Is the U.S. Military Affordable

[bourbon]

The cost of state civil servants in many of our nations hubs is also driving many problems. California for instance, may have a half trillion dollars in underfunded pension obligations. In San Jose, where I'm originally from, a police officer STARTS at over $80,000 and can make much more with overtime. So Mr. Bacevich's big city contemporaries are contributing to the problem as well, through both high salaries and high pensions.

Yes, the cost of state civil servants is an issue. A bigger issue is losses to state pension funds from investment in mortgage-backed securities and toxic derivative crap, much of which fed into the housing bubble in the first place.

A few new nuclear power plants and oil refineries might help, too. After all, Iran is pumping out 2.6 million barrels of oil a month now thanks to military efforts, believe I read. Think how high the price of oil would be currently if they were still only exporting "oil for food."

Think how much more manufacturing we would generate in the U.S. if everyone studied history in college instead of math and engineering...oh wait...

I think you meant to say that Iraq is now pumping 2.6 million bbl/yr, but wrote Iran. But still in error you were on to something, and that is the significant influence that Iran now holds over the Iraqi government and its oil.

Speculation through commodity index’s drove the 2008 oil price spike, and while structural issues exist in the oil market the speculators remain a significant contributor to high oil prices today. Additional Iraqi production is a marginal issue next the speculators.

Besides, the traditional strategy has favored suppressing/red-lining Iraqi oil production – so I am not sure it is favorable for us. But you would need someone who studied history to explain that concept for you...

[bourbon]

From the Pentagon to the private sector: In large numbers, and with few rules, retiring generals are taking lucrative defense-firm jobs, By Bryan Bender. The Boston Globe, 26 December 2010.

The Globe analyzed the career paths of 750 of the highest ranking generals and admirals who retired during the last two decades and found that, for most, moving into what many in Washington call the “rent-a-general’’ business is all but irresistible.

From 2004 through 2008, 80 percent of retiring three- and four-star officers went to work as consultants or defense executives, according to the Globe analysis. That compares with less than 50 percent who followed that path a decade earlier, from 1994 to 1998.

In some years, the move from general staff to industry is a virtual clean sweep. Thirty-four out of 39 three- and four-star generals and admirals who retired in 2007 are now working in defense roles — nearly 90 percent.

And in many cases there is nothing subtle about what the generals have to sell — Martin’s firm is called The Four Star Group, for example. The revolving-door culture of Capitol Hill — where former lawmakers and staffers commonly market their insider knowledge to lobbying firms — is now pervasive at the senior rungs of the military leadership.

Among the Globe findings:

■ Dozens of retired generals employed by defense firms maintain Pentagon advisory roles, giving them unparalleled levels of influence and access to inside information on Department of Defense procurement plans.

■ The generals are, in many cases, recruited for private sector roles well before they retire, raising questions about their independence and judgment while still in uniform. The Pentagon is aware and even supports this practice.

■ The feeder system from some commands to certain defense firms is so powerful that successive generations of commanders have been hired by the same firms or into the same field. For example, the last seven generals and admirals who worked as Department of Defense gatekeepers for international arms sales are now helping military contractors sell weapons and defense technology overseas.

■ When a general-turned-businessman arrives at the Pentagon, he is often treated with extraordinary deference — as if still in uniform — which can greatly increase his effectiveness as a rainmaker for industry. The military even has name for it — the “bobblehead effect.’’

“We are changing the perception and maybe the reality of what it means to be a general,’’ said retired General Robert “Doc’’ Foglesong, who retired as the second-ranking Air Force officer in 2006.

“The fundamental question,’’ he said, “is whether this is shaping the acquisition system and influencing what the Pentagon buys. I think the answer is yes.’’