One of the longer op-eds ever posted here but right on the money. If one knows of it, one can only use a faded memory of a former Republican president who warned us of the dire consequences to the United States of the military-inductrial complex.
The president should recommend a panel be established of political outsiders, they go over the defense budget with a fine tooth comb...and they have one year to complete the job. I think and believe the defense budget can safely be cut by a minimum of 25% with dollars being directed to where they are actually needed and most effective.
It seems to me the hard decisions, the brutality of the bacon-slashing, is less a public service battle for efficiency than the rising and setting stars over various gangs in power at Pentagon and within the congressional committees. It is like watching the small but powerful mafias settle scores, and every once in a while there is a dramatic shift in territory, but in the end everything that can be consumed by the system is consumed.
We study military acquisition and reform by looking at the personalities and prior connections of the key people in largely appointed positions. This is the only way to make sense of it -- as real defensive and even offensive capability against real or likely enemies has been irrelevant for over fifty years, perhaps more. 9/11 stands as the iconic example of that defenselessness -- the gaping hole in the Pentagon as undeniable metaphor of the US defense spending program. The process Winslow and others must use to assess policy and spending in defense is revealing as to the core problem -- it is how we used to study the Soviet Union -- the only way to get major change in spending, for our defense establishment as for the old USSR, is degradation followed by total collapse. How can we accelerate the collapse of the defense establishment? Through extended, costly and unpopular wars, overall federal poverty, and the rise of mercenary services and mindsets. Oops.
An impressive editorial - but the solution is/would be very painful indeed.
Fundamentally - the government (and therefore taxpayers) are getting hosed, and DDE definitly hit the nail on the head when it came to the dire warnings w/r/t the military industrial complex. The other problem this nation faces is that of lobbying, which is completely out of control as well. IMO, both issues have to be addressed, preferably lobbying first because that'll make reforms much easier in the houses of representatives if they don't have all the extraneous noise, etc, from the lobbyists distracting them or otherwise preventing progress.
But overall, the defense acquisition "system" (such as it is) needs to be extirpated and replaced with one similar to that used by the British (sans the latest scandal!). They use a defense/threat review board (containing experts from military, foreign service, intelligence, and civilian sectors) that reviews potential threats, devises strategies to defeat them, and determines what resources (hardware, systems, people) are required to defeat them. That removes much of the politics and prevents direct interfearence from the legislators because all they can do is provide funding. For the most part - it has worked for the British much better than our system has worked for the United States.
Another thing we could do, is remove "cost-plus" - a relic of WW2. Also, eliminate bonuses for non-performance (over budget, late delivery, etc), and put an end to constant changing of requirements during the build process that is the basis of so many overruns to accomodate every new toy that arises.
Reform would be easy. Leave the lobbyist, the Admirals and Generals waiting for high pay paying jobs with defense contractors after they retire. Along with members of congress. Let the senior NCO's and CPO's along with the LTCOL's and CMDR's who are on the front lines leading our brave young men/women decide what the pentagon needs to buy and what the priorities are.After all, they are the ones with everything to loose if the wrong items are purshased
Well, you pretty much have it right. Perhaps if we had a few people who would or should study what happened to the Soviet Union, we may learn some valuable lessons that could be applied to the US situation. A large national debt has never done any country in the history of man any good...spending beyond ones means also applies to nations. What we need is someone who will finally stand up and denounce the changes to our tax code since 1972. Amazing how America produced millionaires, establishment new and steady growth of numerous companies and corporations, economic growth that benefitted millions...and with a tax code some today would deem catastrophic if we returned to it. Never in the history of mankind had the world seen or witnessed the economic growth and success of a nation as was seen in the US between 1946 to 1972! And with a tax code that today would be considered confiscatory! It is no secret the US is failing due to the advent of lobbyists and their increasing power since 1972. Add the fact the Supreme Court ruled a corporation is equal to a human with equivalent rights and according to some, more rights than an individual...it created a recipe for economic disaster...and what we have witnessed in the past two years to the present is living proof of our governments failure to establish a rational tax structure that would serve all of us more fairly and remedy our economic dilemma. Until they do, we will continue to see economic disasters appear more and more frequently, intervals will be much shorter and eventually, we will indeed witness a Soviet Union type of economic collapse.
S/F Gordon _____________________________________________
quote:
Originally posted by 18863920: It seems to me the hard decisions, the brutality of the bacon-slashing, is less a public service battle for efficiency than the rising and setting stars over various gangs in power at Pentagon and within the congressional committees. It is like watching the small but powerful mafias settle scores, and every once in a while there is a dramatic shift in territory, but in the end everything that can be consumed by the system is consumed.
We study military acquisition and reform by looking at the personalities and prior connections of the key people in largely appointed positions. This is the only way to make sense of it -- as real defensive and even offensive capability against real or likely enemies has been irrelevant for over fifty years, perhaps more. 9/11 stands as the iconic example of that defenselessness -- the gaping hole in the Pentagon as undeniable metaphor of the US defense spending program. The process Winslow and others must use to assess policy and spending in defense is revealing as to the core problem -- it is how we used to study the Soviet Union -- the only way to get major change in spending, for our defense establishment as for the old USSR, is degradation followed by total collapse. How can we accelerate the collapse of the defense establishment? Through extended, costly and unpopular wars, overall federal poverty, and the rise of mercenary services and mindsets. Oops.
Could not agree more with your synopsis...accuarate in every respect.
S/F Gordon ____________________________________________
quote:
Originally posted by PolicyWonk: An impressive editorial - but the solution is/would be very painful indeed.
Fundamentally - the government (and therefore taxpayers) are getting hosed, and DDE definitly hit the nail on the head when it came to the dire warnings w/r/t the military industrial complex. The other problem this nation faces is that of lobbying, which is completely out of control as well. IMO, both issues have to be addressed, preferably lobbying first because that'll make reforms much easier in the houses of representatives if they don't have all the extraneous noise, etc, from the lobbyists distracting them or otherwise preventing progress.
But overall, the defense acquisition "system" (such as it is) needs to be extirpated and replaced with one similar to that used by the British (sans the latest scandal!). They use a defense/threat review board (containing experts from military, foreign service, intelligence, and civilian sectors) that reviews potential threats, devises strategies to defeat them, and determines what resources (hardware, systems, people) are required to defeat them. That removes much of the politics and prevents direct interfearence from the legislators because all they can do is provide funding. For the most part - it has worked for the British much better than our system has worked for the United States.
Another thing we could do, is remove "cost-plus" - a relic of WW2. Also, eliminate bonuses for non-performance (over budget, late delivery, etc), and put an end to constant changing of requirements during the build process that is the basis of so many overruns to accomodate every new toy that arises.
Everyone should read the book The Path to Victory by Donald Vandergriff. It is about the past and current structure of our military and pretty much containes the reasons why so many field grade officers and stars wind up with defense jobs after their stint in the military.
S/F Gordon ____________________________________________
quote:
Originally posted by donnieburke: Reform would be easy. Leave the lobbyist, the Admirals and Generals waiting for high pay paying jobs with defense contractors after they retire. Along with members of congress. Let the senior NCO's and CPO's along with the LTCOL's and CMDR's who are on the front lines leading our brave young men/women decide what the pentagon needs to buy and what the priorities are.After all, they are the ones with everything to loose if the wrong items are purshased
