Results 1 to 20 of 83

Thread: SECDEF's DoD Budget Proposals

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #11
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    AUT+RUS
    Posts
    87

    Default

    What I'm missing is a decisive cut of the numbers of the U.S. national security "front end". If you add the armed forces, plus the civil services and contractors, and the intel community you end up with around 3.4 million heads. That is simply enormous.

    At one point in the not too far future one will have to look at the contractors, reserves, and guards structure. The three major tribes of the DoD have about 50% of their manpower *again* sourced out to contractors! And a second look has to be taken at the multitude of civil management levels and at the top heavy command structures all over the place. I see it as inevitable that the national security front end comes down 50% to around 1.7 million heads; otherwise there will never be enough money.

    Lots of things out there are neither sustainable nor productive. It's a pitty that the discussion always centers on hardware, but:

    I would like to have seen much more efforts in space and more in cyber.

    Cutting the F-22 is a mistake, better limit the JSF and go for UCAVs. Cutting the C-17 is a mistake as well, it should continue open ended on a 12 planes per year cycle. The NGB was pointless in its published form in any case.

    FCS should always have been treated as a tech-demo programme. Basically the vehicles would have been re-invented and modified CV90. The Army shouldn't shun away from a armored - cavalry - mot inf - light inf structure.

    And the decision to restart the Burkes is industrial driven, which can't really be criticized, but hopefully is only a gap filler, as at the same time there has to be a deep look into the question of nuclear power carrier escorts. The existing Burkes should be remodeled as dedicated versions for AAW, for ASW, and for land attack/naval fire support. And last but not least I expect a shake-up of the opposed forced entry capability next year, especially the setup of the Marines (Gates said something about looking into that). LHA-6 should never continue, and instead LHA-8 expanded, with LPD-17 more focused on the sustainment role.
    Last edited by Distiller; 04-13-2009 at 05:15 AM.

Similar Threads

  1. DoD Civilian Expeditionary Workforce
    By PRT interest in forum Government Agencies & Officials
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-01-2009, 07:51 AM
  2. DOD Approved Strategic Communication Plan for Afghanistan
    By SWJED in forum Media, Information & Cyber Warriors
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-01-2007, 09:42 PM
  3. Budget & Mgt Challenges of Iraq's Security Ministries
    By Jedburgh in forum Catch-All, OIF
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-24-2007, 01:27 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •