America's Defence Meltdown

America's Defence Meltdown

www.financialsense.com

The Center for Defense Information (CDI) has published a report titled “America’s Defense Meltdown: 13 non-partisan insiders, retired military officers & defense specialists speak out.” The report flatly states that America’s defenses are “outdated,” with “insufficient” lethality bought at high expense. In a chapter written by a retired Marine Corps lieutenant colonel, we read: “The large standing forces were supposed to facilitate professional preparation for war, but the essential officer corps never truly professionalized itself.”

(visit the link for the full news article)

Regarding the projected national security strategy for 2009-2017, Col. Chet Richards (USAF, ret.) wrote: “Decisions by the last two Democratic and Republican administrations have … depleted our military strength … and strengthened those around the world whose goals conflict with ours.” He places the largest share of the blame on the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, where military forces were used to solve problems “that are inherently social, economic or political….”

In a chapter written by a Marine colonel and an Army major, we read: “Institutional failures pervade the current management of military men and women, by far our most important defense resource.” The authors write of “ingrained behaviors” related to risk aversion, “group think” and a preoccupation with “turf battles.” Contracts are said to matter more than winning wars. “The primary route to valuing people is to … nurture highly innovative, unshakably ethical thinkers. Sadly, in today’s armed forces such people … are known as mavericks.”

According to “America’s Defense Meltdown,” the U.S. Marine Corps espouses a doctrine of maneuver while organizing and training for a attrition warfare; there are too many officers and not enough “trigger pullers”; the U.S. Navy is still preparing to fight the Japanese carrier fleet when U.S. enemies no longer deploy carrier fleets; the U.S. must shift to submarines because “cruisers, destroyers and frigates are obsolescent warship types and should be retired”; the U.S. Air Force has not properly developed its close air support capabilities and air-to-air capabilities are presently underfunded.

The report warns that the Pentagon can no longer afford to approach military problems with a “wish list” that Congress simply fulfills. This manner of arms procurement is “outrageously expensive” and “impractical.” The present air mobility of the army simply costs too much. Strategic air and sea lift should be reduced because it is excessively expensive. Manned vehicles should be replaced with unmanned vehicles where possible. The National Guard should be reduced and kept at home. According to the report, “A fundamental source of the DOD’s problems is the historically long pattern of unrealistically high defense budget projections combined with equally unrealistic low estimates of costs of new programs.”

Please, visit the site to read the entire article.

Personally, I always considered the US military to be the most powerful and advanced military in the world. In fact, I don't think the authors of the report are trying to deny that.

However, they might be very right that the last two administrations have greatly weakened the military. Particularly when it comes to cost-effectiveness and advanced weaponry. Particularly when it comes to for instance the F-22. It's superiority is questioned while it's extremely expensive and its production might be halted by Obama.


I'm curious what the opinions are on this report, which can be real in full here Source


www.financialsense.com
(visit the link for the full news article)




[edit on 11-1-2009 by Mdv2]

Well they always want more money. The militaro industrial complex want to own the whole economy. At least they are talking about only producing a little amount of F-22 instead of the whole bunch they talked about before.

The contractors are wasting money, overcharging every project by 200-300%. IMO they could do the same things with half the budget. No more no-bid contracts. If they can't produce anything worth the cost and stop overcharging, don't give them contracts. Lockheed Martin and Halliburton can go screw themselves.

They should decentralize the army. Give power to private militias to protect the borders.

No more foreign wars.

Get out of all of europe. Stay in SK. Get out of Japan. Get out of Afghanistan and Iraq.


And for troops, don't you worry, Rahm Emmanuels' s PNAC, The Plan for america, states that they want a draft of at least 3 months for every 18-25 years old. And with this economy, they'll have plenty of them that will continue military service for money...

[edit on 11-1-2009 by Vitchilo]

I have long ( well a few years really) been reading the work for a few of that papers authors and while i 'agree' , as much as a laypersons opinion is worth, with the large majority of their criticisms of US conventional forces and force structure/doctrines it is as Nyquist points out in good part irrelevant as without a adequate nuclear force structure the national mobilization that the US attrition warfare is based wont be possible.

Until the US can again rival Russian active nuclear forces and passive ABM and civil defenses any restructuring of conventional forces will at best allow it to attack and defeat more third world armies while still leaving it desperately unprepared to fight first world forces either conventionally or strategically trough nuclear weapons.

Stellar

the U.S. Navy is still preparing to fight the Japanese carrier fleet when U.S. enemies no longer deploy carrier fleets; the U.S. must shift to submarines because “cruisers, destroyers and frigates are obsolescent warship types and should be retired”; the U.S. Air Force has not properly developed its close air support capabilities and air-to-air capabilities are presently underfunded.

In the near future the Chinese will have aircraft carriers, I think they already have the largest submarine fleet in the world, although most of them are probably obsolete. I do agree that the US needs to put more emphasis on submarines. It would be cool if they could come up with submersible cruisers, destroyers and frigates.

If America stops playing the Worlds Policeman, very badly as well then it would not even need half its present forces. It could spend less money have much better defensive forces as at th moment it simply cannot afford to continue what its doing.

Spending trillions on supercarries that can be put out of action with one well aimed missile is ridiculous and atotally outdated concept. Not only that whilst the economy is going down the pan and people are surfering at street level the defence/offence budget keps growing and growing at the expense of everything else.

Its complete madness and the reality is that for all its military might little has been gained for having such forces or the cost of them. US actions in the ME and elsewhere have not made the US any more secure or protected its overseas interests because there are none. Its all been a great big scam to rip the tax payer off whilst feeding the Military Industrial complex trillions over the years with very little to show for it.