Amazon.com Widgets

Wednesday, November 12, 2003

Lengthy, but worth it article on the Rumsfeld military transformation, and what Kagan sees as the inherent dangers therein: Too much specialization, not enough overlap in capability - too much reliance on maintaining a large, unsurpassable advantage, not enough looking forward to the inevitable catching up of our enemies. Not every lesson of the business world applies to the military, says Kagan. A fascinating read.

OpinionJournal - A Dangerous Transformation - Donald Rumsfeld means business. That's a problem.

...America's biggest lead, the "market" in which the U.S. has the best competitive advantage, now lies in the realm of long-range reconnaissance and strike capabilities. No other state or group of states can begin to match America's ability to identify a huge number of targets and to attack them from platforms thousands of miles away. The advantage in this area is greater than that in others. The U.S. has the best ground forces in the world, but China has larger ground forces, Germany has excellent tanks, Russia has large amounts of artillery, and so forth. America has the greatest ability to move and supply large forces to distant theaters, but Britain, France and Russia can project force halfway around the world as well. None of those states, however, can come close to matching America's ability to identify, track and destroy targets from great distances away.

Even if Mr. Rumsfeld had not been an enthusiastic supporter of Network-Centric Warfare, it was only natural that his application of business principles to war would lead him to focus on America's capabilities with precision-guided munitions. This is currently the area of America's greatest competitive advantage. By directing funding into it, the U.S. can obtain an even greater competitive advantage--perhaps even the "lockout" that NCW advocates seek. In business, "lockout" occurs when one company attains such a predominant position that it can not be challenged.

The watchwords for the Rumsfeld Pentagon have, therefore, been focus and efficiency. The Pentagon has repeatedly stated that all new weapons systems will be evaluated primarily on the degree to which they further the armed forces' ability to conduct Network-Centric Warfare. Systems that bring other capabilities to the force have received less attention and less funding, and have sometimes been canceled...


2 Comments

Hello Soloman, I'll share some snippets from my fathers first email from Baghdad. I'll preface this email by saying my father is a hard-ass that never complains.

---snip---
Have some time before hitting the rack. This place sucks. The living conditions are worse than when I was in basic training and was living in an open bay barracks. Our tent stinks and I have no room and privacy at all. The food at the Air Force chow hall is bad. Work is going okay....lots of problems to fix when we take over....

Now for the good news.... I can't think of any.

PS - so far, two mortar attacks and one missed SAM on the incoming flight.

Yeesh. That's tough for a 60 year old. Thanks for posting that. Please feel free to keep us up to date.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Search


Archives
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]