jcd11235 0 #51 February 19, 2008 I can't in good conscience say that anyone *should* support Senator McCain. While I think there are few people who would argue he would not do a better job as president than GW Bush has, I would argue that that is not setting the bar high enough. After spending some time reading his website, http://www.johnmccain.com, I found some worrisome aspects of Senator McCain's platform, of which I will address a very small number. QuoteJohn McCain will fight to save the future of Social Security and believes that we may meet our obligations to the retirees of today and the future without raising taxes. [emphasis mine] John McCain supports supplementing the current Social Security system with personal accounts -- but not as a substitute for addressing benefit promises that cannot be kept. John McCain will reach across the aisle, but if the Democrats do not act, he will. No problem is in more need of honesty than the looming financial challenges of entitlement programs. Americans have the right to know the truth and John McCain will not leave office without fixing the problems that threatens our future prosperity and power. Does Senator McCain expect us to believe that the looming crisis can be remedied without reducing benefits or raising contributions (taxes) going into the fund? If such a solution were possible, why hasn't McCain sponsored the necessary legislation to implement it? While actuaries are not fully in agreement as to how to best address the issue, the general consensus remains that either benefits must be reduced or contributions must increase. McCain here addresses the problem like a partisan senator. A good President doesn't work with the Republicans in Congress or the Democrats in Congress. A good President works with Congress, or, perhaps works against Congress, if trying to check their power. Trying to extend inter-party bickering between different branches of government is nothing more than a way to place blame elsewhere when an ill conceived idea fails. QuoteFamilies should receive quality, accountable care at lower costs by harnessing market competition. It would be interesting to see the details of Senator McCain's plan here. From what I have seen, the healthcare industry is not lacking in competition in the market, yet we have a crisis in this country when it comes to affordable health care. Perhaps a better solution would be to examine the healthcare systems of the many countries that offer their citizens superior healthcare at a lower cost than what is available in the US, and use those as models to help develop a real solution. QuoteIf low taxes are on the books, budgets don't assume that they last forever. When they expire, those taxes are automatically raised. What exactly has Senator McCain been doing during his tenure in Congress? If he still does not realize that taxes do not "automatically" raise themselves, do we want him in the Oval Office? Perhaps the good senator would do well to re-read Article I of the United States Constitution. Or, does he simply believe that his supporters lack the intelligence to understand how tax legislation works, and will respond well to such untruthful hyperbole? * * * Senator McCain dedicates a section of his platform to Second Amendment rights. I was, however, unable to find anywhere on his site where he addresses the importance of protecting First Amendment rights, or Fourth Amendment rights, or any other rights of the people that have been threatened by the government in recent years. * * * Although I was unable to find his official platform stance on his website, by all accounts I could find, Senator McCain does not support net neutrality. Considering the senator's faith in the market, and the market's treatment of broadband as a commodity, that stance seems at odds with not only the Clayton Act, but the very essence of the right to free speech, press and expression guaranteed by the First Amendment in this information age we live in. I certainly don't mean to imply that either H. Clinton (did you hear her husband got a blowjob?) or Obama have perfect platforms or ideologies. I have little doubt that inconsistencies in their rhetoric would be just as easily found. In the end, it appears that this year's presidential election, like every other presidential election I've witnessed, will be one of choosing the perceived lesser of two evils, where voters cast their votes against a candidate rather than for a candidate. Personally, I would be much more enthusiastic and optimistic if we could have billvon, rehmwa, Wendy W. and nerdgirl all working together to get into the Whitehouse. They could decide amongst themselves who would be President, Vice President, Chief of Staff and Secretary of State. I'm rather cynical of the status quo.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #52 February 19, 2008 >Does Senator McCain expect us to believe that the looming crisis can > be remedied without reducing benefits or raising contributions (taxes) > going into the fund? Of course he does - because people will. There are a significant number of people, if not the majority, who think that taxes are just meant to screw with you, and that the government can just print money if it needs more. Look at the large number of people who will vote for anyone at all who promises to lower taxes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #53 February 19, 2008 QuoteLook at the large number of people who will vote for anyone at all who promises to lower taxes. And the equally large number of people who will vote for anyone at all who will promise them gov't largesse on the back of those who paid the taxes.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #54 February 19, 2008 QuoteQuoteLook at the large number of people who will vote for anyone at all who promises to lower taxes. And the equally large number of people who will vote for anyone at all who will promise them gov't largesse on the back of those who paid the taxes. Did you ever find the number of people who REFUSE to work - the ones you keep griping about?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #55 February 19, 2008 QuoteIs that why suicides are at record highs among US troops and Iraq veterans? Because times are so good? Quote You know there are times when I regard your arguments very highly and others when I wonder what causes your inability to accept certain realities. You've got a soldier who has been in the military going on 9 years and finished 3 trips to Iraq sayng it's a great time to be a soldier and you contradict it. So I'm going to forego rational argument and put it on a level that should get your attention. WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT WHAT IT'S LIKE TO BE A SOLDIER RIGHT NOW?? I'm just curious, how do you go through life looking at everything so negatively and how could you possibly think you could understand whats good for the military and what isn't? You've already admitted to liking war. That makes you untypical, even for a soldier. And the plural of "anecdote" is NOT "data". The rise in the number of suicides is statistically significant. Your personal preference is not.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #56 February 19, 2008 You've already admitted to liking war. That makes you untypical, even for a soldier. And the plural of "anecdote" is NOT "data". The rise in the number of suicides is statistically significant. Your personal preference is not. Quote When I say it's a good time for us I'm not speaking solely about my feelings, last time I checked part of being in the military is working alongside other soldiers. I honestly can't remember the last time I ran across a soldier complaining about how bad it was for us in the big picture. Using suicide numbers is a half-assed argument at best, there are so many factors that go into a persons decision to take their life blaming it solely on the state of affairs at work is nothing more than you scraping for an argument. Typically I try not to discount a persons argument when it comes to military matters simply because they aren't in the military but on certain topics it can be necessary. You saying it sucks to be in the military right now is laughable, pay is getting better all the time, bonuses are going up, benefits are better than ever, and new programs to help oldiers having issues are constantly popping up. As for the war, guess what, going to combat is part of being a soldier, and being killed is part of he risk of going to combat, sometimes that's just the hand that life deals you. Would you pay any attention to someone trying to argue that teaching at a university is a crappy profession right now because of how many shootings there have been lately?History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #57 February 19, 2008 QuoteLook at the large number of people who will vote for anyone at all who promises to lower taxes. Lokk at the even LARGER number of people who will vote for anyone that promises to sock it to "the weathy" or some other contrived villain class. Everyone is seemingly willing to have the government punish everyone except themselves. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PLFXpert 0 #58 February 19, 2008 QuoteEveryone is seemingly willing to have the government punish everyone except themselves. Right. I think it's obvious the problem is many people vote solely for what is best just for them and not what they perceive to the be the best thing for our overall nation of people. How do we change this?Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #59 February 20, 2008 How do we change this? Truth in advertising related to political adds would be a good start"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites vortexring 0 #60 February 20, 2008 Like Kallend says, going into combat and experiencing good mates being killed isn't actually all that great. Seeing innocent civilians blown out their shoes isn't particularly fun either. In my experience it's the soldiers who haven't experienced combat that crave it. And 15 month tours? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #61 February 20, 2008 QuoteLike Kallend says, going into combat and experiencing good mates being killed isn't actually all that great. Seeing innocent civilians blown out their shoes isn't particularly fun either. In my experience it's the soldiers who haven't experienced combat that crave it. And 15 month tours? To help me understand your position, what, exactly, is your experience? Related to your post please"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,120 #62 February 20, 2008 >Lokk at the even LARGER number of people who will vote for anyone >that promises to sock it to "the weathy" or some other contrived villain >class. Indeed, many do both. >Everyone is seemingly willing to have the government punish everyone >except themselves. Well, if the credit card company "punishes" you every month by sending you a bill for your purchases, I'd agree with your interpretation. I do worry that we have a populace who not only does not understand taxation, they are enticed by the idea of the government sending them "free money." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nerdgirl 0 #63 February 20, 2008 QuoteHis foreign policy abilities are the only thing I like about him. I'm still concerned about what he'll allow to happen domestically. In what sense? Economically? Socially? One area of importance to me in which he does not seem to have put worth much directly w/r/t policies and issues is education, particularly science and engineering. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nerdgirl 0 #64 February 20, 2008 Quote... between 1992 and 2000 the military had little to no improvements. Same weapons, same lack of body armor, same uniforms, same basic issue equipment. It wasn't until 2002-2003 timeframe that things started to come down the line to improve upon what we had been working with for the last decade. Isn't that more a function of the internal DoD requirements process (run out of the J-8 and services) than any specific occupant of the White House or Congress? If products began transitioning to the services in 2002-03 time frame, wouldn't that suggest that the Programs of Record were initiatied (as part of the AT&L Acquisition process) 5-10 years earlier ... or longer for MDAPs? VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #65 February 20, 2008 If products began transitioning to the services in 2002-03 time frame, wouldn't that suggest that the Programs of Record were initiatied (as part of the AT&L Acquisition process) 5-10 years earlier ... or longer for MDAPs? Quote Actually the majority of the equipment we have seen come down the line in recent years has been a result of new rapid fielding programs. In prior years you would be 100% correct, a new piece of equipment would come out and the soldiers would see it issued years later, the current conflict has helped spawn programs which have drastically cut down the time it takes to field new equipment, like I said before, current conditions are benifitting the soldier. Vortexring, If you really want to try and knock my combat experience I'd be more than happy to e-mail you a copy of my ERB, but I'll let you know now that it will only serve to make you feel like an asshole for questioning my service and dedication to my job. I have never once said that I enjoy the parts of combat which involve watching friends or innocents die, I'd appreciate if you and your little sidekick wouldn't put words in my mouth.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nerdgirl 0 #66 February 20, 2008 QuoteActually the majority of the equipment we have seen come down the line in recent years has been a result of new rapid fielding programs. In prior years you would be 100% correct, a new piece of equipment would come out and the soldiers would see it issued years later, the current conflict has helped spawn programs which have drastically cut down the time it takes to field new equipment, like I said before, current conditions are benifitting the soldier. I don't disagree at all that the last 4-5 years have seen some tremendous transitions to the warfigher w/r/t capabilities. That's fantastic to hear that you're getting what you need! That's the way the Requirements process is supposed to work. Historically, times of war have prompted greater innovation. The $1.5 billion-a-year Rapid Fielding Initiative (RFI) was established in PEO soldier in 2003. (Out of $5.4 billion total for procurement and development of new gear.) PEO Soldier instituted the POR for the new Army Combat Uniform (ACUs, ‘digitals’) in 2003 – the technology on which the ACU is based was initiated in the 1970s. The reality is that anything that was delivered in 2002-03, was either (1) COTS-based or (2) in the pipeline as a formal program of record 5-10 years a priori. And, as we all know, programs do not formally transition to a Program Executive Office (PEO) until they have reached Milestone A, that is after passing out of 6.3 (advanced technology development) money. Unquestionably efforts like Adm Cebrowski’s (RIP) Office of Force Transformation (now effectively disbanded back into AT&L) pushed through some fantastic & innovative ideas. E.g., the Stiletto M-hull littoral combat craft, which was partially developed in response to the 30%+ attrition rate among SEALS due to back injuries. Has the Navy transitioned that out of the acquisition program? (No.) Otoh, soldiers seem to love the Stryker brigades. Yeah! Conversely, the Operational Requirements Document (ORD) for the Joint Chemical Agent Detector (JCAD) was put in place 1 July 1997; first fielding of the JCAD was 2003. I can name half dozen similar programs off the top of my head: JPBDS, JSGPM (i.e., ‘M41’), M-100 kits, JSLIST. There are lots of things wrapped up in this issue. In addition to the “Peace Dividend” that was impacting the budget, in the 1990s the Army had to budget for replacement of equipment that had been expended/destroyed during Gulf War I. Army Staff is already trying to plan for that now w/r/t OIF/OEF. They’re trying to learn the lesson from the 1990s to minimize that gap. In the end: Requirements for new equipment (i.e., capabilities) within DoD are a function of the internal DoD requirements process (run out of the J-8 and services) not any specific occupant of the White House or Congress. Now there is a valid question: is the requirements process broken? (Btw: the requirements process was initiated in the 1970s.) One problem is that Requirements organizations have a huge amount of power w/r/t PBR and POM. They’re not going to voluntarily give that up. Btw: this isn’t just nerdgirl saying this – the Defense Science Board 2006 Summer Study on 21st Century Technology Vectors highlighted the acquisition and requirements processes as essentially broken. One of the other issues they highlighted was the problem that requirements organizations have created is acting as ‘middle men’ between technology developers and actual operators. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites vortexring 0 #67 February 22, 2008 Vortexring, If you really want to try and knock my combat experience I'd be more than happy to e-mail you a copy of my ERB, but I'll let you know now that it will only serve to make you feel like an asshole for questioning my service and dedication to my job. I have never once said that I enjoy the parts of combat which involve watching friends or innocents die, I'd appreciate if you and your little sidekick wouldn't put words in my mouth. I'm not knocking your combat experience, just giving an opinion. Perhaps the problem is you feel I'm having a dig over what I understood your opinion to be - and I think I may have been. Where I felt critical of your viewpoint was the issue of enjoying combat. A sensitive subject in itself. But it seems I understood you wrong. So sorry for any offence, or if you felt I was deliberately misreading your post - that wasn't my intention. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #68 February 22, 2008 No worries bro, I can be a drama queen at times History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkyDekker 1,465 #69 February 22, 2008 Quote Actually the majority of the equipment we have seen come down the line in recent years has been a result of new rapid fielding programs. Exactly, if it is a great time to be a soldier, it is an incredibly outstanding time to be a defense supplier. (I wonder where their money goes ) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #70 February 23, 2008 Exactly, if it is a great time to be a soldier, it is an incredibly outstanding time to be a defense supplier. (I wonder where their money goes ) Quote True as well, it's all about supply and demand, I look at it as a way to help my retirement a little bit, defense stocks are WAY up History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites vortexring 0 #71 February 23, 2008 And I'm sure the guy who thought up and marketed HESCO is sitting pretty too - why didn't I think of that! 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 3 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
GQ_jumper 4 #56 February 19, 2008 You've already admitted to liking war. That makes you untypical, even for a soldier. And the plural of "anecdote" is NOT "data". The rise in the number of suicides is statistically significant. Your personal preference is not. Quote When I say it's a good time for us I'm not speaking solely about my feelings, last time I checked part of being in the military is working alongside other soldiers. I honestly can't remember the last time I ran across a soldier complaining about how bad it was for us in the big picture. Using suicide numbers is a half-assed argument at best, there are so many factors that go into a persons decision to take their life blaming it solely on the state of affairs at work is nothing more than you scraping for an argument. Typically I try not to discount a persons argument when it comes to military matters simply because they aren't in the military but on certain topics it can be necessary. You saying it sucks to be in the military right now is laughable, pay is getting better all the time, bonuses are going up, benefits are better than ever, and new programs to help oldiers having issues are constantly popping up. As for the war, guess what, going to combat is part of being a soldier, and being killed is part of he risk of going to combat, sometimes that's just the hand that life deals you. Would you pay any attention to someone trying to argue that teaching at a university is a crappy profession right now because of how many shootings there have been lately?History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #57 February 19, 2008 QuoteLook at the large number of people who will vote for anyone at all who promises to lower taxes. Lokk at the even LARGER number of people who will vote for anyone that promises to sock it to "the weathy" or some other contrived villain class. Everyone is seemingly willing to have the government punish everyone except themselves. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PLFXpert 0 #58 February 19, 2008 QuoteEveryone is seemingly willing to have the government punish everyone except themselves. Right. I think it's obvious the problem is many people vote solely for what is best just for them and not what they perceive to the be the best thing for our overall nation of people. How do we change this?Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #59 February 20, 2008 How do we change this? Truth in advertising related to political adds would be a good start"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #57 February 19, 2008 QuoteLook at the large number of people who will vote for anyone at all who promises to lower taxes. Lokk at the even LARGER number of people who will vote for anyone that promises to sock it to "the weathy" or some other contrived villain class. Everyone is seemingly willing to have the government punish everyone except themselves. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PLFXpert 0 #58 February 19, 2008 QuoteEveryone is seemingly willing to have the government punish everyone except themselves. Right. I think it's obvious the problem is many people vote solely for what is best just for them and not what they perceive to the be the best thing for our overall nation of people. How do we change this?Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #59 February 20, 2008 How do we change this? Truth in advertising related to political adds would be a good start"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vortexring 0 #60 February 20, 2008 Like Kallend says, going into combat and experiencing good mates being killed isn't actually all that great. Seeing innocent civilians blown out their shoes isn't particularly fun either. In my experience it's the soldiers who haven't experienced combat that crave it. And 15 month tours? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #61 February 20, 2008 QuoteLike Kallend says, going into combat and experiencing good mates being killed isn't actually all that great. Seeing innocent civilians blown out their shoes isn't particularly fun either. In my experience it's the soldiers who haven't experienced combat that crave it. And 15 month tours? To help me understand your position, what, exactly, is your experience? Related to your post please"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #62 February 20, 2008 >Lokk at the even LARGER number of people who will vote for anyone >that promises to sock it to "the weathy" or some other contrived villain >class. Indeed, many do both. >Everyone is seemingly willing to have the government punish everyone >except themselves. Well, if the credit card company "punishes" you every month by sending you a bill for your purchases, I'd agree with your interpretation. I do worry that we have a populace who not only does not understand taxation, they are enticed by the idea of the government sending them "free money." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #63 February 20, 2008 QuoteHis foreign policy abilities are the only thing I like about him. I'm still concerned about what he'll allow to happen domestically. In what sense? Economically? Socially? One area of importance to me in which he does not seem to have put worth much directly w/r/t policies and issues is education, particularly science and engineering. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #64 February 20, 2008 Quote... between 1992 and 2000 the military had little to no improvements. Same weapons, same lack of body armor, same uniforms, same basic issue equipment. It wasn't until 2002-2003 timeframe that things started to come down the line to improve upon what we had been working with for the last decade. Isn't that more a function of the internal DoD requirements process (run out of the J-8 and services) than any specific occupant of the White House or Congress? If products began transitioning to the services in 2002-03 time frame, wouldn't that suggest that the Programs of Record were initiatied (as part of the AT&L Acquisition process) 5-10 years earlier ... or longer for MDAPs? VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GQ_jumper 4 #65 February 20, 2008 If products began transitioning to the services in 2002-03 time frame, wouldn't that suggest that the Programs of Record were initiatied (as part of the AT&L Acquisition process) 5-10 years earlier ... or longer for MDAPs? Quote Actually the majority of the equipment we have seen come down the line in recent years has been a result of new rapid fielding programs. In prior years you would be 100% correct, a new piece of equipment would come out and the soldiers would see it issued years later, the current conflict has helped spawn programs which have drastically cut down the time it takes to field new equipment, like I said before, current conditions are benifitting the soldier. Vortexring, If you really want to try and knock my combat experience I'd be more than happy to e-mail you a copy of my ERB, but I'll let you know now that it will only serve to make you feel like an asshole for questioning my service and dedication to my job. I have never once said that I enjoy the parts of combat which involve watching friends or innocents die, I'd appreciate if you and your little sidekick wouldn't put words in my mouth.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nerdgirl 0 #66 February 20, 2008 QuoteActually the majority of the equipment we have seen come down the line in recent years has been a result of new rapid fielding programs. In prior years you would be 100% correct, a new piece of equipment would come out and the soldiers would see it issued years later, the current conflict has helped spawn programs which have drastically cut down the time it takes to field new equipment, like I said before, current conditions are benifitting the soldier. I don't disagree at all that the last 4-5 years have seen some tremendous transitions to the warfigher w/r/t capabilities. That's fantastic to hear that you're getting what you need! That's the way the Requirements process is supposed to work. Historically, times of war have prompted greater innovation. The $1.5 billion-a-year Rapid Fielding Initiative (RFI) was established in PEO soldier in 2003. (Out of $5.4 billion total for procurement and development of new gear.) PEO Soldier instituted the POR for the new Army Combat Uniform (ACUs, ‘digitals’) in 2003 – the technology on which the ACU is based was initiated in the 1970s. The reality is that anything that was delivered in 2002-03, was either (1) COTS-based or (2) in the pipeline as a formal program of record 5-10 years a priori. And, as we all know, programs do not formally transition to a Program Executive Office (PEO) until they have reached Milestone A, that is after passing out of 6.3 (advanced technology development) money. Unquestionably efforts like Adm Cebrowski’s (RIP) Office of Force Transformation (now effectively disbanded back into AT&L) pushed through some fantastic & innovative ideas. E.g., the Stiletto M-hull littoral combat craft, which was partially developed in response to the 30%+ attrition rate among SEALS due to back injuries. Has the Navy transitioned that out of the acquisition program? (No.) Otoh, soldiers seem to love the Stryker brigades. Yeah! Conversely, the Operational Requirements Document (ORD) for the Joint Chemical Agent Detector (JCAD) was put in place 1 July 1997; first fielding of the JCAD was 2003. I can name half dozen similar programs off the top of my head: JPBDS, JSGPM (i.e., ‘M41’), M-100 kits, JSLIST. There are lots of things wrapped up in this issue. In addition to the “Peace Dividend” that was impacting the budget, in the 1990s the Army had to budget for replacement of equipment that had been expended/destroyed during Gulf War I. Army Staff is already trying to plan for that now w/r/t OIF/OEF. They’re trying to learn the lesson from the 1990s to minimize that gap. In the end: Requirements for new equipment (i.e., capabilities) within DoD are a function of the internal DoD requirements process (run out of the J-8 and services) not any specific occupant of the White House or Congress. Now there is a valid question: is the requirements process broken? (Btw: the requirements process was initiated in the 1970s.) One problem is that Requirements organizations have a huge amount of power w/r/t PBR and POM. They’re not going to voluntarily give that up. Btw: this isn’t just nerdgirl saying this – the Defense Science Board 2006 Summer Study on 21st Century Technology Vectors highlighted the acquisition and requirements processes as essentially broken. One of the other issues they highlighted was the problem that requirements organizations have created is acting as ‘middle men’ between technology developers and actual operators. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites vortexring 0 #67 February 22, 2008 Vortexring, If you really want to try and knock my combat experience I'd be more than happy to e-mail you a copy of my ERB, but I'll let you know now that it will only serve to make you feel like an asshole for questioning my service and dedication to my job. I have never once said that I enjoy the parts of combat which involve watching friends or innocents die, I'd appreciate if you and your little sidekick wouldn't put words in my mouth. I'm not knocking your combat experience, just giving an opinion. Perhaps the problem is you feel I'm having a dig over what I understood your opinion to be - and I think I may have been. Where I felt critical of your viewpoint was the issue of enjoying combat. A sensitive subject in itself. But it seems I understood you wrong. So sorry for any offence, or if you felt I was deliberately misreading your post - that wasn't my intention. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #66 February 20, 2008 QuoteActually the majority of the equipment we have seen come down the line in recent years has been a result of new rapid fielding programs. In prior years you would be 100% correct, a new piece of equipment would come out and the soldiers would see it issued years later, the current conflict has helped spawn programs which have drastically cut down the time it takes to field new equipment, like I said before, current conditions are benifitting the soldier. I don't disagree at all that the last 4-5 years have seen some tremendous transitions to the warfigher w/r/t capabilities. That's fantastic to hear that you're getting what you need! That's the way the Requirements process is supposed to work. Historically, times of war have prompted greater innovation. The $1.5 billion-a-year Rapid Fielding Initiative (RFI) was established in PEO soldier in 2003. (Out of $5.4 billion total for procurement and development of new gear.) PEO Soldier instituted the POR for the new Army Combat Uniform (ACUs, ‘digitals’) in 2003 – the technology on which the ACU is based was initiated in the 1970s. The reality is that anything that was delivered in 2002-03, was either (1) COTS-based or (2) in the pipeline as a formal program of record 5-10 years a priori. And, as we all know, programs do not formally transition to a Program Executive Office (PEO) until they have reached Milestone A, that is after passing out of 6.3 (advanced technology development) money. Unquestionably efforts like Adm Cebrowski’s (RIP) Office of Force Transformation (now effectively disbanded back into AT&L) pushed through some fantastic & innovative ideas. E.g., the Stiletto M-hull littoral combat craft, which was partially developed in response to the 30%+ attrition rate among SEALS due to back injuries. Has the Navy transitioned that out of the acquisition program? (No.) Otoh, soldiers seem to love the Stryker brigades. Yeah! Conversely, the Operational Requirements Document (ORD) for the Joint Chemical Agent Detector (JCAD) was put in place 1 July 1997; first fielding of the JCAD was 2003. I can name half dozen similar programs off the top of my head: JPBDS, JSGPM (i.e., ‘M41’), M-100 kits, JSLIST. There are lots of things wrapped up in this issue. In addition to the “Peace Dividend” that was impacting the budget, in the 1990s the Army had to budget for replacement of equipment that had been expended/destroyed during Gulf War I. Army Staff is already trying to plan for that now w/r/t OIF/OEF. They’re trying to learn the lesson from the 1990s to minimize that gap. In the end: Requirements for new equipment (i.e., capabilities) within DoD are a function of the internal DoD requirements process (run out of the J-8 and services) not any specific occupant of the White House or Congress. Now there is a valid question: is the requirements process broken? (Btw: the requirements process was initiated in the 1970s.) One problem is that Requirements organizations have a huge amount of power w/r/t PBR and POM. They’re not going to voluntarily give that up. Btw: this isn’t just nerdgirl saying this – the Defense Science Board 2006 Summer Study on 21st Century Technology Vectors highlighted the acquisition and requirements processes as essentially broken. One of the other issues they highlighted was the problem that requirements organizations have created is acting as ‘middle men’ between technology developers and actual operators. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vortexring 0 #67 February 22, 2008 Vortexring, If you really want to try and knock my combat experience I'd be more than happy to e-mail you a copy of my ERB, but I'll let you know now that it will only serve to make you feel like an asshole for questioning my service and dedication to my job. I have never once said that I enjoy the parts of combat which involve watching friends or innocents die, I'd appreciate if you and your little sidekick wouldn't put words in my mouth. I'm not knocking your combat experience, just giving an opinion. Perhaps the problem is you feel I'm having a dig over what I understood your opinion to be - and I think I may have been. Where I felt critical of your viewpoint was the issue of enjoying combat. A sensitive subject in itself. But it seems I understood you wrong. So sorry for any offence, or if you felt I was deliberately misreading your post - that wasn't my intention. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GQ_jumper 4 #68 February 22, 2008 No worries bro, I can be a drama queen at times History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #69 February 22, 2008 Quote Actually the majority of the equipment we have seen come down the line in recent years has been a result of new rapid fielding programs. Exactly, if it is a great time to be a soldier, it is an incredibly outstanding time to be a defense supplier. (I wonder where their money goes ) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GQ_jumper 4 #70 February 23, 2008 Exactly, if it is a great time to be a soldier, it is an incredibly outstanding time to be a defense supplier. (I wonder where their money goes ) Quote True as well, it's all about supply and demand, I look at it as a way to help my retirement a little bit, defense stocks are WAY up History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vortexring 0 #71 February 23, 2008 And I'm sure the guy who thought up and marketed HESCO is sitting pretty too - why didn't I think of that! 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
