Defense Department Spending Cuts

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

RKM

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Mar 16, 2006
Messages
2,703
Reaction score
563
Location
Del City, Oklahoma
From a workshop on whether Jesus' salvation would apply to aliens to determining the color of the feathers on a 150-million-year-old creature deemed the Earth's first bird, the Pentagon has spent money on some questionable projects, according to Sen. Tom Coburn.

At a time when many Republicans argue the Defense Department cannot afford new spending cuts, Mr. Coburn, Congress's top waste-watcher, released a report Thursday arguing that in fact the Pentagon is awash in billions of dollars of non-security spending that should be cut.

"The American people expect the Pentagon's $600 billion annual budget to go toward our nation's defense," the Oklahoma Republican said. "That isn't happening. Billions of defense dollars are being spent on programs and missions that have little or nothing to do with national security, or are already being performed by other government agencies."

Mr. Coburn said that over the next decade, the Defense Department will spend $6 billion on non-military research, $9 billion on running grocery stores, and some $37 billion on support and supply services that could better be done by civilians or the private sector.

Among the more curious spending was:

• $300,000 spent by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research to fund Brown University's research into archaeopteryx, the 150-million-year-old early bird, in which the researchers determined the creature likely had black feathers.

• an Office of Naval Research research project that helped spawn Caffeine Zone 2, an iPhone application that tells people how to schedule their coffee breaks.

• $1.5 million to develop a special new roll-up beef jerky, which Mr. Coburn said was funded by taking money out of a weapons program.

• $100,000 for a 2011 workshop on interstellar space travel that included a session entitled "Did Jesus die for Klingons too?" The session probed how Christian theology would apply in the event of the discovery of aliens.

But Mr. Coburn said the problems went beyond bad program funding choices.

He said the military now has more generals and admirals per troop than it did at the height of the Cold War. He recommended cutting 200 generals and admirals, which he said would also cut 800 support personnel, for a savings of $800 million over the next decade.


Read more: Pentagon wants to know: 'Did Jesus die for Klingons too?' - Washington Times http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog...now-did-jesus-die-klingons-too/#ixzz2CP8KDMDq
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
 

freeranger

Sharpshooter
Joined
Nov 1, 2012
Messages
143
Reaction score
0
Location
OKC
"Cuts" rarely equate to a reduction in spending. Additionally, said cuts are often spread out over blocks of time (ten years for example) which means that the next congress can as easily undo the acts of the existing congress, seeing as they aren't bound to follow such acts aside from constraints imposed by a constitutional amendment.
 

n8thegr8

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
3,654
Reaction score
3
Location
Oklahoma City
Seems to be picking nits a bit. The air force could care less what color the feathers of the archaeopteryx were, but the techniques used in determining that could have useful applications. Also, the Jesus thing was at the "100 Year Starship Study Symposium" on intergalactic space travel, an academic conference sponsored by DARPA. It really irks me when people jump to "that thar science stuff is a waste of money!" without considering the implications of the studies.
 

mugsy

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
4,538
Reaction score
1,112
Location
South West, OK
Seems to be picking nits a bit. The air force could care less what color the feathers of the archaeopteryx were, but the techniques used in determining that could have useful applications. Also, the Jesus thing was at the "100 Year Starship Study Symposium" on intergalactic space travel, an academic conference sponsored by DARPA. It really irks me when people jump to "that thar science stuff is a waste of money!" without considering the implications of the studies.

But what would this board be like if people didn't jump to unsupported conclusions randomly while huffing and puffing in indignation? LOL Some of the research and the purchases are total BS but most aren't - the vast majority of spending is driven by pay and benefits...primarily for enlisted folks as you might expect. Operations and maintenance are the next biggest bunch, then, IIRC procurement. R&D of all types is a relatively small piece of the budget.

I say instead - let's shrink the large number of ready combat ground forces and focus on modernization - keeping a core of highly trained forward thinking and constantly innovating senior NCOs, and officers. Also for the forces that we do keep - time to tilt toward air and sea power and modernized equipment.

As to all of the "get rid of generals" types - we can, easily, roll back a numberof 4-star to three-star commands and so forth and should do so. However, the force doesn't organize and synchronize itself. We need to be leaner but not brain-dead and the senior officers are the brain-trust and decision making center of the military. The senior NCOs are the "sinews" and the enforcers of discipline and the enlisted force are the muscles and bones.

Now someone here will tell me how their NCOs ran their unit and the officers weren't worth a darn, etc. but that is anecdotal and tells one nothing about how to organize and prepare a military (versus a single unit) for combat. The funds and the weapons and the weapons development and the logistics systems are established and developed by non-grunts and are all necessary precursors to a successful combat force.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom