Tag: Military Spending

Downsizing?

I have always disliked that term……

Let’s go back to pre-Cold War….in those days military service was not the “hero” worship it is today……the peacetime military was small, skeletal force whose nain function was to train the civilian population to be used militarily if the need were to arise.

We are getting more and more involved in the situations around the globe…..and we have only a limited amount of troops to carry out the policies of our admins…..and it appears that those troops will lessened even further……we appear to be trying to return to the days of the skeletal force……

In 1940, the head count for active-duty soldiers in the US Army was 269,023, a low that hasn’t been reached since, the Army Times reports. But due to budget cutbacks, a drawdown plan announced last summer to whittle manpower by 40,000 troops has left the Army with its lowest post-World War II count yet: 479,172 soldiers, which is 154 fewer than those on active duty during the previous post-WWII low hit in 1999.

“These are not cuts the Army wants to make, these are cuts required by [the] budget environment in which we operate,” the Army’s vice chief of staff said in July when the plan was first announced, Fox News reports. Per the Defense Manpower Data Center, there are also just over 548,000 soldiers in reserve, bringing the total number of Army troops to 1,027,196. The ultimate goal: to hit a total force number of 980,000 by the end of September 2018.

Back in the day we had the draft to make up the difference in case of dire need…..but the Congress may finally eliminate that fall back position…..

This year’s National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) looks set to decide the question of whether women aged 18-26 will have to register for the military draft in the United States, with a vote likely next week on Rep. Pete Sessions’ (R – TX) legislation attempting to block language that would require women to register.

The debate has happened off and on for decades and came up again with calls from the Army and Marine chiefs of staff calling for women to be brought into the Selective Service system in the name of “equality.” The Selective Service Act requires all men 18-26 to register, though none have been conscripted since 1973.

This led to some bipartisan efforts to satisfy the desire for equality in the more straightforward way, ending the Selective Service outright, though ultimately this didn’t happen and the committee put language into the NDAA forcing women to register. Sessions’ bill would remove that language.

Questions about who is or isn’t eligible for conscription have long been treated as purely academic, and officials have downplayed the money wasted on the unused Selective Service system. Secretary of State John Kerry, however, recently spoke out in support of bringing back the draft, saying he has “deep reservations” about America’s all-volunteer military.

Let’s say we drop the draft….what then when the country needs recruits fast?  Or will we start limiting our international entanglements?  (Raucous laughter…like that will EVER happen)

A-10 VS F-35

For my last post of the day….I would like to return to my ranting about the new strategic fighter, the F-35……..or as I like to call it….the expensive brick!

When I heard the the US military was thinking about replacing the A-10 Warthog with the ultra-modern F-35 I went into full ranting mode….I have been defending the honor of the Warthog…..but in case you missed some of the post I have written….a little reminder……

Source: In Defense Of The ‘Hog – In Saner Thought

Source: F-35: F.U.B.A.R. – In Saner Thought

I seldom have much good to say about the Repubs in Congress…..but I will come to the aid of Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-NH, has put a whammy on the Pentagon about the F-35……

One of the central issues in the debate over retiring the U.S. Air Force’s A-10 attack jet has been whether or not the new F-35 Joint Strike Fighter will be an adequate replacement to perform the close air support mission.

The program office has issued a number of conflicting statements on the issue. And in this week’s Senate Armed Services Committee update on the F-35 program, the most heated exchange came when Sen. Kelly Ayotte, a New Hampshire Republican, sought clarification about conflicting statements Air Force leaders made regarding the mission — and which aircraft would perform it.

Source: Senator Demands to Know — Is the F-35 Supposed to Replace the A-10 or Not? — War Is Boring

The ‘Hog can continue its mission with only one engine….the F-35 cannot successfully reject the pilot when in trouble…….the F-35 is a BRICK!

Finally someone is putting the Pentagon on the spot for their attempt to replace the best thing that can happen in combat…..the ‘Hog shows up in close ground support o the troops.

The A-10 can be upgraded for a fraction of the cost of a piece crap that is making NO progress in a “new” weapon for close ground support…..why ditch what works?

Here’s an idea….ask a grunt which he would prefer to see come to his/her rescue……I will wager that the A-10 wins hands down.

If one truly wants what is best for our troops….then the A-10 is your choice.  Period!

Only the Pentagon Could Spend $640 on a Toilet Seat

I try to point out just how much money the Pentagon wastes in the course of “doing business”…..we all know the famous stories of a $1000 screw or the $200 hammer and of course the “famous” $600 toilet seat…..but the waste goes much deeper than those that get highlighted occasionally….

What your tax dollars go towards at America’s defense headquarters.

From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars’ worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represents chump change in the Pentagon’s wastage sweepstakes and in the context of its $600-billion-plus budget, but think of it as indicative of the absurd lengths the Department of Defense will go to when what’s at stake is throwing away taxpayer dollars.

Source: Only the Pentagon Could Spend $640 on a Toilet Seat | The Nation

Yes this is an awful waste……if we accept that then the next point is how did this happen?

From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades. Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars’ worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represents chump change in the Pentagon’s wastage sweepstakes and in the context of its $600-billion-plus budget, but think of it as indicative of the absurd lengths the Department of Defense will go to when what’s at stake is throwing away taxpayer dollars.

Source: How Not to Audit the Pentagon | The American Conservative

The truly sad part is that many Americans DO NOT care how much is wasted as long as it is not wasted on poor people or hungry people…..pathetic!

Only The Best For Our Troops

How many times have you heard that line of crap?

Does that include a plane that the military does not want but is forced to take even with all the failures in its systems?  Or maybe it is the minesweeper that cannot detect….wait for it…..mines.

Or how about a special sighting gizmo that our troops are using now…..and in hostile territory……

EOTech, a firm that has supplied gun sights to the US military, admits that its Holographic Weapon Sight suffers from a defect known as thermal drift. And in November, the company’s parent L-3 Communications Corp. agreed to pay $25.6 million to settle a lawsuit brought by the federal government, Bloomberg reported, which claimed EOTech knowingly sold $24 million worth of bad sights to the Defense Department. Months later, though, US Special Operations forces are still using the HWS, which “potentially endangers the lives of service members in combat,” per a Washington Post investigation. Thermal drift (the most serious of the several defects with the sight) can cause a shot to be off target by six to 12 inches—”one of the worst types of failures,” per an unnamed employee quoted in the lawsuit, “since most users won’t notice the problem until their life is on the line.”

Problems with the HWS first emerged in 2007, when the Norwegian military noticed that the holographic crosshairs would distort in cold weather. But EOTech didn’t tell the Pentagon, even as it continued supplying sights. After that, it was discovered that faulty seals caused the sights to fog up in humid weather. Again, EOTech kept quiet. Finally, the FBI, while conducting ballistic tests, discovered the thermal drift, which occurs in both hot and cold temperatures. A Pentagon rep confirmed that some troops still use the sights, adding that military officials “have an unshakable commitment to the safety” of US armed forces. Another military rep tells the Post the sights are only used in instances that “the limitations of the equipment” don’t put troops at risk. Denver police, however, abandoned the sights soon after the November settlement.

When will someone…..anyone….take the time to watch out for our troops….the same troops that we send all over the world and into hostile situations?

Our troops and our veterans deserve far more out of the government than a few well placed words.

How To Fund A War

From the overworked mind of Chuq

Since my days in the military I have been fascinated by war…..its causes and results…….and I have also been anti-war for a host of reasons…….most of which deals with the cost of war.  The human cost and the monetary cost…….but what if they threw a war and could afford to fight it……a country could do what the US is famous for doing…..either raid a well funded program  such as social security or just fight the war on credit…….and run deficit crisis for decades to come……..

Has anyone ever considered alternative ways of funding a war?

Ever hear of crowdfunding?  In case you are not in the business of raising money let me help with the definition……..”the practice of funding a project or venture by raising many small amounts of money from a large number of people, typically via the Internet”…………yes a relative new idea for raising money but can it be used to fund a war?

Yes there is an answer to that question and the NT Times has presented the subject in a recent article…….

A high-profile New York Times article today trumpets the story that Russian NGOs are “crowdfunding” the Ukrainian Civil War, raising money to subsidize the various rebel factions in Eastern Ukraine to resist the invasion by the US-backed government.

Terrorist groups have been crowdfunding for years, and would-be ISIS recruits are regularly using crowdfunding to pay for their trips to Syria to join them. It’s not even just the one side in the ISIS war, a US-based NGO made up of former special forces has been crowdfunding an effort to pay for “humanitarian” aid to Kurdish groups, which broadly defines humanitarian aid to include “combat training.” Assyrian Christian groups on the outskirts of Mosul have similarly crowdfunding their own army to resist ISIS.

There seems to be examples for successful crowdfunding of wars and armed conflicts……maybe the US should tap into some of those that profit the most off of a “good” war like Halliburton, KBR and a wealth of other so-called defense contractors…..after all over the years they have made hundreds of billions, if not trillions,  in the business of war………. now let them foot some of the bill as they will be making money on the back end of any action.

I realize that may seem a bit farfetched but why not try this……it would keep valued and much needed programs from suffering budget cuts to help pay for a war…….as it is in the US every social program has suffered cutbacks to pay for decades of war……programs that are needed to keep the country moving forward like education, health care, infrastructure, etc.

Apparently the US will be fighting wars continuously for decades, possibly for generations, then it is time to find extra funding to save the American society from collapse.

 

Only The Best For Our Troops

Since the movie “Sniper” the country has been in love with the mission of an American sniper…..even though most have NO idea what it takes to be a sniper…..the idea is just so romantic thanks to Hollywood……..

During my days of yore in the Vietnam War the American snipers used a variety of guns for their snipers…..there was the traditional .30-06, some used a .308 and some were given a modified M14 which in my opinion was a good weapon just a bit too heavy to lug through the jungle (or as it is called now, the rain forest)……..

I know I am rehashing the past….but for good reason….there is a story brewing that some of our present day snipers are being short changed on weapons……

US Marine snipers are known for their deadly skill. But their skill is often compensating for inferior equipment. Speaking with the Washington Post, current and former Marines say they’ve suffered in combat for 14 years with a sniper rifle that fails to perform accurately at the necessary range or hold up against weapons used by the Taliban and ISIS. While deployed in Afghanistan in 2011, Sgt. Ben McCullar says he was part of an eight-man sniper team that would exchange fire with Taliban fighters. “They’d set up at the max range of their [machine guns] and start firing at us,” he says. As the team’s sniper rifles had a range of just 1,000 yards, “we really couldn’t engage them.” The Marine Corps recently upgraded from the M40A5 to the M40A6, with a .308-caliber bullet, but the weapon still has a range of 1,000 yards, compared to 1,600 yards for the Chinese M99 and British L115A3.

“It doesn’t matter if we have the best training,” says a sniper. “If we get picked off at a thousand yards before we can shoot, then what’s the point?” McCullar says the .300 Winchester Magnum used by the US Army offers a 1,300-yard range and better accuracy in bad weather. So why aren’t they using it? Some point to Precision Weapons Section, a component of the Marine Corps contracted by Marine Corps Systems Command to build the M40. Its sole purpose is to build and repair Marine weapons, and eliminating it would mean downsizing the Marine Corps. The Marine Corps Systems Command says it has “evaluated several options for replacing the M40 series sniper rifle; however, the weapon continues to meet our operational requirements.” Without a change, however, a current instructor warns “the Marines Corps is going to learn the hard way what happens when you bring a knife to a gunfight.”

If we must have snipers then they should be given the BEST weapon possible to accomplish their mission……..

This story smacks of the early days of the Iraq war when Hummers did not have adequate shielding or the lack of body armor for the troops……if America must fight wars then they MUST provide the materials for the mission to be successful……cutting corners on equipment just so some greedy twat can show a better profit is just wrong and we should not accept short cuts of any type when dealing with our troops.

A Tax For The Sake Of A Tax

Recall back in the day when some pudgy little dude that was against taxes had all the power for the GOP?  He made them sign a pledge that they would NOT support tax increases and would work to lower taxes at every turn?  Remember that?

This went on for 20 years more or less….he was the most powerful lobbyist for awhile…..well all that influence is starting to dwindle away…..

It appears that those Congress slackers that are indebted to the Military-Industrial Complex has had a change of heart on taxes…..some taxes….

Politico is reporting…….

The new chairman of the House Armed Services Committee is taking a bold stand for a Republican and fifth-generation Texan who represents one of the most conservative districts in the country: He’s not ruling out tax hikes as part of a deal to avert sequestration.

“I’m pretty much open to any solution that would fix sequestration,” Thornberry said in a wide-ranging interview, making clear he believes “the taxpayers of this country have been taxed enough” but that a compromise could be necessary to spare the military further budget pain.

“This is not about my preferences,” he said. “This is about having the bigger, longer conversations about how we get from here to here even though I can’t tell you that road map at this moment.”

Thornberry also said the issue of sequestration was too big for his committee to solve but that Armed Services members have a responsibility to make clear to other lawmakers the damage the cuts would do to the military.

And there you have it…..Repubs will support a tax increase as long as it benefits those in the M-IC…..but nothing for the really important issues like health, education or poverty…….God forbid that defense contractors have to actually work for their profits……..

Once again the GOP has shown that war is far more important than the society as a whole.

“War is good business…invest your children”!

What Cost War?

The situations in Iraq and Afghanistan have taken a back seat to  the search for a plane……a debate on birth certificates and a wealth of spurious conspiracies……but since today is my day to post on war….I will delve into those two wars that people forget…….

Does anyone know what the final cost of the two will be?

The final bill will run at least $3.7 trillion and could reach as high as $4.4 trillion, according to the research project “Costs of War” by Brown University’s Watson Institute for International Studies. (www.costsofwar.org)

In the 10 years since U.S. troops went into Afghanistan to root out the al Qaeda leaders behind the September 11, 2001, attacks, spending on the conflicts totaled $2.3 trillion to $2.7 trillion.

Those numbers will continue to soar when considering often overlooked costs such as long-term obligations to wounded veterans and projected war spending from 2012 through 2020. The estimates do not include at least $1 trillion more in interest payments coming due and many billions more in expenses that cannot be counted, according to the study.

In human terms, 224,000 to 258,000 people have died directly from warfare, including 125,000 civilians in Iraq. Many more have died indirectly, from the loss of clean drinking water, healthcare, and nutrition. An additional 365,000 have been wounded and 7.8 million people — equal to the combined population of Connecticut and Kentucky — have been displaced.

$3.7 trillion?  That amount could have gone a long way to solve the $5.1 trillion that Ryan wants to carve out of domestic programs…….don’t you think?

But beyond that there are other costs of war…….

The 2.6 million Americans who volunteered to fight on IED-laden battlefields in Iraq and Afghanistan have returned home with a panoply of problems borne out of their service. Consider the following from a newly released Washington Post-Kaiser Family Foundation survey:

  • 18 percent were seriously injured while performing their duties.
  • 34 percent say they have a service-connected disability.
  • 52 percent say their physical or mental health is worse than it was before the wars.
  • 41 percent report experiencing outbursts of anger, at least sometimes.
  • 51 percent know a service member who has attempted or committed suicide.

More from the Post-Kaiser survey:

For recent veterans, a legacy of pride and pain.

Key findings from the poll.

Interactive poll results and how the survey was conducted.

My point is….war is far more expensive than what most people think……who will pay the tab?

Take It And Like It!

The US Congress is a complete joke…the partisan crap, the do-nothing schedule and the total lack of interest in the “common” man is overwhelming….besides it has become a joke in the rest of the “civilized’ world…..

These people and I use the term loosely spend all their time bitching about all those social programs or all those subsidies for those companies that do NOT need the money……the money being spent is all the rage now, both conserv and libs are trying to find footing in this debate….should Medicare be cut….should oil subsidies end…..should Social Security be killed….r maybe we could end a war or two……everybody has a pet bitch on spending…….

Now let us talk about the government demanding that a certain commodity will be accepted by the military….Congress in its wisdom is telling generals that have said no to the commodity that they will accept it and like it!

An article written in Daily Finance

Over in Washington, where most of America’s money gets spent, there’s a scandal brewing on Capitol Hill. Congress wants to pass an appropriations bill that would (among other things) spend $255 million to purchase 42 M1 Abrams main battle tanks. There are just a few problems with this plan.

First off, we don’t really have any enemies to “point” the new tanks at. The Soviet Union is kaput. China, arguably too valuable a trading partner to fight a war with in the first place, also happens to be located on the wrong side of an ocean. As for the enemies we do want to point guns at, years of battling tank-less foes in Iraq and Afghanistan have taught the U.S. Army that oftentimes, a mix of Humvees, MRAPs, and Strykers is better suited to modern warfare.

Which brings us to the final and most crucial reason why we might not want to spend a quarter-billion dollars on a few dozen main battle tanks: The Pentagon doesn’t even want them.

Turns out, the only reason Congress is even considering spending this money is to try to keep General Dynamics’  tank factory in Lima, Ohio, open — just in case we might need to build tanks in the future.  Would likt be the same Ohio that speaker of the house is from?

But I thought that the Congress was chastised for not listening to the generals….oh my bad….that only applies when dealing with the actions of Obama….it does NOT apply when paying General Dynamics off for their monetary support during elections….

See what is happening while the media has you fixated on the Martin case?

Another Answer To The Afghan Problem

I get email from people all over the country and this one came from a friend in New Mexico…..once I read it I knew I had to post it because a loyal reader of Info Ink…Quin of Quintessential Havoc (great thoughtful site….go to blogroll to visit) is from the UK and I wanted to hear his opinion on the idea…..since he and I have a difference of opinion on Afghanistan…his thoughts are always appreciated.

My emailer says that this piece is written by Jason Ditz:

The British Army’s new counter-insurgency field manual, the guidelines for the 9,000+ British soldiers fighting in Afghanistan, sets sights on a new strategy to fight the Taliban: overt bribery.

The guide advises British troops to buy off Taliban with “bags of gold” instead of fighting them. The commanders are also advised to negotiate with Taliban leaders, including those with “blood on their hands.” The guide advises that the Taliban pays its employees about $10 a day, a staggering amount compared to what Afghan security forces make. It doesn’t set out exactly how much British forces should bribe them, but says it should be enough that it will dissuade them from working for the Taliban

With Afghanistan one of the most corrupt nations on the planet, bribery is hardly a foreign concept that needs to be imported. Still, British forces are unlikely to have enough gold to throw at the insurgency to make it simply disappear into Afghanistan’s seedy background.

Personally, I think it would be cheaper in money and blood to do it this way….I understanbd that the US Military is doing this on a small scale right now….but it still only protects conveys to and from a certain area….and that it does not stop attacks on positions…just on the conveys….

Is this an answer or just a way to waste money?