unhappycamper
unhappycamper's JournalLike Taking Candy From A Baby
Let's start with the basics: where does military money come from?
The answer is the discretionary budget.
What is the military doing that eats up 57% of all discretionary spending in the United States? This artist's concept illustrates where the bucks go in the US Navy:
http://news.usni.org/2014/10/29/opinion-u-s-navy-entering-new-future-electronic-warfare
An artist concept of USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) an Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyer, USS Zumwalt (DDG-1000) and both variants of the Littoral Combat Ship using the Surface Electronic Warfare Improvement Program (SEWIP). Lockheed Martin image
First up: the USS Gerald R Ford
The USS Gerald R Ford is the first of a new class of aircraft carriers. The USS Gerald R Ford is the first Naval warship I can recall being delivered UNFINISHED. Yup, UNFINISHED.
http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/21/navy-aircraft-unfinished-for-launch-will-require-a-billion-dollars-more/
Navy Aircraft Unfinished For Launch, Will Require A Billion Dollars More
Jonah Bennett
9:29 PM 11/21/2014
A government watchdog report sheds light on the disaster that is the Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier. Not only will the Navy carrier be incomplete at launch date, but completing construction will cost upwards of $998 million dollars.
The aircraft carrier stands at only 80 percent complete, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), which began the study at the behest of a Senate report. Not only have costs risen 20 percent since 2006, but the launch has been delayed a year. It was supposed to be cleared for a September 2015 date, but now has been pushed back to March 2016. Even still, some of the most important features of the carrier intended to separate it from older models will remain dormant while on display. Current total costs are estimated at $12.9 billion dollars.
“With the shipbuilder embarking on one of the most complex phases of construction with the greatest likelihood for cost growth, cost increases beyond the current $12.9 billion cost cap appear likely,” the watchdog agency said. Delayed construction, the Navy argues, is an effort to avoid going over the cost cap. Satellite communication will have to wait. Defects will be present, too, until almost a billion dollars more is spent to correct the errors.
Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain wasn’t buying the Navy’s statement on cost overruns.
Next up: Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arleigh_Burke-class_destroyer
The Arleigh Burke-class of guided missile destroyers (DDGs) is the United States Navy's first class of destroyer built around the Aegis Combat System and the SPY-1D multi-function phased array radar. The class is named for Admiral Arleigh Burke, the most famous American destroyer officer of World War II, and later Chief of Naval Operations. The class leader, USS Arleigh Burke, was commissioned during Admiral Burke's lifetime.
They were designed as multi-role destroyers[9] to fit the AAW (Anti-Aircraft Warfare) role with their powerful Aegis radar and anti-aircraft missiles; ASW (Anti-submarine warfare) role, with their towed sonar array, anti-submarine rockets, and ASW helicopter; ASUW (Anti-surface warfare) role with their Harpoon missile launcher; and strategic land strike role with their Tomahawk missiles. Some versions of the class no longer have the towed sonar, or Harpoon missile launcher. Their hull and superstructure were designed to have a reduced radar cross section[10] The first ship of the class was commissioned on 4 July 1991. With the decommissioning of the last Spruance-class destroyer, Cushing, on 21 September 2005, the Arleigh Burke–class ships became the U.S. Navy's only active destroyers; the class has the longest production run for any postwar U.S. Navy surface combatant.[11] Besides the 62 vessels of this class (comprising 21 of Flight I, 7 of Flight II and 34 of Flight IIA) in service by 2013, up to a further 42 (of Flight III) have been envisaged.
With an overall length of 505 feet (154 m) to 509 feet (155 m), displacement ranging from 8,315 to 9,200 tons, and weaponry including over 90 missiles, the Arleigh Burke–class ships are larger and more heavily armed than most previous ships classified as guided missile cruisers.[12]
It's big, it's bad, and it costs $2 billion dollars.
Next up: Zumwalt-class destroyers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Zumwalt_%28DDG-1000%29
USS Zumwalt (DDG-1000)
History
See also: Zumwalt-class destroyer § History
Zumwalt 's deckhouse in transit on 6 November 2012
Many of the ship's features were originally developed under the DD21 program ("21st Century Destroyer"
. In 2001, Congress cut the DD-21 program by half as part of the SC21 program. To save it, the acquisition program was renamed as DD(X) and heavily reworked. The initial funding allocation for DDG-1000 was included in the National Defense Authorization Act of 2007.[10]
A contract worth $1.4 billion was awarded to General Dynamics on 14 February 2008 for the construction of Zumwalt at Bath Iron Works in Bath, Maine.[11]
Full rate production officially began on 11 February 2009.[12]
As of July 2008, the construction timetable was for General Dynamics to deliver the ship in April 2013, with March 2015 as the target for Zumwalt to meet her initial operating capability.[13] However, by 2012, the planned completion and delivery of the vessel had slipped to the 2014 fiscal year.[14]
The first section of the ship was laid down on the slipway at Bath Iron Works on 17 November 2011.[14] By this point, fabrication of the ship was over 60% complete.[14] The naming ceremony was planned for 19 October 2013,[15] but was canceled due to the United States federal government shutdown of 2013.[16]
Despite rumors that the launch of Zumwalt would be delayed until early 2014, the vessel was launched from its shipyard in Bath, Maine on 29 October 2013.[17][18]
In January 2014, Zumwalt began to prepare for heavy weather trials. The trials will see how the ship and her instrumentation reacts to high winds, stormy seas, and adverse weather conditions. The ship's new wave-piercing tumblehome hull configuration is made to reduce her radar cross-section. Tests will involve lateral and vertical accelerations and pitch and roll. Later tests will include fuel on-loading, data center tests, propulsion events, X-band radar evaluations, and mission systems activation to finalize integration of electronics, currently 90 percent complete out of 6 million lines of code. These all culminate in builders trials and acceptance trials, with delivery for U.S. Navy tests in late 2014 with initial operating capability (IOC) to be reached by 2016.[19]
Here's what really frosts my ass about the ship.
in the last century battleships with 16-inch guns were king. Missouri-class battleships were the top of the line and they cost $100 million dollars each.
In contrast the USS Zumwalt costs $5.6 billion dollars each. That's 56 Iowa-class WW II battleships.
Last up: Littoral Combat Ships.
According the Navy's Bluewater program from the 90s, Littoral Combat Ships were supposed to cost $200 million each. LCS#1 (second from bottom) cost $584 million dollars, LCS #2 (bottom) cost $784 million dollars.
From top to bottom:
$12.9 billion dollars (UNFINISHED)
At least $1 billion dollars to FINISH
$2 billion dollars
$5.6 billion dollars
$1.2 billion dollars
==============
$22.7 billion dollars ($22,700,000,000)
And we haven't talked buying ammo and aircraft for these things. Ka'ching.
Who You Callin' An Organizing Principle?!?!
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Who-You-Callin-An-Organiz-by-William-Boardman-Bomber_Bombing_Congress_Congress-140914-777.html
Washington's ISIS War Drums: Do Stupid Stuff, Do It Now!
Who You Callin' An Organizing Principle?!?!
By William Boardman
General News 9/14/2014 at 15:10:49
As Hillary Clinton was widely quoted as saying recently, "Great nations need organizing principles, and 'don't do stupid stuff' is not an organizing principle."
Maybe others have pointed out that this is a pretty stupid statement, but that's far from the conventional wisdom. Think about the levels of stupidity here. Only "Great nations"? What, small nations don't need to get their acts together? And who says the United States is a "great" nation and in what sense is it great and isn't spouting a version of the American exceptionalism cliche just another way of doing stupid stuff? As organizing principles go, "Don't do stupid stuff" is a great place to start. Then all you need to do is figure out what's stupid and don't do it: like not voting for war in Iraq in 2002.
What does the aspiring President Clinton offer for her own organizing principle? In her book Hard Choices, she writes: "Making policy is a balancing act. Hopefully we get it more right than wrong." That means even less than "Don't do stupid stuff." That pretty much means: "we're bound to do stupid stuff but we hope we won't do too much stupid stuff."
Of course that makes good political sense coming from the woman who, as Senator Clinton, voted to go to war in Iraq. As if that wasn't totally knowable, in advance, as doing stupid stuff, really stupid stuff. That vote was a clever trap for intimidated Democrats, afraid to stand up to stupid stuff. Senator Clinton was not alone in that rush to war. She, along with Senators Kerry, McCain, Biden, Hagel, McConnell, Reid, and 70 other Senators, voted to support the administration lying us into that war on transparently dishonest evidence. It's kind of cute, in a darkly disastrous way, that these same wrong-headed people are again among those braying most loudly for more war now. It makes a sort of amoral sense, since today's mess is a continuation of the war they voted for because they presumably didn't think it was stupid stuff that would last more than a decade.
--
Like lemmings, our politicians are drawn to war and those fuckers take us with them.
Analysis Of Volunteer's Metadata Stream Reveals His Life In Detail, Allows Passwords To Be Guessed
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140910/06590828478/analysis-volunteers-metadata-stream-reveals-his-life-detail-allows-passwords-to-be-guessed.shtmlAnalysis Of Volunteer's Metadata Stream Reveals His Life In Detail, Allows Passwords To Be Guessed
from the not-"just"-metadata dept
Privacy
by Glyn Moody
Fri, Sep 12th 2014 7:39pm
Three years ago, Techdirt wrote about how German politician Malte Spitz obtained six months' worth of basic geolocation data for his mobile phone. He then gave this to the German newspaper Die Zeit, which produced a great visualization of his travels during this time. That showed clearly how much was revealed from such basic data. Since then, of course, metadata has assumed an even greater importance, as it has emerged that the NSA routinely gathers huge quantities of it about innocent citizens. More chillingly, we also know that people are killed purely because of their metadata. But what exactly does metadata show about us? We now have a better idea thanks to the generosity of Ton Siedsma from Holland. He has allowed researchers to access not just the geolocation data of his mobile phone, but all of its metadata:
From one week of logs, we were able to attach a timestamp to 15,000 records. Each time Ton's phone made a connection with a communications tower and each time he sent an e-mail or visited a website, we could see when this occurred and where he was at that moment, down to a few metres. We were able to infer a social network based on his phone and e-mail traffic. Using his browser data, we were able to see the sites he visited and the searches he made. And we could see the subject, sender and recipient of every one of his e-mails.
That's very similar to the sort of thing governments around the world are now routinely demanding. Here's what the researchers were able to find out about various aspects of his life as a result. The basics:
Ton is a recent graduate in his early twenties. He receives e-mails about student housing and part-time jobs, which can be concluded from the subject lines and the senders. He works long hours, in part because of his lengthy train commute. He often doesn’t get home until eight o'clock in the evening. Once home, he continues to work until late.
His work:
Based on the data, it is quite clear that Ton works as a lawyer for the digital rights organisation Bits of Freedom. He deals mainly with international trade agreements, and maintains contact with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and a few Members of Parliament about this issue. He follows the decision-making of the European Union closely. He is also interested in the methods of investigation employed by police and intelligence agencies. This also explains his interest in news reports about hacking and rounded-up child pornography rings.
His social networks:
From a social network analysis based on Ton's e-mail traffic, it is possible for us to discern different groups to which he belongs. These clusters are formed by his three e-mail accounts. It may be the case that the groups would look a bit different if we were also to use the metadata from his phone. However, we agreed to not perform any additional investigation, such as actively attempting to discover the identity of the user of a particular number, so as to protect the privacy of those in Ton’s network.
Former CIA Lawyer Defends Torture in Der Spiegel Interview
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Former-CIA-Lawyer-Defends-by-Eric-London-Bush_Counterterrorism_Detention_Former-Politicians-140827-857.html
Former CIA Lawyer Defends Torture in Der Spiegel Interview
By Eric London
OpEdNews Op Eds 8/27/2014 at 14:42:34
~snip~
In the interview, Rizzo, who worked at the CIA from 1976 to 2009, declares that although the torture programs he approved "seemed harsh, even brutal," he does not regret his support for their implementation.
"I was certainly an architect of the interrogation program, even if I didn't originally come up with it," he says, adding, "I was the legal architect of the proposed list of techniques and played the lead role in obtaining legal approval for their use."
He goes on to tell Der Spiegel, "I can't honestly sit here and say I would have made any different decisions than the ones I made back in early 2002," even as he asserts, "I am confident that, If I had chosen to, I could have stopped (the torture programs) before they started."
At one point in the interview, Rizzo refers to an interrogation technique on the initial list provided by the Counter Terrorism Center that was "even more chilling than waterboarding." He claims it was never used.
Obama’s budding Cambodia Policy in Syria
http://www.juancole.com/2014/08/budding-cambodia-policy.htmlObama’s budding Cambodia Policy in Syria
By Juan Cole | Aug. 23, 2014
Former British ambassador to the United States Sir Christoher Meyer is advocating that the US and Western Europe stop advocating the overthrow of the Baath regime of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad and instead coordinate with it to move against the so-called “Islamic State,” which controls some predominantly Sunni Muslim desert towns on both the Syrian and Iraqi sides of the border.
The Obama administration is also talking about hitting IS in Syria. Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, says that the IS cannot be defeated without taking it on in Syria. For US fighter jets to fly over Syrian air space and avoid being shot down by Russian-supplied anti-aircraft batteries of the Baath government, the US would have to in some way coordinate with Damascus in this aerial bombing campaign. Typically this arrangement is made by sharing “Identify Friend or Foe” signal codes that the jets send out so that they can be seen as friendlies. Since the stated US position is that al-Assad should resign or be overthrown ASAP, such an arrangement would be, as Meyer says, “the mother of all U-turns.”
Meyer, however, is advocating not just a tacit recognition of strategic and tactical common interests with the Syrian Baath but an actual military alliance, which is unlikely.
British Foreign Minister Philip Hammond pushed back against Meyer’s amoral Realism. Hammond challenged the notion that you needed to coordinate with Damascus to do bombing runs on eastern Syria on IS positions. The foreign minister, however, is wrong about that. There would be a danger of setting off Baath Army anti-aircraft batteries unless there was at least minimal behind the scenes coordination.
How Harper’s botched procurement crippled the F-35
http://www.ipolitics.ca/2014/08/20/how-harpers-botched-procurement-crippled-the-f-35/
How Harper’s botched procurement crippled the F-35
By Jonathan Manthorpe | Aug 20, 2014 8:58 pm
Canada will not be alone in being raked over the coals for its low military spending when 150 heads of state and government ministers meet at the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit in Cardiff early next month.
Canada’s military expenditure last year, according to the World Bank, was only one per cent of gross domestic product, half the two per cent NATO target. But among the 28 NATO members, only the United States, the United Kingdom, Greece and Estonia have hit the target consistently.
But Canada’s military spending will loom large because the fate of Washington’s problem-plagued F-35 Joint Strike Fighter programme — at $1.5 trillion the most expensive U.S. military procurement programme ever — has become a token of the unwillingness of the NATO allies to march in step.
And among the NATO and allied governments having second thoughts about buying this all-purpose, “fifth generation” warplane, Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s decision to shelve the purchase of 65 F-35s — after a damning auditor-general’s report on the government’s misleading representation of the costs — is being seen as a fulcrum moment.
The U.S. Navy’s Most Expensive Warships for 2014
http://www.nasdaq.com/article/the-us-navys-most-expensive-warships-for-2014-cm378514The U.S. Navy’s Most Expensive Warships for 2014
~snip~
The United States has an impressive array of weapons systems, but it could be argued that none are as imposing as the U.S. Navy's warships. In fact, the U.S. often uses the deployment of these weapons as a "show of force" to intimidate would-be-aggressors into backing down -- and who wouldn't be intimidated by a veritable floating fortress in your backyard?
~snip~
3. LHA 6 America -Class Amphibious Assault Ship
~snip~
More importantly, this ship is an essential when it comes to transporting Marine Expeditionary Units and their equipment. In fact, it can carry up to 1,871 troops, in addition to its 1,204-person crew. The Government Accountability Office's, or GAO, estimated program unit cost for this titan? $3.4 billion -- and while that might seem like a staggering number, it's still not as expensive as the next two vessels on this list.
2. DDG 1000 Zumwalt -Class Destroyer
~snip~
Speaking of dominating, the Zumwalt has a truly impressive array of weapons, including Advanced Gun Systems, Peripheral Vertical launch Systems, a number of missile systems, and a power plant that can produce 78 megawatts of electricity. This means the Zumwalt could be used for futuristic weapons like the Electromagnetic Railgun -- an extended range launcher that uses electricity to fire projectiles at 4,500-5,600 mph. More importantly, thanks to automation technologies, the Zumwalt can be crewed with 142 sailors. That's less than half of what's needed on traditional destroyers. The GAO's estimated program unit cost for this stealth destroyer? $7.3 billion. Expensive, but not nearly as expensive as the last ship on this list.
1. Gerald R. Ford -Class Nuclear Aircraft Carrier (CVN 78)
~snip~
It's 1,092 feet long, its beam is 134 feet high, its Flight Deck is 256 feet wide, and it has a crew of 4,539. More importantly, the Gerald R. Ford is the first new design for an aircraft carrier since the Nimitz , and it comes power-packed with new technology. This includes: an electromagnetic aircraft launch system, new reactor plants that increase electrical power generation, and there's more space for Flight Deck operations thanks to a decreased island. Further, the Gerald R. Ford 's weaponry includes the Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile, Rolling Airframe Missile, Phalanx Close-In Weapon System, and it can carry 75+ aircraft. Clearly, this is one ship you don't want to mess with, and it comes with an equally daunting price: an estimated $12 billion per program unit cost, according to the GAO.
The F-35, the Scam of the Century
http://www.voltairenet.org/article185088.html
The F-35, the Scam of the Century
Voltaire Network | 16 August 2014
The F-35 is the largest weapons program in history. This multi-role aircraft is built by Lockheed Martin with Northrop Grumman and BAE Systems as major partners.
~snip~
Since the launch of the project, its cost has varied ceaselessly, leading to the cancellation of various orders. Earlier this month, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a reassuring study, however based on figures already two years old. Simultaneously, the Department of Defense assured it would be cheaper to buy but more expensive to maintain.
According to an independent Canadian study by Professor Michael Byers for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and the Rideau Institute, the truth is much darker: in truth, no one can know the exact cost of an aircraft that has not been precisely designed. However, the 65 aircraft ordered by Canada would likely cost a staggering $ 1.5 billion USD per aircraft over 40 years (in 2007, the United States assured that the aircraft would not cost more than the F-18 and estimated its cost at about 377 million dollars each).
The following bar graph illustrates the increase in the cost estimates for Canada’s fleet of 65 over the past years.
Ignoring Ukraine's Neo-Nazi Storm Troopers
http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/robert-parry/57610/ignoring-ukraines-neo-nazi-storm-troopersIgnoring Ukraine's Neo-Nazi Storm Troopers
Ukraine
by Robert Parry | August 14, 2014 - 7:26am
The U.S.-backed Ukrainian government is knowingly sending neo-Nazi paramilitaries into eastern Ukrainian neighborhoods to attack ethnic Russians who are regarded by some of these storm troopers as “Untermenschen” or subhuman, according to Western press reports.
Recently, one eastern Ukrainian town, Marinka, fell to Ukraine’s Azov battalion as it waved the Wolfsangel flag, a symbol used by Adolf Hitler’s SS divisions in World War II. The Azov paramilitaries also attacked Donetsk, one of the remaining strongholds of ethnic Russians opposed to the Kiev regime that overthrew elected President Viktor Yanukovych last February.
Yet, despite this extraordinary reality – modern-day Nazi storm troopers slaughtering Slavic people in eastern Ukraine – the Obama administration continues to concentrate its criticism on Russia for sending a convoy of humanitarian supplies to the embattled region. Suddenly, the administration’s rhetoric about a “responsibility to protect” civilians has gone silent.
This same hypocrisy has permeated nearly everything said by the U.S. State Department and reported by the mainstream U.S. news media since the Ukraine crisis began last year. There was fawning coverage of the Maidan protesters who sought to overthrow Yanukovych and then an immediate embrace of the “legitimacy” of the regime that followed the Feb. 22 coup. As part of this one-sided U.S. narrative, reports about the key roles played by neo-Nazi activists and militias were dismissed as “Russian propaganda.”
Ukraine-News Flash: Bloodiest Days of Ukraine's Ethnic Cleansing Expected to Come Now
http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/eric-zuesse/57586/ukraine-news-flash-bloodiest-days-of-ukraines-ethnic-cleansing-expected-to-come-nowUkraine-News Flash: Bloodiest Days of Ukraine's Ethnic Cleansing Expected to Come Now
Ukraine
by Eric Zuesse | August 13, 2014 - 7:18am
A reliably well-informed resident in the area that Obama's Ukrainian regime is ethnically cleansing (i.e., exterminating and/or expelling) has informed this reporter (and all of this source’s previous reports to me have subsequently turned out to be true):
"Kiev is attempting to blow up a chemical plant that will destroy a 600 KM diameter/ 300KM radius of area -- every living thing.
~snip~
Oleh Lashko, the person my source is referring to, is a convicted embezzler who then became a leading parliamentary member of the "Bloc Yulia Tymoshenko," led by the woman whom Obama had initially expected would become elected on 25 May 2014 as Ukraine's new President. She was also known as "the Gas Princess,” due to her having skimmed billions from Russia’s gas-sales to the State. But another oligarch, Petro Poroshenko (‘the Chocolate King,” and also a shipbuilder), became elected President instead, because Tymoshenko was too far to the right even for most of the voters in Ukraine's northwest. (There were only few people voting in the southeast after Obama's coup, because the post-coup regime had already begun its campaign to exterminate them by the time of the May 25th election.)
The pro-Hitler portion of Ukraine during World War II was the country's northwest. Ukraine's southeast tended to prefer Stalin's rule instead. After the end of communism, the southeast sought closer ties to Russia, whereas the northwest sought closer ties to "the West," but came to be led actually by CIA-backed admirers of the pro-Hitler Ukrainian Stepan Bandera, whom Hitler's forces imprisoned when it became clear that Bandera sought to establish a pro-Nazi independent Ukraine, and Hitler's forces insisted instead on Ukraine’s total subjugation.
When Obama took over Ukraine in the February 2014 coup, his agent Victoria Nuland placed at the top of the new Ukrainian Government the leaders of Ukraine's two nazi (or "pro-Nazi"
Parties, Right Sector, and "Freedom" or Svoboda (formerly called the Social Nationalists, but the CIA instructed them to change that name), both being led by Yulia Tymoshenko's ally Arseniy Yatsenyuk.
Profile Information
Member since: Wed Mar 16, 2005, 11:12 AMNumber of posts: 60,364
