Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(108,035 posts)
Thu Feb 28, 2013, 07:05 PM Feb 2013

Five Military Cuts That Would Fix Sequestration

1. Ground the glitch-ridden F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program. The F-35 was supposed to produce state-of-the-art stealth jets. It is seven years behind schedule and 70 percent over cost estimates. At almost $400 billion, the F-35 has become the most expensive weapons system in U.S. history and one that offers only marginal improvements over existing aircraft, according to Barry Blechman, co-founder of the Stimson Center, a nonprofit policy institute in Washington. (On Friday, the Pentagon grounded its nascent 51-plane fleet of F-35s after discovering a cracked engine blade in one jet.) The F-35 is “worth killing, particularly given its technical problems,” Blechman said. “Putting the F-35 into production years before the first flight test was acquisition malpractice,” Frank Kendall, the Pentagon’s acquisition undersecretary, said in February 2012. So, um, let’s do something about it, Frank.

2. While we’re at it, how about parking the Ground Combat Vehicle? With wind-downs in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army’s strength is due to decline by some 72,000 by 2017. Still, we’re poised to spend as much as $32 billion to buy 1,904 new Ground Combat Vehicles, tank-like replacements for the Bradley Fighting Vehicle. What the Army actually needs is improved, smaller vehicles to get modest-sized forces into trouble spots with greater alacrity. The 70-ton Ground Combat Vehicle won’t be easily transportable by air or sea, raising questions about “how quickly it could be deployed in the event of a conflict,” according to a report (PDF) issued in January by the Congressional Research Service.

3. On the topic of Army gas-guzzlers: Even the generals admit that they don’t want or need an updated version of the familiar M1 combat tank. The M1 was originally built to face off against Soviet tanks in a land war in Europe, which thankfully never happened. Congress, however, intends to keep doling out billions to gut and renovate old M1s. That makes no sense.

4. Dock the Littoral Combat Ship. The Navy is building two versions of the troubled vessel that was once billed as a low-cost, versatile coastal patrol ship. The LCS has doubled in price, to more than $440 million a ship. Evaluators have determined that its guns aren’t effective, meaning it might not survive in combat.

5. Excess bureaucracy must go. “One need only spend 10 minutes walking around the Pentagon or any major military headquarters to see excess and redundancy,” former Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in September at an event organized by the Center for Strategic & International Studies in Washington. He should know. As defense chief in 2009, he culled 20 weapons systems he thought unnecessary or too expensive, including the F-22 fighter. One place to start thinning the bureaucracy: the staff of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. That office has more than tripled in manpower, to 4,244 in 2012 from 1,313 in 2010, according to the Pentagon’s annual manpower report. (Fewer bureaucrats means fewer memos and fewer meetings. Win-win-win.)

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-02-25/five-military-cuts-that-would-fix-sequestration#p2

6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Five Military Cuts That Would Fix Sequestration (Original Post) Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Feb 2013 OP
K&R Sherman A1 Feb 2013 #1
the primary target of the military is the US Treasury, by any means available nt msongs Feb 2013 #2
Multiple prior posts ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #3
As much as I love them Hayabusa Feb 2013 #4
Eliminate nuclear weapons and the subs that carry them mwrguy Feb 2013 #5
But yet, they're furloughing people instead AnnieBW Mar 2013 #6

Hayabusa

(2,135 posts)
4. As much as I love them
Thu Feb 28, 2013, 09:40 PM
Feb 2013

I really have to question the usefulness of tanks, especially large ones such as the Abrams, in modern warfare. The majority of our fighting nowadays will likely be urban operations with streets that will not easily accommodate them.

AnnieBW

(10,429 posts)
6. But yet, they're furloughing people instead
Fri Mar 1, 2013, 12:22 AM
Mar 2013

The war profiteers must be paid, no matter what. Fuck the "Human Resources".

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Five Military Cuts That W...