Comments on: Flournoy Details QDR Threats, Principles http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/ Online Defense and Acquisition Journal Mon, 15 Mar 2010 21:30:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: JSF MIKEhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-8637 JSF MIKE Thu, 28 May 2009 17:09:33 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-8637 The US doesn't live in a vacuum where we can live the good life, without a care in the world. We depend on the high seas and airspaces to import and export the goods that create this good living. There are people who want to create a world that they can control and minimize our presence. Small countries and their little dictators can cause more trouble than lare states like China and Russia. North Korea and Iran come to mind. Even a few nuclear weaspons in the wrong hands can create unreasonable situations. The question comes down to whether they are crazy enough to actually detonate one on another country. And if they did, what would the US, China, Russia really do? The odds are no one would anything. The shock of the act would tramatize the world into no action. In the 1930's the threat of a war froze Europe into inaction while Hitler peacefully took parts of other countries. "Peace in our Time" was the cry for a piece of worthless paper. North Korea didn't expect anyone to resist when they invaded South Korea in the 1950's. Sadam didn't really think anyone would actually go to war when he invaded Kuwait. Israel is still here because Arab foes can never be certain that in a possible losing side of a war, the Israeli wouldn't use nukes in a last attempt to turn the tide of that war. Our military is here to ensure the sea lanes are open and the skies are free so that our commerce can succeed in keeping our lifestyle. Much of our position in the world is based on what we are capable of fielding if push really came to shove. The world was amazed at the technology we showed in Iraq in the two wars there. That made a lot of countries decide to back off of some of their Unamerican thinking. For those who think we can drastically reduce our military and fight a good fight if need be, then remember the unprepared state of our capabilities near the start of WW I, WW II, Korea, etc. At the beginning of each, we traded bodies for the time to get more and better guns, ships, and planes built and into the battle. Today the opposing weapons can kill much more effectively than ever before. How many men and women do you want to sacrifice in lieu of pieces of paper to buy and maintain better weaponry? The US doesn’t live in a vacuum where we can live the good life, without a care in the world. We depend on the high seas and airspaces to import and export the goods that create this good living. There are people who want to create a world that they can control and minimize our presence. Small countries and their little dictators can cause more trouble than lare states like China and Russia. North Korea and Iran come to mind. Even a few nuclear weaspons in the wrong hands can create unreasonable situations. The question comes down to whether they are crazy enough to actually detonate one on another country. And if they did, what would the US, China, Russia really do? The odds are no one would anything. The shock of the act would tramatize the world into no action. In the 1930’s the threat of a war froze Europe into inaction while Hitler peacefully took parts of other countries. “Peace in our Time” was the cry for a piece of worthless paper. North Korea didn’t expect anyone to resist when they invaded South Korea in the 1950’s. Sadam didn’t really think anyone would actually go to war when he invaded Kuwait. Israel is still here because Arab foes can never be certain that in a possible losing side of a war, the Israeli wouldn’t use nukes in a last attempt to turn the tide of that war. Our military is here to ensure the sea lanes are open and the skies are free so that our commerce can succeed in keeping our lifestyle. Much of our position in the world is based on what we are capable of fielding if push really came to shove. The world was amazed at the technology we showed in Iraq in the two wars there. That made a lot of countries decide to back off of some of their Unamerican thinking. For those who think we can drastically reduce our military and fight a good fight if need be, then remember the unprepared state of our capabilities near the start of WW I, WW II, Korea, etc. At the beginning of each, we traded bodies for the time to get more and better guns, ships, and planes built and into the battle. Today the opposing weapons can kill much more effectively than ever before. How many men and women do you want to sacrifice in lieu of pieces of paper to buy and maintain better weaponry?

]]> By: paulhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-8042 paul Sun, 10 May 2009 19:38:28 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-8042 Thats why people need a compass!Basic nav,extends into longrange with a compass alone. I bet you never used one. Thats why people need a compass!Basic nav,extends into longrange with a compass alone.
I bet you never used one.

]]> By: john caseyhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-8041 john casey Sun, 10 May 2009 12:00:42 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-8041 IF OUR SATALITES ARE DESTROYED, WHERE IS THE COMMUNICATION. THE GPS IS GONE. WE NEED TO UPGRADE THE HF CAPABILITIES. SIMPLY TO KEEP ALL THE OTHERS ARE TALKING ABOUT. IF OUR SATALITES ARE DESTROYED, WHERE IS THE COMMUNICATION. THE GPS IS GONE. WE NEED TO UPGRADE THE HF CAPABILITIES. SIMPLY TO KEEP ALL THE OTHERS ARE TALKING ABOUT.

]]> By: TankerIPhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-7844 TankerIP Mon, 04 May 2009 17:34:36 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-7844 North Korea has a missile that can hit California. Before long, they'll have one that can hit a state worth saving. Meanwhile, we're flying B-52s and KC-135s that are 50 years old. We need to modernize while still maintaining capability to respond to the full range of threats. That will necessarily mean a leaner and meaner fighting force.Regarding soft power, isn't that just a limp-wristed euphemism for impotence? North Korea has a missile that can hit California. Before long, they’ll have one that can hit a state worth saving. Meanwhile, we’re flying B-52s and KC-135s that are 50 years old. We need to modernize while still maintaining capability to respond to the full range of threats. That will necessarily mean a leaner and meaner fighting force.

Regarding soft power, isn’t that just a limp-wristed euphemism for impotence?

]]> By: Rhyno327http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-7806 Rhyno327 Sat, 02 May 2009 15:06:22 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-7806 Islamic fundamentalism is the biggest threat now, and for the next [decade?] couple or many years. A combination of heavy and light forces will always be needed, and air superiority is #1. The military is augmenting its Spec. Ops, and wat I would like to see is mountain warfare trianing for whole battalion size units, just like the Royal Marines. Versatility is a good thing. Islamic fundamentalism is the biggest threat now, and for the next [decade?] couple or many years. A combination of heavy and light forces will always be needed, and air superiority is #1. The military is augmenting its Spec. Ops, and wat I would like to see is mountain warfare trianing for whole battalion size units, just like the Royal Marines. Versatility is a good thing.

]]> By: Greghttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-7797 Greg Sat, 02 May 2009 01:32:27 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-7797 I suppose if we didn't need so much oil we wouldn't give a rat's ass about the Middle East. Time to start really developing our own nuclear capability supplemented by all those other botique supplies [wind, solar, wave, etc.] and our own oil. Then we can let the "youth bulges" annihilate each other. I suppose if we didn’t need so much oil we wouldn’t give a rat’s ass about the Middle East. Time to start really developing our own nuclear capability supplemented by all those other botique supplies [wind, solar, wave, etc.] and our own oil. Then we can let the “youth bulges” annihilate each other.

]]> By: Bolding Blackhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-7762 Bolding Black Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:44:14 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-7762 The QDR- Cyber Security - Cyber Command - Cyberspace - Military plans for the future! I find it strange that the DoD is seriously considering the establishment of a "new" Cyber Command and talk only about "defence" or cyber Security. The potential for military action in Cyberspace is not a J6 problem! It is not about the "defence" of DoD networks. If the DoD begins to Militarize the US structure for handing problems in Cybersspace, they will have, defacto, given the problem to the CIA and destroy a national asset.. How many Services have attempted to create a "Cyber Command" to no avail! Where are the weapons? They are not techniques developed by the computer-wise. The weapon is between the ears of the operator. It is knowledge and experience of that operator and is effective when used as "Covert Action" in cyberspace. Where are the Forces (people)? The only such capable people in the US government are civilian cryptologists. They do not rotate assignments, they live every day in their space -cyberspace! They do not train for the day they are needed; they go to work everyday in their space. They know their neighborhoods, they know the people in their neighborhoods. They produce at their "work" everyday. And they are paid by the intelligence community to do intelligence work. They are not paid by the DoD! The people that are paid by the DoD do defence of the networks or information assurance work -J6-like. This is like going back to the days of an Information Command, combinning the Space Command and DISA for handling and "securing" neworks. Yes, Cyberspace is a problem area; yes, the DoD needs to learn how to effectively secure networks. But how can a Command solve this prolem? The DoD should learn from the Services that have already attemped to create a Cyber Command. It may be that an "Information Command" is needed; not a Cyber Command. You may destroy something much more important and not solve the network security problem! The QDR– Cyber Security — Cyber Command — Cyberspace — Military plans for the future! I find it strange that the DoD is seriously considering the establishment of a “new” Cyber Command and talk only about “defence” or cyber Security. The potential for military action in Cyberspace is not a J6 problem! It is not about the “defence” of DoD networks. If the DoD begins to Militarize the US structure for handing problems in Cybersspace, they will have, defacto, given the problem to the CIA and destroy a national asset.. How many Services have attempted to create a “Cyber Command” to no avail! Where are the weapons? They are not techniques developed by the computer-wise. The weapon is between the ears of the operator. It is knowledge and experience of that operator and is effective when used as “Covert Action” in cyberspace. Where are the Forces (people)? The only such capable people in the US government are civilian cryptologists. They do not rotate assignments, they live every day in their space –cyberspace! They do not train for the day they are needed; they go to work everyday in their space. They know their neighborhoods, they know the people in their neighborhoods. They produce at their “work” everyday. And they are paid by the intelligence community to do intelligence work. They are not paid by the DoD! The people that are paid by the DoD do defence of the networks or information assurance work –J6-like. This is like going back to the days of an Information Command, combinning the Space Command and DISA for handling and “securing” neworks. Yes, Cyberspace is a problem area; yes, the DoD needs to learn how to effectively secure networks. But how can a Command solve this prolem? The DoD should learn from the Services that have already attemped to create a Cyber Command. It may be that an “Information Command” is needed; not a Cyber Command. You may destroy something much more important and not solve the network security problem!

]]> By: mikehttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-7748 mike Thu, 30 Apr 2009 16:42:28 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-7748 Bill, I find it very frightening that when one advocates more efficient government (pentagon included) that the pro big establishment take pot shots at those wanting to reform it. Our founding fathers wanted no standing army, they did not have an Air Force, the Marines were kep to a small number and we did not even have an army for a couple periods in our hstory. The founding fathers feared military power and coups. Before WWII we had a American patriotic way of life and that was stay out of the world's affairs. All of know today that has changed. The approach to what we face today is a debate between those who want to keep the cold war relics (and that includes cushion jobs for old institutions) and institutions against those who want a lean mean Armed Services. All of the world's current skirmishes involve religious zealots, small time idiots and want-be-a-be dictators that we must deal with appropriately. Bill siding with religious zealots in America who abuse women and children is not American and I believe that our founding fathers would agree with me on that. Bill, I find it very frightening that when one advocates more efficient government (pentagon included) that the pro big establishment take pot shots at those wanting to reform it. Our founding fathers wanted no standing army, they did not have an Air Force, the Marines were kep to a small number and we did not even have an army for a couple periods in our hstory. The founding fathers feared military power and coups. Before WWII we had a American patriotic way of life and that was stay out of the world’s affairs. All of know today that has changed. The approach to what we face today is a debate between those who want to keep the cold war relics (and that includes cushion jobs for old institutions) and institutions against those who want a lean mean Armed Services. All of the world’s current skirmishes involve religious zealots, small time idiots and want-be-a-be dictators that we must deal with appropriately. Bill siding with religious zealots in America who abuse women and children is not American and I believe that our founding fathers would agree with me on that.

]]> By: Anthony Merlonghihttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-7744 Anthony Merlonghi Thu, 30 Apr 2009 14:32:42 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-7744 Overwhelming convectional military superiority is a prerequisite to soft power. Overwhelming convectional military superiority is a prerequisite to soft power.

]]> By: Bill Rhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-7740 Bill R Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:51:37 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-7740 Why doesn't the QDR get honest and call their approach "cheap power" ? This whole business is strategy on a shoestring. It attacks neo-isolationism, but beggars the elements of national power that enable the nation to fight and win in full spectrum operations. I don't mind seeing DoD put more emphasis on missions that get short shrift in the budgetary scramble - but not at the expense of the basics. Captain Mahan will be turning over in his grave. This QDR will continue the attenuation of the force in being, and Gates/Flournoy are simply being disingenuous in their lip service to "balance". Yes - operating with finite resources means having to set priorities and focus on what is doable. This crowd has even less understanding of the limits of US power than those hated neoconservatives under Rumsfeld. In the seventies and eighties, we spent a long time fixing a broken system - these guys are trying fix what is broke by continuing to break it. Why doesn’t the QDR get honest and call their approach “cheap power” ? This whole business is strategy on a shoestring. It attacks neo-isolationism, but beggars the elements of national power that enable the nation to fight and win in full spectrum operations. I don’t mind seeing DoD put more emphasis on missions that get short shrift in the budgetary scramble — but not at the expense of the basics. Captain Mahan will be turning over in his grave. This QDR will continue the attenuation of the force in being, and Gates/Flournoy are simply being disingenuous in their lip service to “balance”. Yes — operating with finite resources means having to set priorities and focus on what is doable. This crowd has even less understanding of the limits of US power than those hated neoconservatives under Rumsfeld. In the seventies and eighties, we spent a long time fixing a broken system — these guys are trying fix what is broke by continuing to break it.

]]> By: Billhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-7739 Bill Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:45:44 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-7739 Alan & Mark,Thanks for your comments as I find them quite accurate and relevant to this QDR discussion. In terms of defense priorities, I think both modernization of existing systems and staying on the cutting edge of defensive systems, especially those that defend our own shores should be at the center of concern. Fighting future asymmetric threats is very important, especially in light of worldwide terrorism but it is not a panacea. It was the combination of soft and hard power that was successful in Iraq. What about the kind of "nut cases" like Mike above that advocate "killing Americans" that do not agree with there opinions about where the country should be heading? Are these kinds of people (the Mike kind) a threat to our freedoms? I do believe the founding fathers were also concerned about people like Mike taking over the government and using its power to force their personal agenda's on the populace. Freedom is supposed to be for everyone not just people we agree with! I saw this first hand in Iraq with the Shia and Sunni battles. Can the Iraqi's find a common ground? I think so based on what I saw. By the way, Obama had nothing to do with that progress. It was on Bush's watch!Semper Fidelis (Navy served with I MEF) Alan & Mark,

Thanks for your comments as I find them quite accurate and relevant to this QDR discussion. In terms of defense priorities, I think both modernization of existing systems and staying on the cutting edge of defensive systems, especially those that defend our own shores should be at the center of concern. Fighting future asymmetric threats is very important, especially in light of worldwide terrorism but it is not a panacea. It was the combination of soft and hard power that was successful in Iraq.
What about the kind of “nut cases” like Mike above that advocate “killing Americans” that do not agree with there opinions about where the country should be heading? Are these kinds of people (the Mike kind) a threat to our freedoms? I do believe the founding fathers were also concerned about people like Mike taking over the government and using its power to force their personal agenda’s on the populace. Freedom is supposed to be for everyone not just people we agree with! I saw this first hand in Iraq with the Shia and Sunni battles. Can the Iraqi’s find a common ground? I think so based on what I saw. By the way, Obama had nothing to do with that progress. It was on Bush’s watch!

Semper Fidelis
(Navy served with I MEF)

]]> By: Alan Cochinhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-7734 Alan Cochin Thu, 30 Apr 2009 12:31:42 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-7734 "Think tanks" and graduate seminars for "social workers" notwithstanding, those enamored of "soft approaches" for the use of national force as an element of the QDR, would do well to recall that Captain Phillips was not rescued by negotiation. He was rescued by Seal operators at the tip of the spear doing what they do so well. Remember Robert Frost? He said, in part, "With reasonable men I will Reason, with tyrants, I will show no Quarter". The cold war is alive and well, the "friendly" east bloc, is now the arms supplier to the terrorists of the world and we continue to concern ourselves with social engineering and nation building. When will we ever learn? “Think tanks” and graduate seminars for “social workers” notwithstanding, those enamored of “soft approaches” for the use of national force as an element of the QDR, would do well to recall that Captain Phillips was not rescued by negotiation. He was rescued by Seal operators at the tip of the spear doing what they do so well. Remember Robert Frost? He said, in part, “With reasonable men I will Reason, with tyrants, I will show no Quarter”. The cold war is alive and well, the “friendly” east bloc, is now the arms supplier to the terrorists of the world and we continue to concern ourselves with social engineering and nation building. When will we ever learn?

]]> By: Johnhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-7727 John Thu, 30 Apr 2009 11:16:57 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-7727 The Adminsitration did not scrap missile defense. The Adminsitration did not scrap missile defense.

]]> By: Tony Connerhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-7725 Tony Conner Thu, 30 Apr 2009 11:10:03 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-7725 Interesting the statement was made "key asymmetric threats Flournoy said the country must do more to counter are anti-satellite systems, anti-air systems, anti-ship systems, undersea war and cyber attacks. Of course, dealing with all this means “we are going to be pulled in different directions to deal with the threats of the future.” The same technologies driving ant-missile defense are key to these issues, but the new administration has basically scrapped anti-missile defense? Interesting the statement was made “key asymmetric threats Flournoy said the country must do more to counter are anti-satellite systems, anti-air systems, anti-ship systems, undersea war and cyber attacks. Of course, dealing with all this means “we are going to be pulled in different directions to deal with the threats of the future.” The same technologies driving ant-missile defense are key to these issues, but the new administration has basically scrapped anti-missile defense?

]]> By: Markhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-7723 Mark Thu, 30 Apr 2009 01:40:56 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-7723 mike, Interesting perspective. If the world is as safe from conventional threats as you describe, then why not disband most of the DOD, send the money to the UN, let DHS take care of the odd terrorist and disgruntle veterans and we all live happily ever after? Your denigration of "Cold War" military veterans tells me that you did not serve and much of what you know about the world is not first hand experience. Let me puncture a couple of demi-myths that you are trying to create: Eastern Europe & El Salvador were transformed by soft power? The deterrent power of NATO and hard US military power created the conditions that ended the Soviet Union and enabled a political process to ferment and change Eastern Europe...not soft power in a vacuum. Guess you forgot about the US Military involvement in El Salvador?? You make it sound as though there a large number of people demanding a "Reagan sized" military build up?? Most thoughtful people are not advocating a 600 ship navy or a 40 Fighter Wing Equivalent AF. The US military has been reduced constantly since 1992 and the FACTs are that many of our weapons are outdated and worn out. The Services were not able to recapitalize force structure during the Clinton/Bush years: consequently,it has led some current and former military professionals to advise a little prudent risk management in the face of what could be irrational exuberance for irregular warfare and soft power. BTW, I was deployed to SWA when the USG dealt with the "relegious zealots" in Waco, so I wasn't there...that said, I always wondered what law the children broke that warranted their death in that "soft power government operation"?? mike,
Interesting perspective. If the world is as safe from conventional threats as you describe, then why not disband most of the DOD, send the money to the UN, let DHS take care of the odd terrorist and disgruntle veterans and we all live happily ever after?
Your denigration of “Cold War” military veterans tells me that you did not serve and much of what you know about the world is not first hand experience. Let me puncture a couple of demi-myths that you are trying to create: Eastern Europe & El Salvador were transformed by soft power? The deterrent power of NATO and hard US military power created the conditions that ended the Soviet Union and enabled a political process to ferment and change Eastern Europe…not soft power in a vacuum. Guess you forgot about the US Military involvement in El Salvador??
You make it sound as though there a large number of people demanding a “Reagan sized” military build up?? Most thoughtful people are not advocating a 600 ship navy or a 40 Fighter Wing Equivalent AF. The US military has been reduced constantly since 1992 and the FACTs are that many of our weapons are outdated and worn out. The Services were not able to recapitalize force structure during the Clinton/Bush years: consequently,it has led some current and former military professionals to advise a little prudent risk management in the face of what could be irrational exuberance for irregular warfare and soft power.
BTW, I was deployed to SWA when the USG dealt with the “relegious zealots” in Waco, so I wasn’t there…that said, I always wondered what law the children broke that warranted their death in that “soft power government operation”??

]]> By: erichttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-7721 eric Thu, 30 Apr 2009 00:32:53 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-7721 mike...cold war isn't over, just doesn't get as much press lately, china still on the rise, russians aren't smart enough to be scared of us, everyone is just biding their time. But I am glad that maybe people are looking at an ounce of prevention instead of a pound (megaton) of cure. DOD as a lover and a fighter, to help people out instead of blowing up their houses and wondering why their pissed. Lots of potential in these ideas. mike…cold war isn’t over, just doesn’t get as much press lately, china still on the rise, russians aren’t smart enough to be scared of us, everyone is just biding their time. But I am glad that maybe people are looking at an ounce of prevention instead of a pound (megaton) of cure. DOD as a lover and a fighter, to help people out instead of blowing up their houses and wondering why their pissed. Lots of potential in these ideas.

]]> By: mikehttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-7720 mike Thu, 30 Apr 2009 00:04:06 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-7720 Eric...soft power is what happened in Poland, Hungary, El Salvador, Romania, and Ukraine, etc. Soft power is what happened in northern Ireland. When I told co workers in the 1980s that Berlin and the Soviet Union would find freedom within 10 years, they scoffed. The world is finding better ways to solve problems between those nations who are educated. The religious zealots, like those we had in Waco, and those in Guyana are a different challenge and the use of irregular warfare is the way to go. Some need death and there is no compromise on that. However the old guard wants to use billion dollar gold plated machines and do not want to hear the facts of life today on how we face the zealots on this planet versus those who can be swayed by soft power. Eric…soft power is what happened in Poland, Hungary, El Salvador, Romania, and Ukraine, etc. Soft power is what happened in northern Ireland. When I told co workers in the 1980s that Berlin and the Soviet Union would find freedom within 10 years, they scoffed. The world is finding better ways to solve problems between those nations who are educated. The religious zealots, like those we had in Waco, and those in Guyana are a different challenge and the use of irregular warfare is the way to go. Some need death and there is no compromise on that. However the old guard wants to use billion dollar gold plated machines and do not want to hear the facts of life today on how we face the zealots on this planet versus those who can be swayed by soft power.

]]> By: mikehttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-7719 mike Wed, 29 Apr 2009 23:53:54 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-7719 The eastern block countries gained there own freedom and the Soviet Union broke up almost 30 years ago, and we in America finally have Defense officials who see this new world of different challenges. Michele Flournoy, undersecretary of defense for policy,and her boss SECDEF Gates are on the right track in seeing and guiding new developing strategy to face it. THE COLD WAR IS OVER old guard. Those tens of thousands of retired officers who work for defense contractors, acquisition institutions and defense lobbyists must face this new reality and stop the unethical and immoral falsehoods about destroying our military aresenals. If all the Armed Forces of the world decided to take us on today at one time what would we face? The factual inventories and capabilities of these opposing forces are what needs to be told to Congress and the American public. True inventories, not jets on pedestals in VFW yards or museums, as was reported in Iraq (a MIG was found in a cemetry in Iraq...duh....?). The QDR must be based on real geniune possible enemies and there weapons in hand thatthey intend to use against us. After that the Combatant commanders can determine what counter weapons they need to take them out, and then if new weapons are needed, let the combatant commanders tell the weapons buyers what they need to buy and maybe this big uncontolled lobby laded Department can come back to reality like it was befor WWII. The eastern block countries gained there own freedom and the Soviet Union broke up almost 30 years ago, and we in America finally have Defense officials who see this new world of different challenges. Michele Flournoy, undersecretary of defense for policy,and her boss SECDEF Gates are on the right track in seeing and guiding new developing strategy to face it. THE COLD WAR IS OVER old guard. Those tens of thousands of retired officers who work for defense contractors, acquisition institutions and defense lobbyists must face this new reality and stop the unethical and immoral falsehoods about destroying our military aresenals. If all the Armed Forces of the world decided to take us on today at one time what would we face? The factual inventories and capabilities of these opposing forces are what needs to be told to Congress and the American public. True inventories, not jets on pedestals in VFW yards or museums, as was reported in Iraq (a MIG was found in a cemetry in Iraq…duh.…?). The QDR must be based on real geniune possible enemies and there weapons in hand thatthey intend to use against us. After that the Combatant commanders can determine what counter weapons they need to take them out, and then if new weapons are needed, let the combatant commanders tell the weapons buyers what they need to buy and maybe this big uncontolled lobby laded Department can come back to reality like it was befor WWII.

]]> By: erichttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-7718 eric Wed, 29 Apr 2009 23:49:36 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-7718 How about a first come first serve...the first branch to incorporate a "social worker" unit (possibly deployed with sf trainers as part of hearts and minds campaign before hard tactics) will lead the pack and develop doctrine and training and maybe the rest will follow, probably for $ or recognition. How about a first come first serve…the first branch to incorporate a “social worker” unit (possibly deployed with sf trainers as part of hearts and minds campaign before hard tactics) will lead the pack and develop doctrine and training and maybe the rest will follow, probably for $ or recognition.

]]> By: Markhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/29/flournoy-details-qdr-threats-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-7716 Mark Wed, 29 Apr 2009 20:28:34 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6051#comment-7716 Interesting set of issues....it will be fascinating to hear the analysis on the "smarter" use of soft power which briefs well but is stressed by reality....which begs that question: which part of the US government should lead the employment of soft power? Will the US DOD have a split force of "international social workers" and people that deter and/or deliver overwhelming force of arms. How do the other arms of the USG fit in? How about historical examples of effective use of "soft power" in cases where US objectives differed from another power? Interesting set of issues.…it will be fascinating to hear the analysis on the “smarter” use of soft power which briefs well but is stressed by reality.…which begs that question: which part of the US government should lead the employment of soft power? Will the US DOD have a split force of “international social workers” and people that deter and/or deliver overwhelming force of arms. How do the other arms of the USG fit in? How about historical examples of effective use of “soft power” in cases where US objectives differed from another power?

]]>