Michael O'Hanlon - Obama's Pentagon Budget: Not Enough for Defense - washingto... - The Diigo Meta page

• 10 Jun 09
  

  TransTracker

  procurement F-22 F-35 fcs

  • Procurement and research and development are the chief areas in which Defense Secretary Robert Gates has sought savings in the proposals he announced in April. He has proposed cuts to programs including the F-22 fighter, the DDG-1000 destroyer, the Army's Future Combat System, the presidential helicopter fleet, the transformational communications satellite, aircraft carrier production runs, the airborne laser missile defense program and the next-generation bomber. These are solid proposals; he could make additional cuts to the V-22 Osprey and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter programs, as well as existing nuclear weapons platforms. 

     

     It is important to note, though, that these aren't cuts in current costs; they are cuts in plans. When you eliminate a defense program, you still typically must buy something to replace aging equipment, even if the alternative is less expensive. Moreover, a lot of equipment (much of it purchased under Ronald Reagan and the first President Bush) is wearing out, and we need to replace it soon.

    • Or....here's a radical idea. Maybe it would be cheaper to buy the shit we've already paid to develop! Ya know, instead of paying for it, then shit canning it, and then paying AGAIN to develop other stuff!! The problem with these kinds of "analyses" is that they never take into account the money we have already spent. They only consider from today forward. Long term responsibility with our defense dollars means not making decisions now that, in effect, wastes all the money we have already spent. But alas, politicians don't think that way.
    Add Sticky Note

Public Stiky Notes

• 
  TransTracker on 2009-06-10
  Or....here's a radical idea. Maybe it would be cheaper to buy the shit we've already paid to develop! Ya know, instead of paying for it, then shit canning it, and then paying AGAIN to develop other stuff!! The problem with these kinds of "analyses" is that they never take into account the money we have already spent. They only consider from today forward. Long term responsibility with our defense dollars means not making decisions now that, in effect, wastes all the money we have already spent. But alas, politicians don't think that way.

Would you like to comment?

Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.