OK. Government is way too big
- Thread starter WATU2
- Start date
A suggestion - one word ---------- "brevity".
That applies to both the videos and posted NYT articles. But we get it, there is a danger when govt and industry/business are in bed with each other. So we need more industry (for jobs) and less govt - problem solved.
I'm not sure the title completely fits the discussion, but yes, govt is way too big in the US of A. We (the people) need a partner, not a dominant, abusive, violent, father so to speak. The federal govt in and of itself is NOT more important than any individual americans' constitutional freedoms when everthing is said and done. Unfortunately with BHO in the executive, we have that father.
As far as the military industrial complex is concerned (at least the way it is applied and translated today) we actually need more of it imo because the world is actually a far more dangerous place than in the Cold War days of the fifties. During the cold war, america was never physically attacked. Now we have the worst of both the old and new worlds - a resurgent cold war that was once defeated with the help of Pres Reagan and a jihadist theocratic threat that endangers every man, woman and yes, child in the western hemisphere. So we now have two world threats and an executive that was trained as a community agitator doing the negotiations.
This post was edited on 2/25 11:09 AM by rabidTU
I'm not sure the title completely fits the discussion, but yes, govt is way too big in the US of A. We (the people) need a partner, not a dominant, abusive, violent, father so to speak. The federal govt in and of itself is NOT more important than any individual americans' constitutional freedoms when everthing is said and done. Unfortunately with BHO in the executive, we have that father.
As far as the military industrial complex is concerned (at least the way it is applied and translated today) we actually need more of it imo because the world is actually a far more dangerous place than in the Cold War days of the fifties. During the cold war, america was never physically attacked. Now we have the worst of both the old and new worlds - a resurgent cold war that was once defeated with the help of Pres Reagan and a jihadist theocratic threat that endangers every man, woman and yes, child in the western hemisphere. So we now have two world threats and an executive that was trained as a community agitator doing the negotiations.
This post was edited on 2/25 11:09 AM by rabidTU
Yes, there is a massive issue with the
"security state" or whatever you want to call it. However, there are so
many errors in the essay that one loses the point while stumbling over
the abysmal research and analysis. A couple of examples:
- TS
clearance. Yup, lots of people have TS clearance. Basically you have
to have that level to get into buildings on on the bridge of a ship in a
lot of cases. Sometimes just seeing a file jacket without a TS
clearance could send you to federal prison. Not a big deal to have it
and with the growth of the NSA and DHS there are tons of contractors
with same. Actual secrets are classified as "SCI", "SAP" or "SCI/CA",
TS/Compartmentalized/Code Word Access" or a host of other things that we
won't discuss here. You have to get TS clearance before you can be
vetted to access the other stuff but TS clearance doesn't really get you
much in the way of information or access.
- The big
governmental cabal. I find it almost laughable that anyone who has ever
dealt with CIA versus State, DoD versus State, CIA versus DoD or CIA
versus FBI could actually think that there was some sort of over arching
conspiracy between the groups. Honest, there is a reason that the
military thinks CIA stands for "Clowns In Action". There is no way,
absolutely no way, that State, the CIA/NSA, the FBI and the DoD all get together to
run the country from some secret bunker. Everyone hates State, State
hates everyone, the FBI and CIA are constantly at war and the other kids do not play well together.
Fortunately
there are several kernels of truth in the premise that are, as noted,
mostly lost due to the presentation. There is a massive issue with
contractors versus federal agencies versus congress critters.
Congressmen live to be re-elected (regardless of party). To get
re-elected, they need political contributions and goodies for their
constituency. So, they deal with lobbies and contractors. This causes
them to make really bad decisions. Same rules apply to DoD, military, National LEO
and intelligence personnel. Getting a juicy job with a contractor is
all too often the primary goal of purported public servants, regardless of agency.
Take
the
F-22 for example. In order to be sure and get funding, the Air Force
forced Lockheed to use contractors spread out across 44 - 48 states.
This ensured that most members of congress had a stake in the project
and
none of them would vote for cancellation. It also meant that the parts
and assemblies were so diverse that each plane had to have components
hand fitted during final assembly. This was a big factor in the cost
overruns with the project. It also means that replacing a component can
require the same level of hand fitting which increases maintenance
hours by a factor of 10. Had the Air Force used primary contractors for
all components and sub-assemblies both acquisition and maintenance
costs would have been dramatically reduced. Additionally, congress is
constantly forcing
the military to keep bases open or continue purchasing systems (C-17,
C-27 and
V-22 are recent examples) that they don't want in order to protect the
financial interests of their respective states. Finally, many
representatives and senators develop incestuous relationships with
lobbyists, defense contractors and "special interest groups" during
their service in order to secure post congressional employment. The
lifetime salary and benefits plan for congress is supposed to eliminate
this sort of conflict of interest. It fails miserably.
Of course, the
DoD is equally guilty. Many officers spend their last posting (or two)
currying the favor of defense contractors in order to secure a well paid
civilian job. Not a good situation when you are involved with
approving a massive, multi-year program one year, retire and then go to
work on the program the next. Additionally, the military has completely
lost any perspective on holding contractors responsible for systems or
themselves for system specifications. Bradley, Sergeant York, F-35,
Fire Scout, DDX, CGX, CVX ..... the list is endless. The latest
boondoggle from the USN gives us the DDG-1000. That ship has a $7
billion development price tag and, after starting construction on the
first hull, the Navy decided that a destroyer the size of a WW2 pocket
battleship was a bad idea. So, they will cap the class at 3 ships and
go back to building Burke class destroyers with upgraded electronics.
That means that each ship in the class will carry a $3.5 - $4 BILLION
dollar price tag. Yup, $12 billion for three freakin' destroyers.
I could provide the same kind of info for State
(where employees habitually go to work for lobbyists representing
various foreign countries) or the CIA (which sends soccer moms with no
training to run posts in Indian Country and has
a veritable revolving door of people leaving one day and coming back
the next as a "contractor") but you probably have the picture. Huge
problem, wastes tons of money, has a direct impact on how the country is
run but not some over arching conspiracy amongst agencies or the result of some super secret cabal.
Thus endeth the rant. Now who wants to talk about Ukraine??
"security state" or whatever you want to call it. However, there are so
many errors in the essay that one loses the point while stumbling over
the abysmal research and analysis. A couple of examples:
- TS
clearance. Yup, lots of people have TS clearance. Basically you have
to have that level to get into buildings on on the bridge of a ship in a
lot of cases. Sometimes just seeing a file jacket without a TS
clearance could send you to federal prison. Not a big deal to have it
and with the growth of the NSA and DHS there are tons of contractors
with same. Actual secrets are classified as "SCI", "SAP" or "SCI/CA",
TS/Compartmentalized/Code Word Access" or a host of other things that we
won't discuss here. You have to get TS clearance before you can be
vetted to access the other stuff but TS clearance doesn't really get you
much in the way of information or access.
- The big
governmental cabal. I find it almost laughable that anyone who has ever
dealt with CIA versus State, DoD versus State, CIA versus DoD or CIA
versus FBI could actually think that there was some sort of over arching
conspiracy between the groups. Honest, there is a reason that the
military thinks CIA stands for "Clowns In Action". There is no way,
absolutely no way, that State, the CIA/NSA, the FBI and the DoD all get together to
run the country from some secret bunker. Everyone hates State, State
hates everyone, the FBI and CIA are constantly at war and the other kids do not play well together.
Fortunately
there are several kernels of truth in the premise that are, as noted,
mostly lost due to the presentation. There is a massive issue with
contractors versus federal agencies versus congress critters.
Congressmen live to be re-elected (regardless of party). To get
re-elected, they need political contributions and goodies for their
constituency. So, they deal with lobbies and contractors. This causes
them to make really bad decisions. Same rules apply to DoD, military, National LEO
and intelligence personnel. Getting a juicy job with a contractor is
all too often the primary goal of purported public servants, regardless of agency.
Take
the
F-22 for example. In order to be sure and get funding, the Air Force
forced Lockheed to use contractors spread out across 44 - 48 states.
This ensured that most members of congress had a stake in the project
and
none of them would vote for cancellation. It also meant that the parts
and assemblies were so diverse that each plane had to have components
hand fitted during final assembly. This was a big factor in the cost
overruns with the project. It also means that replacing a component can
require the same level of hand fitting which increases maintenance
hours by a factor of 10. Had the Air Force used primary contractors for
all components and sub-assemblies both acquisition and maintenance
costs would have been dramatically reduced. Additionally, congress is
constantly forcing
the military to keep bases open or continue purchasing systems (C-17,
C-27 and
V-22 are recent examples) that they don't want in order to protect the
financial interests of their respective states. Finally, many
representatives and senators develop incestuous relationships with
lobbyists, defense contractors and "special interest groups" during
their service in order to secure post congressional employment. The
lifetime salary and benefits plan for congress is supposed to eliminate
this sort of conflict of interest. It fails miserably.
Of course, the
DoD is equally guilty. Many officers spend their last posting (or two)
currying the favor of defense contractors in order to secure a well paid
civilian job. Not a good situation when you are involved with
approving a massive, multi-year program one year, retire and then go to
work on the program the next. Additionally, the military has completely
lost any perspective on holding contractors responsible for systems or
themselves for system specifications. Bradley, Sergeant York, F-35,
Fire Scout, DDX, CGX, CVX ..... the list is endless. The latest
boondoggle from the USN gives us the DDG-1000. That ship has a $7
billion development price tag and, after starting construction on the
first hull, the Navy decided that a destroyer the size of a WW2 pocket
battleship was a bad idea. So, they will cap the class at 3 ships and
go back to building Burke class destroyers with upgraded electronics.
That means that each ship in the class will carry a $3.5 - $4 BILLION
dollar price tag. Yup, $12 billion for three freakin' destroyers.
I could provide the same kind of info for State
(where employees habitually go to work for lobbyists representing
various foreign countries) or the CIA (which sends soccer moms with no
training to run posts in Indian Country and has
a veritable revolving door of people leaving one day and coming back
the next as a "contractor") but you probably have the picture. Huge
problem, wastes tons of money, has a direct impact on how the country is
run but not some over arching conspiracy amongst agencies or the result of some super secret cabal.
Thus endeth the rant. Now who wants to talk about Ukraine??
Similar threads
