Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
unhappycamper
unhappycamper's Journal
unhappycamper's Journal
October 19, 2012
Heidi Vogt/AP - CIA Director David H. Petraeus, center, urged in a proposal that the White House approve a significant expansion of the CIA’s fleet of armed drones, a move that would accelerate the spy service’s transformation into a paramilitary force, U.S. officials said.
CIA seeks to expand drone fleet, officials say
By Greg Miller, Published: October 18
The CIA is urging the White House to approve a significant expansion of the agency’s fleet of armed drones, a move that would extend the spy service’s decade-long transformation into a paramilitary force, U.S. officials said.
The proposal by CIA Director David H. Petraeus would bolster the agency’s ability to sustain its campaigns of lethal strikes in Pakistan and Yemen and enable it, if directed, to shift aircraft to emerging al-Qaeda threats in North Africa or other trouble spots, officials said.
In the past, officials from the Pentagon and other departments have raised concerns about the CIA’s expanding arsenal and involvement in lethal operations, but a senior Defense official said that the Pentagon had not opposed the agency’s current plan.
Officials from the White House, the CIA and the Pentagon declined to comment on the proposal. Officials who discussed it did so on the condition of anonymity, citing the sensitive nature of the subject.
CIA seeks to expand drone fleet, officials say
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-seeks-to-expand-drone-fleet-officials-say/2012/10/18/01149a8c-1949-11e2-bd10-5ff056538b7c_story.html?hpid=z1Heidi Vogt/AP - CIA Director David H. Petraeus, center, urged in a proposal that the White House approve a significant expansion of the CIA’s fleet of armed drones, a move that would accelerate the spy service’s transformation into a paramilitary force, U.S. officials said.
CIA seeks to expand drone fleet, officials say
By Greg Miller, Published: October 18
The CIA is urging the White House to approve a significant expansion of the agency’s fleet of armed drones, a move that would extend the spy service’s decade-long transformation into a paramilitary force, U.S. officials said.
The proposal by CIA Director David H. Petraeus would bolster the agency’s ability to sustain its campaigns of lethal strikes in Pakistan and Yemen and enable it, if directed, to shift aircraft to emerging al-Qaeda threats in North Africa or other trouble spots, officials said.
In the past, officials from the Pentagon and other departments have raised concerns about the CIA’s expanding arsenal and involvement in lethal operations, but a senior Defense official said that the Pentagon had not opposed the agency’s current plan.
Officials from the White House, the CIA and the Pentagon declined to comment on the proposal. Officials who discussed it did so on the condition of anonymity, citing the sensitive nature of the subject.
October 19, 2012
Boston Public Library Has Historic Photos Online
I was checking my email this morning and was looking at a BPL eNews message:
10 Million
Earlier this month, the library's ever-growing Flickr photostream received its 10 millionth view. To date, there are more than 65,000 images available to view on an array of subjects. Find images from the Great Fire of 1872, the Molasses Disaster of 1919, the Cocoanut Grove Fire of 1942, and much more.
I was especially interested in photos from the Great Molasses Flood of 1919:
And the Charlestown Navy yard:
And the Coconut Grove fire of 1942:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/boston_public_library/ <<-- Enjoy!
October 18, 2012
Crash Drives Air Force to Restart CV-22 Pilot Formation Training: EXCLUSIVE
By Richard Whittle
Published: October 17, 2012
The Air Force plans to reinstate substantial formation flight training for CV-22 Osprey pilots that it eliminated four years ago, AOL Defense has learned. Reinstatement of the training four years after the service ended it is an implicit admission, V-22 aviators said, that better training might have prevented the June 13 crash of a CV-22B in Florida.
From now on, Air Force pilots going through initial Osprey flight training with Marine Medium Tiltrotor Training Squadron 204 (VMMT-204) at Marine Corps Air Station New River, N.C., will take a classroom course in formation flight, fly two formation flights of two hours each in a V-22 simulator, and fly one actual two-hour formation flight in the tiltrotor troop transport.
The decision to increase formation flight training for Air Force pilots at VMMT-204 is "an acknowledgement that our V-22 formation training was lacking," said an AFSOC member who spoke without authorization. "Obviously, in hindsight, the decision removing it is questionable at best."
Marine Corps pilots have received such formation flight training for years and regularly fly in two- and three-ship sections. The Air Force, though, whose CV-22Bs are flown solely by Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) pilots, directed VMMT-204 four years ago to exempt AFSOC students from most formation flight instruction and remove it from the syllabus for Air Force students, Air Force and Marine Corps sources said. Air Force pilots instead were given more training in using the CV-22B's inertial navigation system and terrain following/terrain avoidance radar, the sources said. The Air Force also streamlined its training at VMMT-204 to get pilots into the field more quickly, the sources said, holding each student's total flight hours at the training squadron to about 28 to 29 hours compared to 33 or more for Marine student pilots.
(CV-22) Crash Drives Air Force to Restart CV-22 Pilot Formation Training: EXCLUSIVE
http://defense.aol.com/2012/10/17/crash-drives-air-force-to-restart-cv-22-pilot-formation-training/Crash Drives Air Force to Restart CV-22 Pilot Formation Training: EXCLUSIVE
By Richard Whittle
Published: October 17, 2012
The Air Force plans to reinstate substantial formation flight training for CV-22 Osprey pilots that it eliminated four years ago, AOL Defense has learned. Reinstatement of the training four years after the service ended it is an implicit admission, V-22 aviators said, that better training might have prevented the June 13 crash of a CV-22B in Florida.
From now on, Air Force pilots going through initial Osprey flight training with Marine Medium Tiltrotor Training Squadron 204 (VMMT-204) at Marine Corps Air Station New River, N.C., will take a classroom course in formation flight, fly two formation flights of two hours each in a V-22 simulator, and fly one actual two-hour formation flight in the tiltrotor troop transport.
The decision to increase formation flight training for Air Force pilots at VMMT-204 is "an acknowledgement that our V-22 formation training was lacking," said an AFSOC member who spoke without authorization. "Obviously, in hindsight, the decision removing it is questionable at best."
Marine Corps pilots have received such formation flight training for years and regularly fly in two- and three-ship sections. The Air Force, though, whose CV-22Bs are flown solely by Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) pilots, directed VMMT-204 four years ago to exempt AFSOC students from most formation flight instruction and remove it from the syllabus for Air Force students, Air Force and Marine Corps sources said. Air Force pilots instead were given more training in using the CV-22B's inertial navigation system and terrain following/terrain avoidance radar, the sources said. The Air Force also streamlined its training at VMMT-204 to get pilots into the field more quickly, the sources said, holding each student's total flight hours at the training squadron to about 28 to 29 hours compared to 33 or more for Marine student pilots.
October 18, 2012
Northrop Shows Off Smaller, Modular Robot For Tighter Budgets
By Sydney J. Freedberg Jr.
Published: October 17, 2012
NATIONAL PRESS CLUB: Since 9/11, robots have become commonplace tools for the military, police bomb squads, and hazardous materials teams. But as budgets tighten, not even the Pentagon can afford to buy many types of robots, each for a different mission.
So Northrop Grumman's subsidiary, Remotec, is rolling out a new robot called Titus specifically designed to be smaller, cheaper, and more versatile than the current crop. Its basic configuration weighs about 135 pounds, costs about $125,000, and is "modular" so users can easily snap off and snap on parts to tailor the robot to a particular mission. Users can swap the manipulator arm, the tires and tracks (it has both), and cameras; Titus even has "Picatinny rails" like those on standard-issue U.S. military rifles so users can snap on different accessories.
For example, a SWAT team can snap on a taser to stun a suspect, while a bomb squad can attach a miniature water cannon called a "disruptor" to blast open suspicious packages. Northrop also wants to offer Titus to hazardous materials (HAZMAT) teams, but they're still working on a pressurization system to prevent stray sparks from the robot's electric interior from igniting any flammable gasses.
Titus is primarily aimed at law enforcement and other emergency responders, but Northrop aims to apply its technologies and design principles both as upgrades to its current robots and to future robots for the Army that will likely be both larger and more autonomous. (Like most current ground robots, Titus has to be remotely controlled by a human operator; robots that can find their own way around obstacles are a work in progress). Northrop is now in negotiations to sell the first 16 or so Titus robots to undisclosed state, local, and international agencies in the first quarter of 2013.
Northrop Shows Off Smaller, Modular Robot For Tighter Budgets
http://defense.aol.com/2012/10/17/northrop-shows-off-smaller-modular-robot-for-tighter-budgets/Northrop Shows Off Smaller, Modular Robot For Tighter Budgets
By Sydney J. Freedberg Jr.
Published: October 17, 2012
NATIONAL PRESS CLUB: Since 9/11, robots have become commonplace tools for the military, police bomb squads, and hazardous materials teams. But as budgets tighten, not even the Pentagon can afford to buy many types of robots, each for a different mission.
So Northrop Grumman's subsidiary, Remotec, is rolling out a new robot called Titus specifically designed to be smaller, cheaper, and more versatile than the current crop. Its basic configuration weighs about 135 pounds, costs about $125,000, and is "modular" so users can easily snap off and snap on parts to tailor the robot to a particular mission. Users can swap the manipulator arm, the tires and tracks (it has both), and cameras; Titus even has "Picatinny rails" like those on standard-issue U.S. military rifles so users can snap on different accessories.
For example, a SWAT team can snap on a taser to stun a suspect, while a bomb squad can attach a miniature water cannon called a "disruptor" to blast open suspicious packages. Northrop also wants to offer Titus to hazardous materials (HAZMAT) teams, but they're still working on a pressurization system to prevent stray sparks from the robot's electric interior from igniting any flammable gasses.
Titus is primarily aimed at law enforcement and other emergency responders, but Northrop aims to apply its technologies and design principles both as upgrades to its current robots and to future robots for the Army that will likely be both larger and more autonomous. (Like most current ground robots, Titus has to be remotely controlled by a human operator; robots that can find their own way around obstacles are a work in progress). Northrop is now in negotiations to sell the first 16 or so Titus robots to undisclosed state, local, and international agencies in the first quarter of 2013.
October 18, 2012
New littoral ship due to arrive on Thursday
Written by Jeanette Steele
7:32 p.m., Oct. 17, 2012
ABOARD THE FORT WORTH - A blown fuse in a communications system meant the Navy helicopter had to find the Fort Worth, the U.S. fleet's newest littoral combat ship, by sight in the ocean off San Diego on Wednesday.
The helicopter passed over a destroyer, a big, bulky warship, all squared-off angles. Nope, not that one.
When the helicopter found the Fort Worth, it was obvious at a glance that the small, sleek ship was a different creature all together.
The Fort Worth, the third in the Navy's new littoral combat ship line, is bound for San Diego, its new home port. The ship is scheduled to sail past Ballast Point and into the bay, arriving at its San Diego Naval Base pier at 9:30 a.m. Thursday.
New ($500 million dollar) littoral ship due to arrive on Thursday
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/oct/17/new-littoral-ship-due-to-arrive-on-thursdayNew littoral ship due to arrive on Thursday
Written by Jeanette Steele
7:32 p.m., Oct. 17, 2012
ABOARD THE FORT WORTH - A blown fuse in a communications system meant the Navy helicopter had to find the Fort Worth, the U.S. fleet's newest littoral combat ship, by sight in the ocean off San Diego on Wednesday.
The helicopter passed over a destroyer, a big, bulky warship, all squared-off angles. Nope, not that one.
When the helicopter found the Fort Worth, it was obvious at a glance that the small, sleek ship was a different creature all together.
The Fort Worth, the third in the Navy's new littoral combat ship line, is bound for San Diego, its new home port. The ship is scheduled to sail past Ballast Point and into the bay, arriving at its San Diego Naval Base pier at 9:30 a.m. Thursday.
October 18, 2012
Navy OKs $1 billion for missile called flawed by tester
By Kobus on 2012-10-18 01:02:30 | From nosint.blogspot.com
The U.S. Navy approved an Alliant Techsystems Inc. anti-radar missile for full production valued at as much as $1.1 billion, even though the Pentagon's chief tester says the weapon's performance flaws "largely negate" its "ability to accomplish its mission."
While the missile "has the potential to eventually provide some improved combat capability against enemy air defenses, the weapon as tested has multiple deficiencies," said Michael Gilmore, the Pentagon's director of operational testing.
Gilmore's position that earlier problems with the Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile haven't been remedied wasn't known publicly when the Navy on Aug. 20 approved full-rate production, the most profitable phase for a defense contractor.
From The Use It Or Lose It Files: Navy OKs $1 billion for missile called flawed by tester
http://www.zimbio.com/The+United+States+Navy/articles/M95DCcq1XFW/Navy+OKs+1+billion+missile+called+flawed+testerNavy OKs $1 billion for missile called flawed by tester
By Kobus on 2012-10-18 01:02:30 | From nosint.blogspot.com
The U.S. Navy approved an Alliant Techsystems Inc. anti-radar missile for full production valued at as much as $1.1 billion, even though the Pentagon's chief tester says the weapon's performance flaws "largely negate" its "ability to accomplish its mission."
While the missile "has the potential to eventually provide some improved combat capability against enemy air defenses, the weapon as tested has multiple deficiencies," said Michael Gilmore, the Pentagon's director of operational testing.
Gilmore's position that earlier problems with the Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile haven't been remedied wasn't known publicly when the Navy on Aug. 20 approved full-rate production, the most profitable phase for a defense contractor.
October 18, 2012
Afghanistan’s president says NATO can speed up handover of security to Afghan forces
By Associated Press, Updated: Thursday, October 18, 9:06 AM
KABUL, Afghanistan — President Hamid Karzai said Thursday the nation’s military and police are ready and willing to take full responsibility for security in the country if the U.S.-led international coalition decides to speed up the handover to Afghan government forces.
With support for the already unpopular war fading in the West, there has been growing speculation that NATO could accelerate withdrawal plans that currently call for the security transition to Afghan forces to be complete by the end of 2014, when all foreign combat troops are scheduled to leave the country.
“Afghans are ready to expedite the process of transition if necessary, and willing as well,” Karzai said during a joint news conference with NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen. “So this is in all aspects good news for us and good news for NATO.”
A NATO diplomat said there was no discussion of speeding up the 2014 timeline during the meeting between Karzai and the alliance chief. The diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity in line with alliance’s regulations, said Karzai was eager to see the next stage of transition, which would have Afghan forces take charge of security for almost the entire country.
unhappycamper comment: 2+ billion dollars a week that this occupation is costing could be used in this country to fix infrastructure, education, women's health, etc., etc. etc.
Afghanistan’s president says NATO can speed up handover of security to Afghan forces
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/nato-to-remain-in-afghanistan-until-2014-despite-calls-for-quicker-withdrawal/2012/10/18/ae1d647c-18f7-11e2-a346-f24efc680b8d_story.htmlAfghanistan’s president says NATO can speed up handover of security to Afghan forces
By Associated Press, Updated: Thursday, October 18, 9:06 AM
KABUL, Afghanistan — President Hamid Karzai said Thursday the nation’s military and police are ready and willing to take full responsibility for security in the country if the U.S.-led international coalition decides to speed up the handover to Afghan government forces.
With support for the already unpopular war fading in the West, there has been growing speculation that NATO could accelerate withdrawal plans that currently call for the security transition to Afghan forces to be complete by the end of 2014, when all foreign combat troops are scheduled to leave the country.
“Afghans are ready to expedite the process of transition if necessary, and willing as well,” Karzai said during a joint news conference with NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen. “So this is in all aspects good news for us and good news for NATO.”
A NATO diplomat said there was no discussion of speeding up the 2014 timeline during the meeting between Karzai and the alliance chief. The diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity in line with alliance’s regulations, said Karzai was eager to see the next stage of transition, which would have Afghan forces take charge of security for almost the entire country.
unhappycamper comment: 2+ billion dollars a week that this occupation is costing could be used in this country to fix infrastructure, education, women's health, etc., etc. etc.
October 18, 2012
"Not only is there is no evidence at all to support the view that the private sector is more efficient, but there is very strong public resistance to privatization. European citizens will not back down quietly on this,” said Jan Willem Goudriaan of the European Federation of Public Service Unions.
Privatization Pushback: Civil Society Slams Water Privatization Conditions for EU Bailouts
Published on Wednesday, October 17, 2012 by Common Dreams
Civil society groups Wednesday are slamming the European Commission's continued insistence that privatization of municipal water systems be a condition for receiving rescue funds, a plan the groups describe as "economically, socially and democratically flawed."
In a letter addressed to Olli Rehn, Vice-President of the European Commission and member of the Commission responsible for Economic and Monetary Affairs and the Euro, 24 groups, including Food & Water Europe, Save Greek Water, Italian Forum of Water Movements and Blue Planet Project, write that the privatization plans are based on supposed virtues of water privatization without any factual substantiation. Because of lack of success of privatizing municipal water, European communities who had privatized their water systems have re-municipalized them, the groups write. Their letter sent today is in response to a letter they received September 26 from Rehn acknowledging the privatization conditions.
“This really demonstrates how the Commission has lost touch with reality. Their ideological arguments are not based on substantiated facts and goes to the extreme of ignoring the democratic will of the people,” stated Gabriella Zanzanaini, Director of European Affairs for Food & Water Europe.
Further, the groups assert that "imposing privatization of water utilities 'appears to be in violation of the EU's supposed neutrality on the question of public or private ownership and management of collective water services.'"
Privatization Pushback: Civil Society Slams Water Privatization Conditions for EU Bailouts
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/10/17-2"Not only is there is no evidence at all to support the view that the private sector is more efficient, but there is very strong public resistance to privatization. European citizens will not back down quietly on this,” said Jan Willem Goudriaan of the European Federation of Public Service Unions.
Privatization Pushback: Civil Society Slams Water Privatization Conditions for EU Bailouts
Published on Wednesday, October 17, 2012 by Common Dreams
Civil society groups Wednesday are slamming the European Commission's continued insistence that privatization of municipal water systems be a condition for receiving rescue funds, a plan the groups describe as "economically, socially and democratically flawed."
In a letter addressed to Olli Rehn, Vice-President of the European Commission and member of the Commission responsible for Economic and Monetary Affairs and the Euro, 24 groups, including Food & Water Europe, Save Greek Water, Italian Forum of Water Movements and Blue Planet Project, write that the privatization plans are based on supposed virtues of water privatization without any factual substantiation. Because of lack of success of privatizing municipal water, European communities who had privatized their water systems have re-municipalized them, the groups write. Their letter sent today is in response to a letter they received September 26 from Rehn acknowledging the privatization conditions.
“This really demonstrates how the Commission has lost touch with reality. Their ideological arguments are not based on substantiated facts and goes to the extreme of ignoring the democratic will of the people,” stated Gabriella Zanzanaini, Director of European Affairs for Food & Water Europe.
Further, the groups assert that "imposing privatization of water utilities 'appears to be in violation of the EU's supposed neutrality on the question of public or private ownership and management of collective water services.'"
October 17, 2012
The Pentagon has picked next summer’s Man of Steel film to be the cinematic debut of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, shown here in a 2011 ceremony at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida.
Superman Reboot Will Be Pentagon Stealth Jet’s Silver Screen Debut
By Spencer AckermanEmail Author
October 16, 2012 | 6:30 am
Faster than a sluggish bureaucracy. More powerful than enemy radar. Able to scale tall buildings with a single engine. Up on the screen in the forthcoming Superman reboot, it’s — it’s — it’s the debut of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the most expensive weapons program in human history.
Long before the family of stealth jets known as the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter will ever fly a combat mission, the F-35 will appear in theaters for the first time next summer in Man of Steel, Zach Snyder’s anticipated re-imagining of the Superman franchise. It’s perhaps the best cinematic debut possible for an aircraft program that’s suffered numerous budgetary and engineering woes.
“It was a target of opportunity,” Phil Strub, the Pentagon’s Hollywood liaison, tells Danger Room. When the filmmakers visited California’s Edwards Air Force Base in January to get shots of military aircraft for a scene, they were excited to learn that the base hosted a complement of F-35s for flight testing. The base arranged for two of them to be towed into the shot.
~snip~
Offscreen, the F-35 is in about as much trouble as a superhero in the third act of an action movie. The advanced stealth fighter — intended to be the backbone of the Air Force, Navy and Marines’ future combat air fleets — is estimated to cost as much as $1.5 trillion over its half-century lifespan. It’s several years late and several hundred million dollars over budget. Its software is complicated, its engineering flaws are numerous, and the Pentagon no longer predicts when it will enter service. The Navy appears to be hedging its bets against the program ultimately collapsing under the weight of its costs — and inside the Pentagon, there’s concern over whether the F-35 remains, as Sen. Claire McCaskill once called it, “too big to fail.”
unhappycamper comment: Towing two of these pigs into a movie scene does not a fighter make. On the plus side we get to see half a billion dollars of military holeware being towed to.... ? to.... ? Bueller?
on edit to change paragraph #4
Superman Reboot Will Be Pentagon Stealth Jet’s Silver Screen Debut
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/10/superman-f35-man-of-steel/The Pentagon has picked next summer’s Man of Steel film to be the cinematic debut of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, shown here in a 2011 ceremony at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida.
Superman Reboot Will Be Pentagon Stealth Jet’s Silver Screen Debut
By Spencer AckermanEmail Author
October 16, 2012 | 6:30 am
Faster than a sluggish bureaucracy. More powerful than enemy radar. Able to scale tall buildings with a single engine. Up on the screen in the forthcoming Superman reboot, it’s — it’s — it’s the debut of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the most expensive weapons program in human history.
Long before the family of stealth jets known as the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter will ever fly a combat mission, the F-35 will appear in theaters for the first time next summer in Man of Steel, Zach Snyder’s anticipated re-imagining of the Superman franchise. It’s perhaps the best cinematic debut possible for an aircraft program that’s suffered numerous budgetary and engineering woes.
“It was a target of opportunity,” Phil Strub, the Pentagon’s Hollywood liaison, tells Danger Room. When the filmmakers visited California’s Edwards Air Force Base in January to get shots of military aircraft for a scene, they were excited to learn that the base hosted a complement of F-35s for flight testing. The base arranged for two of them to be towed into the shot.
~snip~
Offscreen, the F-35 is in about as much trouble as a superhero in the third act of an action movie. The advanced stealth fighter — intended to be the backbone of the Air Force, Navy and Marines’ future combat air fleets — is estimated to cost as much as $1.5 trillion over its half-century lifespan. It’s several years late and several hundred million dollars over budget. Its software is complicated, its engineering flaws are numerous, and the Pentagon no longer predicts when it will enter service. The Navy appears to be hedging its bets against the program ultimately collapsing under the weight of its costs — and inside the Pentagon, there’s concern over whether the F-35 remains, as Sen. Claire McCaskill once called it, “too big to fail.”
unhappycamper comment: Towing two of these pigs into a movie scene does not a fighter make. On the plus side we get to see half a billion dollars of military holeware being towed to.... ? to.... ? Bueller?
on edit to change paragraph #4
October 17, 2012
Why the U.S. military can't predict the next war.
100% Right 0% of the Time
BY MICAH ZENKO | OCTOBER 16, 2012
Two weeks ago, General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, delivered the Landon Lecture to hundreds of U.S. servicemembers and students at Kansas State University. During the question and answer session, a cadet in the Air Force ROTC asked, "What [do] you see being the focus of our nation in 5 to 10 years, where I'll be serving?"
Paraphrasing a quote by hockey legend Wayne Gretzky, Dempsey replied: "Somebody said to him once, you're not really a physically imposing guy, how come you're such a great hockey player? He said, 'I skate to where the puck is going to be, not to where it's been.' That's what we're trying to do."
In May, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta echoed this sentiment with even greater conviction when he described Pentagon priorities in an era of slightly reduced defense spending and a leaner military: "We've got to focus on where the main threats are. That means we continue a major focus on the Pacific region and we continue a major focus on the Middle East, because that's where the potential problems are for the future."
This forward-looking approach from the Pentagon's senior leadership is admirable, in that it attempts to counter the old adage that "generals fight the last war." There is just one glaring problem with this degree of certainty: The U.S. military has a terrible record of predicting where conflicts will emerge and where they will be deployed to fight. The next time you hear lists of emerging threats and future conflicts, bear in mind the following observations from senior military officials over past few years:
100% Right 0% of the Time
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/10/16/why_the_military_cant_predict_the_next_warWhy the U.S. military can't predict the next war.
100% Right 0% of the Time
BY MICAH ZENKO | OCTOBER 16, 2012
Two weeks ago, General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, delivered the Landon Lecture to hundreds of U.S. servicemembers and students at Kansas State University. During the question and answer session, a cadet in the Air Force ROTC asked, "What [do] you see being the focus of our nation in 5 to 10 years, where I'll be serving?"
Paraphrasing a quote by hockey legend Wayne Gretzky, Dempsey replied: "Somebody said to him once, you're not really a physically imposing guy, how come you're such a great hockey player? He said, 'I skate to where the puck is going to be, not to where it's been.' That's what we're trying to do."
In May, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta echoed this sentiment with even greater conviction when he described Pentagon priorities in an era of slightly reduced defense spending and a leaner military: "We've got to focus on where the main threats are. That means we continue a major focus on the Pacific region and we continue a major focus on the Middle East, because that's where the potential problems are for the future."
This forward-looking approach from the Pentagon's senior leadership is admirable, in that it attempts to counter the old adage that "generals fight the last war." There is just one glaring problem with this degree of certainty: The U.S. military has a terrible record of predicting where conflicts will emerge and where they will be deployed to fight. The next time you hear lists of emerging threats and future conflicts, bear in mind the following observations from senior military officials over past few years:
Profile Information
Member since: Wed Mar 16, 2005, 11:12 AMNumber of posts: 60,364
