I second the previous comments about the "Cyber" element - No Such Agency has the ball, let Congress hold their feet to the fire about performance, information sharing, operations, etc, and require them to cooperate and collaborate with the FBI for U.S. persons issues.

Re: The Space element - Tying Space (for the sake of a convienient definition from the ionosphere out [ionosphere — That part of the atmosphere, extending from about 70 to 500 kilometers; JP 1-02]) to Cyber is as fallacious as tying submarines to aircraft. Yes, there is a connection, but it is not a natural or obvious one.

This being said, space is an operational environment waiting for its Billy Mitchell. And this bears considerable thought. Had that insubordinate, and arrogant fighter jock not made his case, the air force probably would have split off eight to ten years later and along TAC/SAC lines (with transport being divided similarly) rather than taking all armed fixed wing and almost all transport. If the services accept gracefully that a Space Fleet is a clear and unavoidable necessity, we can approach the organization logically rather than emotionally, proactively rather than reactively. For exactly the reasons Douhet cites for an independent air service to be organized along naval lines, plus the similiarities between a space craft with a crew of more than a dozen (and that seems like a logical possibility in the long term) and a maritime vessel, an independent space service should be organized along naval lines. Sadly, in the U.S. the more likely scenario will be like the air force. The Air Force split off the Army Air Corps as its main body, then made up the rest as it went. I suspect the Air Force Space Ops community will break off and then stumble through the rest of their requirements in a similar fashion.

And we need to get this one moving. Orbital kinetic bombardment has sooo much potential [energy].