive the most of them. Pensions are a drop in the well compared to them, since very few of them are willing to stay in for 20 years. And they are long-term. I think the concern is that these costs will dig into our ability to maintain the most advanced military force, in which Reapers will eventually replace F-35s. I think they'd rather tech be the main dish.