“Thats easy he doesn’t have any.”

And the folks that have “experience” cannot build anything!

“I can’t speak to Obama’s experience with security issues of this magnitude”

Thats easy he doesen’t have any.

“but it is inaccurate and uninformed to suggest that Biden has no clue.”

I have delt with Bidens Office and his “advisors” on national security issues — Dr. Livine , he does not have a clue.

“I think he has much more experience in tackling issues of this complexity than our former president had.”

Uh huh

“And our current president is doing his best to master them.”

Obama’s Best isnt good enough.

“Give him a chance to do so at least. He hasn’t been in office long enough yet to significantly shape our threat assessment and response, but he strkes me as a fast learner.”

I wonder if you left wingers gave President Bush that consideration in 2001.

“It is why I voted for him, and if the election were held today, I would still vote for him. MIKE”

Words of a typical neophyte ideolog.

gotta love the gov’t acronyms, we’ve gotten so good at it we’re just conjuring them with all the right considerations ahead of time for an effective and accurate description of what that office would produce

2. I’m not sure what is so new about current tactics. A force structure designed for WWII can’t operate well out of enclaves because the support infrastructure isn’t designed for it. You’re asking men who’ve spent their entire lives studying and fighting/training for linear war with a FEBA and a rear area to change.

3. We have stunning technologies, yet basic issues that we ignore. How do senior leaders with 2 or so years figure out the priorities or see where the holes are?

I don’t expect the CIC to be a zen military master. But who do we have to educate him and Congress? We do not have a education-training system that brings the National strategic partners together. If I were king, that’s where I’d start.

* Knew it was likely, understood the magnitude of the implications, but didn’t pursue it appropriately
– History: Iran nukes?
– Current: IED threat to logistics and routes. Overreliance on sealift and light Army and Marine forces to fight threats early. Iran nukes? Choosing a ballistic missile defense response to a terrorist nuke-in-a-container threat. Continued emphasis on airpower when oil is known to be scarce in a few decades and environmentalists will never allow synthetic fuels from coal.

* Did it to ourselves
– History: Korean war beginning after disarming following WWII. Clinton procurement holiday.
– Current: Planned procurement holiday? Army heavy armor status quo proponents shooting down FCS and risking the Army becoming irrelevant against competent threats, and destined to be written off as solely a counterinsurgency force because the Marines become the sole rapid response ground force…even though they lack the armor to do it right against many threats

* Believed they were not up to it
– History: U.S. AH-64 deep attack against Iraqis that failed due to coordinated small arms defense. Soviets vs. Afghan Jihaddis…no, it’s not the same today, they killed at least 100,000 innocent Afghans
– Current: Russian attack of NATO allies and former eastern bloc countries who turned west. Yemen-based and Indonesia-based terrorists. North Korea. Darfur-based Arabs. Somalia and other pirates.

* Believed they wouldn’t dare
History: China’s invasion of Korea after we pushed “North Koreans” back.
– Current: Russian invasian of Georgia. Kyrgystan closure of U.S. airbase. Afghan waste of U.S. aid money and continued corruption and drug-dealing.

* Knew it might happen, but were trapped in own paradigms
– History: Israel vs Lebanon 2006 reliance on their paradigm of airpower-can-do-it-all
– History: Sec of Defense Rumsfeld decision to attack Iraq without adequate force or a plan for afterwards, due to desire to fight the war on the cheap and belief in the Revolution of Military Affairs that thought airpower could do it all
– Current: Air Force reliance on short range fighters and air-to-air leaves them vulnerable to airfield attack by tactical ballistic missiles, and satellite attacks that take out GPS-guided munition capabilities. Navy reliance on carriers leaves them vulnerable to diesel-electric subs that hide and wait in suicide attacks and to barrages of tactical ballistic missiles. Army belief that they will have sufficient time and naval access to deploy heavy forces exclusively by sea or that light forces are an adequate early ground deterrent.

* Didn’t imagine or anticipate the strategic impact
– History: Somalia and decision to pull out after a bloody nose thus showing weakness to al Qaeda
– Current: Iran and Pakistan threat of getting nukes or biological weapons to terrorists for infiltration to the U.S. leaving us with uncertainy who to retaliate against

* Lost in the ’signal to noise’ of other possibilities
– History: al Qaeda was lost to Clinton while worrying about Serbia and Monica Lewinsky
– Current: Darfur Arab aggression spreading to other central Africa nations, endangering potential sources of oil and vital defense minerals. India invading Pakistan leading to a nuclear exchange that could spread.

* Imagined it, but thought it was years away
– History: China anti-satellite capability
– Current: China/Iranian EMP capability and space capability.

* Were willing to take the risk that it wouldn’t happen.
– History: North Korean invasion of the South. Also our Cold War placement of tripwire forces in Europe in the 60s/70s rather than realistic quantities to fight Soviet armor while continuing to build up capabilities during the 80s to force Soviets to overspend
– Current: North Korean invasion of the South. China invasion of Taiwan due to economic ties with the U.S. and its potential business losses and susceptability to blockading of oil resources were it to invade

atacms…we should talk to countries after they meet our conditons…“Leave us and our allies alone”. We should not talk to terrorists…we should kill them.

Many have noticed we haven’t won a war since the War Department was changed into the Department of Defense. The USA hasn’t won a war since WWII. Korea is festering sore, we pulled out of Vietnam (technically, we lost), Gulf War I ended in a farce (two no-fly zones with cost of enforcement > $90 billion a year), and Iraq and Afghanistan are still going on basically because those two wars are not being staffed properly. Handing off Afghanistan to NATO was a screwup because anyone who’s been stationed in Europe KNOWS NATO is a paper tiger.

With the two present wars, it’s painfully obvious Guard and Reserves were not meant to keep getting clobbered like this. What was meant to happen was the draft was to be reinstated in time of war. Unfortunately, no one on Capitol Hill nor in the White House has the testicular fortitude to do so.

Nothing will change as long as the great behemoth of the 20th and 21st Centuries still exists eating up resources: the Pentagon.

Now we have another flustercuck: DHS. Between those two bureaucracies, nothing will get done or change.

Eisenhower was spot on in 1958.

There is no overnight solution.

That aside, there are other major problems that demand immediate resolution. The behavior of the VA in handling veteran’s claims is just one of many long standing problems.

Problem resolution is not a bureaucrats strong point. “Passing the buck” is.