Commission Slams US Defense Strategy

Author: cristo71

Posts

Total: 14
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,552
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
“The threats the United States faces are the most serious and most challenging the nation has encountered since 1945 and include the potential for near-term major war,” the report concluded. “The United States last fought a global conflict during World War II, which ended nearly 80 years ago. The nation was last prepared for such a fight during the Cold War, which ended 35 years ago. It is not prepared today.”

… The commissioners criticized multiple administrations for backing National Defense Strategies based on wishful thinking, as well as budgetary gridlock in Congress, and general indifference from an American public that is largely disengaged on national security issues.

“The lack of preparedness to meet the challenges to U.S. national security is the result of many years of failure to recognize the changing threats and to transform the U.S. national security structure,” the commissioners say. “The 2011 Budget Control Act, repeated continuing resolutions, and inflexible government systems” exacerbate the problem.

“The United States is still failing to act with the urgency required, across administrations and without regard to governing party,” the report says. “Implementing these recommendations to boost all elements of national power will require sustained presidential leadership and a fundamental change in mindset at the Pentagon, at the National Security Council and across executive branch departments and agencies, in Congress, and among the American public writ large.”


This is a problem which is getting no airplay currently, but it deserves our attention. Everyone is focused on high prices, but we need to be mindful of the very high price of war and preventing it. Media need to be holding both candidates’ feet to the fire on this, but they won’t. The irony is that a president holds much more sway in this matter than with inflation.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,988
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@cristo71
Getting rid of Trump is the only thing America needs to do to overthrow Putin.

The planes and tanks we sent to Europe that got destroyed is of no concern. We can make more.

To suggest otherwise sounds like alt-right Russian propaganda, and not American.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,988
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@cristo71
But increasing cooperation between China and Russia, along with closer ties between Russia and Iran, and Russia and North Korea, suggest the U.S. may face broader challenges in the future. President Biden’s 2022 National Defense Strategy calls China the “pacing challenge” and Russia an “acute threat.” Russia, however, has proved itself more than just an immediate troublemaker in one part of the world. It remains a disruptive force and has managed to adapt to economic sanctions by leaning on Chinese help to keep its defense factories running and Iranian and North Korean help to generate munitions and drones for its war in Ukraine.
Biden has done a lot to make sure China and Russia stay apart. The only reason why China and Russia is so strong right now is because of all the public praise originating from Trump for the past 7 years. I definitely heard this on the verified news.

If we want Ukraine to win, we can't allow Trump to end wars prematurely.
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,552
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
… and a side of fries with that Whopper, please.

Swagnarok
Swagnarok's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,250
3
2
6
Swagnarok's avatar
Swagnarok
3
2
6
-->
@cristo71
The DoD: *spends $840 billion in defense spending per fiscal year*

Also the DoD: "We're being too fiscally responsible! Unless we cut that out and add even more to the $35 trillion in debt we already have, the military will be unable to do its job and lose the next war! The solution isn't to demand our allies pay more on defense! Any suggestion made by Trump is far-right fascism by default and thus unacceptable, no matter how objectively sensible that suggestion is! Nor is it to expand nuclear sharing with our vulnerable allies, because the UN, that eternally gridlocked institution which habitually sides with autocrats and wouldn't lift its little pinky finger to defend Taiwan or the Baltic states, would get mad if we did that! Nope, there is no solution whatsoever except to pour hundreds of billions more down the drain!"
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@cristo71
Everyone is focused on high prices, but we need to be mindful of the very high price of war and preventing it.
We are in the possession of thousands of multiple independently targetable nuclear warhead, intercontinental ballistic missiles.

All we need to do to stay out of wars is to not start them by puppeting minor countries along the borders of military powerhouses and then acting like the wars we started are an existential crises for us.

The whole world would be far better off if we disarmed down to the nuclear deterrence and maybe worked on some technology that would actually help in a future war. (Everything we see in the Ukraine Russia war indicates that our theory of war is outdated and 85% of what we spend our military budget on is outdated and would get a lot of our soldiers killed if they ever had to fight a modern war with an enemy who knows how to utilize the new technology)

Remember when France was invaded and is now occupied? Oh wait that hasn't happened since they got nukes, and it won't happen unless the French let it happen via migration. UK? India?

Nations with nukes don't get invaded. Something Ukraine is learning the hard way.

Until we're prepared to face the greatest threat to world peace by dismantling the CIA, NSA, etc... and publishing everything they've ever done this is hawkish drivel designed to justify expanding the already unjustifiable theft of enormous wealth from US citizens and humanity at large (because the way US conducts foreign policy means wealth is being funneled to the USA and then to the government under threat of force)
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,552
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
-->
@Swagnarok
The report was not made by the DoD.
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,552
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
(Everything we see in the Ukraine Russia war indicates that our theory of war is outdated and 85% of what we spend our military budget on is outdated and would get a lot of our soldiers killed if they ever had to fight a modern war with an enemy who knows how to utilize the new technology)
This point was actually made in the report, so in that respect, you agree with the report.

Remember when France was invaded and is now occupied? Oh wait that hasn't happened since they got nukes
You don’t think Israel has nukes?

Agree or disagree with the conclusions of the report, I’m mainly saying that it should be part of the national conversation.
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@cristo71
Remember when France was invaded and is now occupied? Oh wait that hasn't happened since they got nukes
You don’t think Israel has nukes?
I don't think an F-22 does any better against Hamas than an F-16 (huge price difference).

Israel is going for the global historical record of the least collateral + allied damage against enemies that dress in civilian clothes, refuse to meet on the battlefield, and hide behind women and children.

Plus they (unlike the USA or the other countries I mentioned) are keeping their nukes (if any) a secret. This radically different strategy caused by their unique situation where their major nation state rivals don't yet have nukes and if Israel started bragging about having them those rivals would be publicly obliged to start their own nuclear weapons programs.

Israel won't tolerate that so that would inevitably lead to a large war (which may happen anyway).


The USA has family oriented Catholics to the south and hockey oriented jean jacket wearers to the north. We have no insurgency war except the one we're allowing to happen through unchecked migration.

The wars the Pentagon wants more money to prepare for are overseas.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,649
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Israel is going for the global historical record of the least collateral + allied damage against enemies that dress in civilian clothes, refuse to meet on the battlefield, and hide behind women and children.
Israel just assumes women, children, schools and hospitals are the enemies, so no collateral damage.
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@cristo71
The report was not made by the DoD.
It basically was, the people are old Bush era deep state war mongers who lied about WMDs so blackrock could pretend to build roads for a decade. Those are the types that run the DoD through a network of unelected paper pushers.

Scary thing is that many of them actually believe they're saving the USA. They (like the chiense and russians equivalents) watch way to many WW2 movies wistfully.


Agree or disagree with the conclusions of the report, I’m mainly saying that it should be part of the national conversation.
Well the fact that there are reports like this should definitely be part of the national conversation. Right now these reports are taken very seriously by a very small group of people. The kind of people who would lie to POTUS about troop deployments: https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2020/11/outgoing-syria-envoy-admits-hiding-us-troop-numbers-praises-trumps-mideast-record/170012/

Another word might be oath-breaking blood-lusting insubordinate enemies of the constitution...


Then again if a candidate with a real chance did try to make this stuff a point of public attention I'm sure they would get the Trump treatment. Then we would be talking about how he or she raped 50 people and is a racist to boot.
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@cristo71
I actually agree with some specifics in "Technology and Technology Adoption"


Unfortunately, DoD R&D and procurement systems were built around a closed network ofdefense-funded organizations and traditional defense companies.2
This ought to be in 2km font.


In 2018, the Defense Innovation Board noted that DoD does not have an innovation problem, it has an innovation adoptionproblem.6
Definitely, so why does the budget need to increase? The the only reason is if they want all their useless shit (super carriers and such) plus some cheap drones that are actually capable of affecting extreme digital intelligence battlefields.

You take one super carrier off the menu and you could probably develop a drone fleet that would crush what Russia is using in Ukraine; I mean assuming it's not a money laundering scheme which is a very unsafe assumption for government spending.


Overcoming the cultural and institutional barriers to innovation at speed and scale is a criticalrequirement for achieving the goals of the NDS
lol "cultural", the culture of watching Lockheed Martin stock continue to rise as they are given more and more stolen money regardless of what they produce.


DoD must confront the institutional processes and incentives that favor continuing existingprograms, such as long planning cycles, overly specific requirements, inflexible budget lines,long-standing relationships with providers, proprietary technology, familiarity in using existingequipment, political support, ostensibly less risk of schedule delays and cost overruns, and fearsthat replacing existing programs will lead to operational gaps.
In other words "could you please stop being the military industrial complex, it's not working".


The U.S. security clearance system also impedes innovation by delaying nontraditionaldefense companies in conducting work with warfighting applications. Recent reforms havereduced the average time to process an application for a security clearance
I waited for 6 months before they let me work on anything (this was a while ago). What is it now, 5.5 months? Like a drop of water on a raging fire. The system needs to be burned to the ground. Everyone above major general and every civilian can go home and enjoy retirement if you want to fix this. If Trump knew what he was talking about he would have done this already.


The "Technology and Technology Adoption" didn't have much in the way of specifics on technology. Just mentioned 'drones' once. I assume the rest is just general lambasting "do better" (spend more but magically reverse the trends of the last 70 years and start spending efficiently).
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,552
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
I don't think an F-22 does any better against Hamas than an F-16 (huge price difference).

Israel is going for the global historical record of the least collateral + allied damage against enemies that dress in civilian clothes, refuse to meet on the battlefield, and hide behind women and children.

Plus they (unlike the USA or the other countries I mentioned) are keeping their nukes (if any) a secret. This radically different strategy caused by their unique situation where their major nation state rivals don't yet have nukes and if Israel started bragging about having them those rivals would be publicly obliged to start their own nuclear weapons programs.

Israel won't tolerate that so that would inevitably lead to a large war (which may happen anyway).
I’m not sure what your point is in all this, but my point is that Israel having nukes didn’t prevent October 7 any more than the US having nukes prevented 9/11. Nukes deter nukes, and that is about it.

The wars the Pentagon wants more money to prepare for are overseas.
WWII was overseas until December 7, 1941. Al Qaida was overseas (or so we thought) until September 11, 2001. This report is as much about prevention and deterrence as it is about war fighting capability.

It basically was, the people are old Bush era deep state war mongers
If that is truly the case, then the DoD is being extremely self critical with this report. Self criticism is often the best and most important kind. For what it’s worth, Trump asked General Keane to be his SecDef.
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@cristo71
my point is that Israel having nukes didn’t prevent October 7 any more than the US having nukes prevented 9/11.
My point is that nukes don't prevent terrorism, but neither do super carriers.

Thus my proposal to rely on nukes instead of nukes and super-carriers (for example) to deter major nation state aggressors is undamaged by events like 9/11 or October 7 happening despite nukes.


Nukes deter nukes
Nukes deter anyone with cities they care about. Total victory is impossible so they don't even try.

Ukraine going for Kursk is not a plan that ends in Moscow, it's to gain chips at a negotiation table. Unconditional surrender of Russia is not possible because of their nuclear arsenal and everyone knows it.


Al Qaida was overseas (or so we thought) until September 11, 2001.
We did not need F-22s to defeat al quida. We needed a willingness to brainwash children and kill anyone who dared dissent. We didn't have that in Iraq or Afghanistan and we don't have that now. That is something money can't buy.

Military spending is about favors in the united states. It's about getting money out of the people of the united states and into the hands of people who can influence the federal government, especially the "intelligence community".


For what it’s worth, Trump asked General Keane to be his SecDef.
It's not worth anything given that Trump regularly had people lie to his face about what the federal government was actually doing.