-Caveat Lector-
All conventional warfare is obsolete now considering the
ultra-secret and NWO SDI developements of the last ten
years, which we have NOT been privy to. Its all a bunch of
monkey business and this in particular is a pork barrel for
the wealthiest constituents. FEAR IS THE PRODUCT THEY
PUSH. You should fear the government itself declaring war
on us, like they have with the war on drugs...the banks have
bled the whole world white and pretty soon if not right now
all countries will be too poor to feed themselves say
nothing about war with each other. These planes are toys
for rich kids who can't grow up.
B
Alamaine Ratliff wrote:
>
> -Caveat Lector-
>
> > Publications of the Center for Security Policy
> > No. 99-D 81
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > -------
> >
> >
> >
> > DECISION BRIEF
> > 19 July 1999
> >
> >
> > Don't Let the F-22 Fall Victim to a Defense 'Train Wreck'
> >
> > (Washington, D.C.): When the House Appropriations Committee voted
> > last week to defer production of the Air Force's next generation
> > fighter plane, the F-22, the image that came to mind was that of
> > the cartoon character Pogo who once famously declared, "We have
> > met the enemy and it is us." Unless the Republican-led Congress
> > comes to grips with the central reality of the defense budget --
> > namely, that its present and projected funding levels are
> > woefully inadequate to meet America's future security needs --
> > the GOP will become fully implicated in the Clinton
> > Administration's hollowing-out of the U.S. military.
> >
> > The F-22: America's Qualitative Edge
> >
> > To be sure, critics of the F-22 cast this fight in narrower
> > terms. They claim that an aircraft with its characteristics --
> > low-observability ("stealth"), supersonic cruise capability (that
> > is, the ability to fly at supersonic speeds without having to
> > utilize afterburners that consume huge quantities of fuel) and
> > sophisticated avionics and weapon systems -- is no longer needed
> > to dominate the skies. They contend that, with the decline in the
> > technical skills and productivity of the former Soviet
> > military-industrial complex, the United States can safely make do
> > with far less sophisticated and expensive warplanes.
> >
> > Unfortunately, as the war in Kosovo reminds us, threats to U.S.
> > pilots can come from the ground as well as the air. We owe it to
> > those asked to fight the Nation's future wars to ensure that they
> > are given platforms for doing so that are as immune as possible
> > to the continuing improvements being made by potential
> > adversaries in both air-to-air and terrestrial anti-aircraft
> > weapons. As one retired Air Force general recently put it, "We
> > don't want a fair fight. We want to win decisively."
> >
> > Bait and Switch
> >
> > Another source of the flak the F-22 is taking arises from the
>
> > perennial temptation to forego a near-term defense expenditure in
> > favor of an outlay that is farther off. In recent years,
> > Democratic critics of the Pentagon have made an art form of this
> > gambit, promising to support the next program as long as the
> > present one is terminated, only to oppose its successor when its
> > turn comes. Even normally responsible Republicans are susceptible
> > to this siren's song when, as has been the case with the F-22,
> > the estimated production costs have inexorably grown as the
> > various technical challenges associated with this extraordinary
> > plane's development have been overcome.
> >
> > The alternative some prefer is to skip the F-22 and procure
> > instead another promising aircraft called the Joint Strike
> > Fighter (JSF), now in the early stages of development. Estimates
> > of the multi-service, multi-mission, multi-mode JSF's ultimate
> > price tag and performance characteristics, however, are currently
> > as soft as the F-22's used to be. If anything, the JSF may cost
> > more than the F-22 when the former reaches the latter's level of
> > programmatic maturity.
> >
> > Others favor a two-step procurement strategy, involving the
> > purchase first of up-to-date versions of the F-15 and F-16 as a
> > stop-gap awaiting the maturing of the JSF, which would then be
> > purchased in quantity when it becomes available. Producing
> > modernized F-15s and -16s is probably a good idea under all
> > circumstances, but it would be a mistake to kill the F-22 (which
> > would be the practical effect of the proposed delay in
> > production) to pay for it.
> >
> > The Coming 'DoD Train Wreck'
> >
> > The painful truth is that the problem is far larger than the fate
> > of the F-22, or even that of the Pentagon's aviation account more
> > generally. This reality is evident in the fact that House
> > appropriators found lots of areas into which to reallocate the
> > roughly $1.5 billion sought by the Clinton Administration for the
> > purpose of producing the first six F-22s.
> >
> > An impressive analysis conducted by Dr. Dan Goure of the Center
> > for Strategic and International Studies and Jeffrey Ranney, a
> > strategic planner at the defense consulting firm MSTI, quantifies
> > this problem. According to these highly respected experts, there
> > is a $376 billion deficit in the funding needed over the next
> > five years to meet the Clinton Pentagon's own modernization goals
> > as defined in its latest blueprint, the 1997 Quadrennial Defense
> > Review (QDR). In fact, the Goure-Ranney study, entitled "Averting
> > the Coming Department of Defense Train Wreck," suggests that the
> > procurement shortfall in Fiscal Year 2000 alone is $71 billion.
> > If the QDR projections prove unduly optimistic, moreover, even
> > that staggering amount would actually be understated.
> >
> > What's to be Done?
> >
> > The good news is that the procurement "gap" -- and similar,
> > although less acute, shortfalls in the research and development,
> > operations and maintenance and personnel pay accounts -- would
> > essentially disappear if the United States were willing for the
> > foreseeable future to allocate 4% of its Gross Domestic Product
> > to defense, rather than today's less than 3%. Such a proportion
> > of GDP is well below the more than 5-6.7% that President Reagan
> > dedicated during the 1980s to rebuilding our military after its
> > last hollowing-out. And this percentage is a small fraction of
> > the allocations the Nation made to national security earlier on,
> > notably during John F. Kennedy's administration.
> >
> > The bad news is that, despite the surging U.S. economy and the
> > attendant increase in tax revenues, Republicans in Congress find
> > themselves opposing the sorts of defense spending increases that
> > are clearly required if the American military is to be able to
> > preserve its decisive qualitative edge via modernization of its
> > inventory, without further reducing an already overstretched
> > force structure and/or the global commitments it is being asked
> > to fulfill. It's not that most Republicans are averse to
> > additional funding for the armed forces. Rather, they fear that
> > -- were they to rupture the "caps" on Pentagon accounts agreed to
> > in the 1997 budget deal with President Clinton -- it would be
> > impossible to maintain the constraints that deal imposed on the
> > growth of spending on popular domestic programs.
> >
> > The Bottom Line
> >
> > As the F-22 episode makes clear, however, unless there is relief
> > from the Pentagon caps, there is a defense "train wreck" coming.
> > Military leaders know this to be true, as do their more
> > responsible civilian counterparts. The so-called "bow-wave" of
> > deferred procurement, like compounded interest, is intensifying
> > daily. The attendant risks of an inadequate defense posture are
> > increasing concomitantly.
> >
> > If the present Congress does not come to grips with this reality
> > -- not by cutting needed defense modernization programs, but by
> > adding the funds necessary to buy them and to cover other
> > Pentagon shortfalls -- the next President will face an even more
> > dangerous deficit in our national security capabilities. and an
> > even more daunting price tag for correcting it. And the
> > Republicans will lose one of their most important planks in their
> > campaign for renewed control of the legislative branch, namely
> > their ability to understand our vital national security interests
> > and their willingness to provide the resources needed to
> > safeguard them.
> >
> > - 30 -
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > -------
> >
> >
> > NOTE: The Center's publications are intended to invigorate and
> > enrich the debate on foreign policy and defense issues. The views
> > expressed do not necessarily reflect those of all members of the
> > Center's Board of Advisors.
> >
> > Top of Page© 1988-1999, Center for Security Policy
>
> From
> http://www.security-policy.org/papers/1999/99-D81.html
>
> A<>E<>R
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
> new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust
> + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
> "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said
> it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your
> own reason and your common sense." --Buddha
> + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
> A merely fallen enemy may rise again, but the reconciled
> one is truly vanquished. -Johann Christoph Schiller,
> German Writer (1759-1805)
> + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
> It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that
> prevents us from living freely and nobly. -Bertrand Russell
> + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
> "Everyone has the right...to seek, receive and impart
> information and ideas through any media and regardless
> of frontiers."
> Universal Declaration of Human Rights
> + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
> "Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will
> teach you to keep your mouth shut."
> --- Ernest Hemingway
> + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
> Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed
> + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
> In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
> is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
> expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
> for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
>
> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
> ==========
> CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
> screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
> and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
> frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
> spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
> gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
> be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
> nazi's need not apply.
>
> Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
> ========================================================================
> Archives Available at:
> http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
>
> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
> ========================================================================
> To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
> SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
> SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Om
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
