General Dynamics completes acquisition of Force Protection

General Dynamics doubles down on blast-resistant military vehicles

MRAPs are the type of technology that is needed in Afghanistan to save lives; hopefully this merger will allow General Dynamics to produce them quickly and cheaply. Well at least produce them cheaper than the F-35, which shouldn't be too hard...  compared to the Joint Strike Fighter program, MRAP is cheap.
"The FY 2012 Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) budget requests $3.2 billion for sustainment, upgrade, and overhaul of MRAP vehicles."

Here is a graph showing funding for the top 30 acquisition programs in DoD:

Vickers

What a remarkable career. At least now I know who the smart former Green Beret from Charlie Wilson's War is...

A new national security team

Here are some quick comments on the national security moves:

It appears clear to me that Ryan Crocker will be an upgrade over Karl Eikenberry as ambassador to Afghanistan.

As to the other moves, in my mind, Secretary Gates is the finest Secretary of Defense in our history. Mr. Panetta, although talented, probably won't come close to Secretary Gates. Secretary Gates has been fighting the DoD bureaucracy since the beginning of his tenure asking for budget cuts and to spend money on "stuff" we need now, not 20 years from now; he was a visionary. Mr. Panetta, a Washington insider, is not a visionary.

With regards to the GEN Petraeus move, it seems like a lateral move that just allows him to collect his Army retirement check and a paycheck for being CIA Director, while keeping him in the United States with his family (most of the time). This move also keeps him off the ballot, an added benefit to career politicians that view him as a potential threat.

Finally, Lt. Gen. Allen will do a fine job in Afghanistan if his work in Iraq's MNF-W is any indicator.



Here is an excerpt from the article:

Perhaps the greatest risk of the reshuffle comes in Afghanistan, where the departure of Gen. Petraeus will remove America’s most skilled military commander from a campaign that appears to be teetering between success and failure. Lt. Gen. Allen, however, was a key contributor to the successful turnaround of the war in Iraq; and Mr. Crocker offers a major improvement over his predecessor, Karl Eikenberry, who contributed substantially to the souring of U.S. relations with Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

The State of State: A Proposal for Reorganization at Foggy Bottom

I found out about this article from listening to Pete Dominick's show Stand Up!

The article makes excellent points about how responsibilities for regions in the DoD and State Department do not match up, focusing on one of the many inefficiencies of our nation's diplomatic arm. The DoD isn't perfect either, but its combatant command structure seems much better than the system in use by the State Department.





Take a look at the author's blog, Mountain Runner.

A Pentagon Cyber-Command is in the Works

This idea has good intentions, but how is adding another level of bureaucracy going to help this situation? The key is to place emphasis on cyber-warfare within the existing commands. The key is to recruit competent soldiers and officers who have computer knowledge. The key is to prepare for 5GW throughout the entire DoD. How is having another four-star general with no real command authority over troops going to help the situation? Here is an excerpt from the article:

The Obama administration is finalizing plans for a new Pentagon command to coordinate the security of military computer networks and to develop new offensive cyber-weapons, sources said last night.

Planning for the reorganization of Defense Department and intelligence agencies is underway, and a decision is imminent, according to a person familiar with the White House plans...

One question is whether the new command's leader would be a military commander with a four-star rank. The NSA is currently led by Army Lt. Gen. Keith B. Alexander, who has three stars.

News of the proposal comes on the heels of a 60-day White House review of cybersecurity efforts. Federal agency deputies are expected to meet Friday to consider the recommendations of the review team.

Military Budget

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Military Budget Cuts
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis Political Humor

Full Metal Budget

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Full Metal Budget
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis Political Humor

How Defense Firms Get Our Money

This is a great letter to the editor. Here is an excerpt:

But the way in which Lockheed and other large military contractors have distributed their workforces is the real key to their amazing success. As economist and former Pentagon official Alain C. Enthoven once said, "The ideal weapons system is built in 435 congressional districts, and it doesn't matter whether it works or not." Indeed.

Share

Obama Pledges New Data System for Veterans

President Obama is on the right track, but he pretty much needs to tell DoD and VA to use one system by [fill in date here], not ask "both departments to work together to define and build a seamless system." This along with advanced funding for VA will go a long way to help fix what is a broken system. Share

Pentagon Appointments

I have no doubt that the Obama appointees mentioned in the article above are qualified for their positions, but it hurts me to see that only four of the 13 appointees are veterans (David Ochmanek - USAF; James Townsend, USNR; Thomas Dee, USN; Robert Salesses, USMC). Share

Gates Seeks Sharp Turn In Spending

Bravo, Mr. Secretary, bravo! Gates has effectively put Congress and the military industrial complex on notice by calling for many of the exact things I have advocated for on this blog for almost a year. Dana Milbank says it best in his article "Pentagon Chief Calls for Cuts; Congress Opens Fire" when talking about the F-22:

The F-22 Raptor fighter can cruise at speeds greater than Mach 1.5 without afterburners. It is virtually invisible to enemies, carries two 1,000-pound missiles and can turn on a dime.

But there is one foe the F-22 was not designed to defeat: Defense Secretary Bob Gates.

By pitching a pared down defense budget, Gates has put the pressure on Congress to approve his recommendations. Gates can argue that he is supporting the troops in combat now, not the defense industry always looking for big government contracts promising to leap ahead over generations of military technology. More MRAPs are needed now and Gates is asking for them. More destroyers, F-22s, and FCS equipment is not needed now, and Gates is axing them. How about that? The U.S. is already spending more than the next top 25 countries' spending on defense combined. Finally, we have a defense secretary who understands that this is a problem.

This budget can also lead to more acceptance of the military in society. Today many veterans go from one insular organization, the military, to another, the defense contracting industry. Because of this budget, perhaps instead of leaving the military and going to work for a defense contractor, good military officers will again be a force in corporate America, just as they were after World War II. They can serve our country in corporate America. Today's corporate America needs military officers with the work ethic and morals to improve industries that have little to do with the military (e.g. automobile industry, financial services industry, etc.). How about a lieutenant general retires and becomes an executive at General Motors, rather than an executive at L-3? Shocking.

Thank you, Mr. Gates. Bravo! Share

Can Obama Make Good On Promises About Wars?

I think that Robert Gates has done a wonderful job at DoD and should stay on as SECDEF for at least a year, perhaps for as long as he wants the job. However, I have not read anywhere whether or not Gates will accept an offer from President-elect Obama to stay on as SECDEF. I have heard the names of Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) and Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) being thrown around for SECDEF and Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) being thrown around for Secretary of State, but I am sure we will see what the Obama cabinet will look like very shortly. Here is an excerpt from the article:

But can the incoming administration remove U.S. troops from Iraq that quickly?

Anthony Cordesman, a defense analyst with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, says that although violence is down in Iraq, Obama may find it hard to withdraw American troops in large numbers given that the security situation is still so uncertain.

"And no one can predict at this point in time exactly what's going to happen with internal civil conflict in Iraq or that al-Qaida will be fully defeated or reduced to such a low level of operations that Iraq can operate on its own," says Cordesman.

He says Obama can withdraw American forces but maybe not as many as he promised his supporters.

Obama could find himself in political peril by removing too many U.S. troops, says Michael O'Hanlon of the Brookings Institution.

"Should he make the mistake of withdrawing so fast that he creates a worse security situation environment, you can bet that will be Exhibit A in future Republican criticism of him starting with the midterm elections in 2010," O'Hanlon says...
While on the campaign trail, Obama had said this failure centered on President Bush not having sent enough troops to Afghanistan. And at campaign rallies, he constantly pledged to stop the war in Iraq and turn to the other.

"We will bring this war to an end. We will focus our attention on Afghanistan," Obama said.

O'Hanlon says Obama's campaign focused mostly on sending more U.S. troops to Afghanistan. Occasionally, Obama raised the problem of fighters coming across the border from Pakistan.

"But that's at best only two of five key parts of this problem," O'Hanlon says.