AF Secretary and Chief of Staff Dismissed

[Tom Odom]

CNN is reporting that the Sec Def has dismssed both the Sec AF and the Chief of Staff of the AF for the nuke incident last year when weapons were loaded and flown to Louisiana by mistake.

More as it comes out

Tom

[Cavguy]

From "Danger Room"

The Air Force's top civilian and uniformed leaders are being booted out of the Pentagon. Chief of Staff Gen. T. Michael "Buzz" Moseley has resigned, according to Inside Defense and Air Force Times. Secretary Michael W. Wynne is next.

The move isn't exactly a shocker. The Air Force has come under fire for everything from mishandling nukes to misleading ad campaigns to missing out on the importance of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. For months, the Air Force's leadership has been on the brink of open conflict with Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England. In the halls of the Air Force's chiefs, the talk has been largely about the threats posed by China and a resurgent Russia. Gates wanted the service to actually focus on the wars at hand, in Iraq and Afghanistan. "For much of the past year I’ve been trying to concentrate the minds and energies of the defense establishment on the current needs and current conflicts," he told the Heritage Foundation. "In short, to ensure that all parts of the Defense Department are, in fact, at war."

Last fall, the Pentagon's civilian chiefs shot down an Air Force move to take over almost all of the military's big unmanned aircraft. "There has to be a better way to do this," Moseley complained at the time. Things only got more tense when Gates said that the future of conflict is in small, "asymmetric" wars -- wars in which the Air Force takes a back seat to ground forces. Then Gates noted that the Air Force's most treasured piece of gear, the F-22 stealth fighter, basically has no role in the war on terror. And when a top Air Force general said the service was planning on buying twice as many of the jets -- despite orders from Gates and the rest of the civilian leadership -- he was rebuked for "borderline insubordination."

Relations between Gates and the Air Force chiefs soured further when the Defense Secretary called for more spy drones to be put into the skies above Iraq and Afghanistan. The Air Force complained that all those extra flight hours were turning the robo-plane's remote pilots into virtual "prisoners." Gates then publicly chastised the service during the drone build-up, comparing it to "pulling teeth."

The scrapes harmed the service's image in Congress, and with the public. And so the Air Force launched an $81 million marketing effort to demonstrate its relevance in today's conflicts. Outside analysts wondered whether such a push was in violation of American anti-propaganda laws -- especially after one of the spots was found be be "misleading."

But, according to Air Force Times, "the last straw appears to be a [damning] report on nuclear weapons handling... [that] critical report convinced Gates that changes must be made."

According to the report, "the service mistakenly shipped four ballistic missile detonators -- instead of helicopter batteries -- to Taiwan," Inside Defense reports. "The incident occurred three years ago, but was discovered in March."

Last fall, the Air Force's 5th Bomb Wing lost track of six nuclear warheads. Then, in mid-May, the service flunked a nuclear surety inspection, when security personnel couldn't even be bothered to stop playing video games on their cell phones. Now, it looks like Moseley and Wynne has some serious time to play with, themselves.

More to come...

Gates is such a breath of fresh air after Rumsfeld. He did something similar after Walter Reed. Good for him. We have little need for "nice guy" leaders - we need people who engender results.

[Steve Blair]

I really hope whoever wins in November has the brains to ask Gates to stay on. Somehow I doubt they will, but one can always dream....

[Tom Odom]

From MSNBC

Top two Air Force officials resigning
NBC: Secretary refused to fire chief of staff so both are forced out

WASHINGTON - The nation's top two Air Force officials are resigning, and military sources told NBC News Thursday that they were being forced out.

At the White House, press secretary Dana Perino said President Bush knew about the resignations of Air Force Chief of Staff Michael Moseley and Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne, but that the White House “has not played any role” in the shake-up.

Moseley, a general, is the Air Force's top uniformed officer. Wynne is the top civilian official.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates last week told Wynne to fire Moseley but Wynne refused, sources told NBC. As a result, Gates took the unprecedented step of asking both men to resign.

[Ken White]

much anxious stirring in the pachyderm herds tonight...

That ruins Bob Bateman's article on unfired Generals. Still none for tactical blunders or technical malfeasance but the clock maybe she's a-ticking (hat tip to Dr. Emilio Lizardo).

[Fuchs]

It's likely more because of the AF lobbying for more F-22's after Gates said 'no' than about the safety regulations mishap.

[Steve Blair]

It's likely more because of the AF lobbying for more F-22's after Gates said 'no' than about the safety regulations mishap.

No, I don't think so. It's a combination of things, and the F-22 is only a part of that. There were actually two nuke-related mishaps, and in the second case Gates didn't even trust the AF to look into it on its own.

[Cavguy]

No, I don't think so. It's a combination of things, and the F-22 is only a part of that. There were actually two nuke-related mishaps, and in the second case Gates didn't even trust the AF to look into it on its own.

The unit from the first one failed its re-inspection miserably a few weeks ago - if the CEO can't accomplish simple leadership fixes, than Gates has a case for what he did, especially given the combination of other factors - UAV's, F-22's, etc.

[Steve Blair]

He also gave them plenty of public notice that he felt the AF was moving down the wrong garden path. There was no noticeable correction of course...if anything they got more stubborn about what they were doing. Combine that with the Thunderbirds contract issue ($50 million or so of PR stuff done in a suspect manner) and some of the other things and you could really see the writing on the wall.

[Stevely]

While I agree Fuchs there is a larger context here, and the two nuclear mishaps were the excuse to lower the boom on the USAF leadership for many more sins, I do not think they are merely pretexts but are also of a pattern with the other abuses that has set Gates and others in DOD against the USAF. The senior leadership of a service sets the tone for its organizational culture. So does it come as a surprise that in a service where the senior leadership habitually subverts and even defies the express will of its superiors in government to further their own agendas, that farther down the ranks you find officers becoming lax and unserious about their own duties and jobs?

[selil]

as to Batemans article "whoops". as to the USAF... playing that blue boy political media blitz football may have backfired. I'm not putting much faith in this until I see the results down stream.

[JJackson]

much anxious stirring in the pachyderm herds tonight...

That ruins Bob Bateman's article on unfired Generals. Still none for tactical blunders or technical malfeasance but the clock maybe she's a-ticking (hat tip to Dr. Emilio Lizardo).

Thanks for that I did not know what a pachyderm was so I had to look it up but it is such a brilliantly apt term I am sure I will find plenty of use for it (obviously with acknowledgements).

[Norfolk]

I really hope whoever wins in November has the brains to ask Gates to stay on. Somehow I doubt they will, but one can always dream....

I'll second that!

There could be a few more stars falling out of Air Force sky over the next several months if the Boys in Blue don't get the message loud and clear this time. Then again, maybe they'll just try to wait Gates out, and defer their ambitions until the next Administration comes in.

But wouldn't there be a gratifyingly palpable sense of fear running through the AF service culture if Gates were retained by the next Administration?

[stanleywinthrop]

I really hope whoever wins in November has the brains to ask Gates to stay on. Somehow I doubt they will, but one can always dream....

McCain might consider it, with all the praise he's been showering Gates and Patreaus with.

[Stevely]

Then again, maybe they'll just try to wait Gates out, and defer their ambitions until the next Administration comes in.

That seems the most likely COA.

[Entropy]

People are way overplaying the acquisition angle. This firing was all about loss of confidence related to nukes - both the B-52 transport and the inadvertent selling of nuclear -related stuff to Taiwan.

[Culpeper]

He also gave them plenty of public notice that he felt the AF was moving down the wrong garden path. There was no noticeable correction of course...if anything they got more stubborn about what they were doing. Combine that with the Thunderbirds contract issue ($50 million or so of PR stuff done in a suspect manner) and some of the other things and you could really see the writing on the wall.

Well stated, and I wish I had posted exactly that. Without trying to bash the Air Force I have to state that not much has changed in the company language of the organization in the last thirty or more years. This is a good start with disciplinary action on the higher echelon. There very well may be a lot of USAF Technical Sergeants and Lt. Colonels that would concur with what happened.

[wm]

People are way overplaying the acquisition angle. This firing was all about loss of confidence related to nukes - both the B-52 transport and the inadvertent selling of nuclear -related stuff to Taiwan.

Defense Link posting of Secretary Gates' announcement supports this point rather clearly.

The more important point is who will be the new CSAF and SAF. I've heard that Gen Schwartz, the TRANSCOM Cdr, may have an inside track as CSAF. Anyone have any insight as to who is the likely new SAF?

[Tom Odom]

Defense Link posting of Secretary Gates' announcement supports this point rather clearly.

The more important point is who will be the new CSAF and SAF. I've heard that Gen Schwartz, the TRANSCOM Cdr, may have an inside track as CSAF. Anyone have any insight as to who is the likely new SAF?

On the first point true--but it did happen against a larger setting. When I first started looking for information I googled SecDef Fires AF Secretary and Chief of Staff. Pages came up on the earlier events--including the nukes as I stated when I started this thread--and Gates' frustration with the AF over war support and rigidity in its approach to life.I would say this was a very large proverbial straw that broke the SecDef's patience.

On the second point that is a very large question. Gates is trying to affect AF culture. Nominating a airlift guy would be a very large signal. It is one way that Gates could significantly limit the AF senior leaders abilities to "wait him out" as others have correctly suggested.

Tom

[Hacksaw]

Wow, we can only hope... I suppose the equivalent would be a placing a QM or Corps of Engineer as the CSA. If it comes to pass, it will be real interesting to see how the rank and file react. I suppose the chances are that it would be very professional etc etc. But the possibility remains for near open mutiny (at least behind closed doors).

Hell, if Chenney named Gates as either his running mate or presumptive Sec Def it might swing my vote.

There is definitely a bad moon arising in the USAF... about time