Military pay and benefits

One again there are calls to “reform” military pay. I’ve said on this blog before that our service members don’t get paid enough. No we’re not europe; defense spending is not breaking the bank it’s actually smaller now. But many still attack our bennies.

Some bloggers, like In from the Cold, have struck back.

We have a powerful ally:

Col. Mike Hayden, USAF (Ret), deputy director, MOAA Government Relations
“Statements that rising personnel costs are “unaffordable”…“out of control”…”unsustainable”… and “will impact readiness” are geared to make headlines, alarm the reader, and (not infrequently) generate support for pursuing additional studies.

“If personnel costs continue growing at that rate and the overall defense budget remains flat with inflation,” CSBA authors hyperbolized, “military personnel costs will consume the entire defense budget by 2039.”

Elsewhere, they acknowledged that will never happen. But the quote was seized and repeated by reporters, pundits, bureaucrats and other “analysts.” E.g., James Kitfield did so in the July 2012 National Journal.

Is there any chance personnel costs will consume the entire defense budget by 2039? Of course not.

Before examining the personnel share, let’s first consider that the defense budget has consumed a progressively smaller share of federal outlays over the last 50 years”

The Military Officer’s Association of America is made up of people who’ve fought America’s wars. Company level commanders who’ve had to deal with military families. The Association of the United States Army echoes the call to help soldiers get better pay.

There are many leftist dirtbags who insist that the military revert to the Regan/Carter era of pay.

Pay freezes and benefit cuts would cause the Army to bleed numbers. Soldiers on food stamps, NCO’s and officers leaving, morale nosediving and enlistment down. The left wants that, I don’t.

How about we cut the think tanks and the pay of Congressmen who say stupid things instead?

“Turning and turning in the widening gyre”

The Second Coming

“Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity”
–”The Second Coming“, William Butler Yeats

“The missile tests popping up all over Asia should be seen in this light. Everyone’s arming up, starting with Russia. As we speak, Moscow is rearming missile units with Russia’s most advanced ICBM, the Yars missile, which was first tested in 2007. The Topol-M missile, tested in 2004, is already deployed.”
–”Missiles, missiles everywhere” December 4, 2012 by J.E. Dyer, HotAir.com

Mr. Dyer goes on to list missile developments in Asia, including the Nork’s upcoming missile test. Oh, and “Nork” is not racist, btw.

US Army Patriot missile units are in the middle east, defending our allies in the Arabian Gulf. Egypt’s “moderate” president flees the presidential palace because Egyptians don’t like a dictator. India and China are flexing their muscles.

The left, when not plugging their fingers in their ears (that “norks is racist comment is based on a tweet by a leftie with the IQ of a tree stump), they spit on our country:

But will a film like Kathryn Bigelow’s “Zero Dark Thirty,” about a specific, recent event — the killing of Osama bin Laden — resonate in the same way that her previous, fictional movie about the Iraq war, “The Hurt Locker,” did with its fearless main character channeling our deepest fears about the price of that misbegotten war?

Oddly, my deepest fears about the war were that (a) the rules of engagement prevented victory, and (b) any gains made would be lost to politics. Both of those fears have been realized.
–”Yet more fear and loathing of American culture (and history) at the LA Times“,by Joel Engel (giving a “reason you suck speech” to the LAT’s Reed Johnson)

The left wants to pretend that the world loves and shares their Marxist worldview. The world is have vs. have not’s and not the real world of hate and power hungry haters.

Either we recognize that there is a bear in the woods or we let the bear attack.

“And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?”

We’ll find out soon enough.

Huh…

“But there’s one thing that hasn’t changed much. Each year, the overwhelming majority of new military recruits are young and male. In that sense, the American military of 2012 still looks a great deal like the American military of the 1970s, the 1940s, the 1860s, or the 1770s. For that matter, it still looks a lot like virtually every group of warriors in virtually every society during virtually every period of human history.

It’s time to question the near-universal assumption that the ideal military recruit is young and male. The nature of warfare has changed dramatically in the last century and the capabilities most needed by the military are less and less likely to be in the exclusive possession of young males. In fact, the opposite may be true: when it comes to certain key skills and qualities likely to be vital to the military in the coming decades, young males may be one of the least well-suited demographic groups.”
–
No Army for Young Men
Soldiers these days need less muscle and more maturity, so why do we still focus on recruiting 18-year-olds?
BY ROSA BROOKS

My least favorite blogger, Ms. Brooks actually hits one out of the park. I was mad at her epic fail as she questioned military pay and benefits. Hey, service members aren’t paid high enough lady!

But she hits the right notes with this piece. For some reason the left wants to screw over our allies. The New York Times wants us to leave Taiwan. War is Boring and the Atlantic want the US to leave Japan.

In the midst of teh peacenik crazies, it’s nice to see someone admit that soldiers are ADULTS.

The US military does not enlist, nor commission children. I’m gonna say that again, the US military does not enlist, nor commission children.

The reason the military recruits in high school is to get young people as they turn 18. Given the 20 year career path many take, that means a young man or woman could enlist at 17 (with their parent’s permission). Starting at E-1, they go up the ranks. The higher ranks are capped per federal regs and age limits, but promotion is based on merit. So a young man or woman can join at 17, get promoted and then retire at the age of 40 if they want. Or they can go to a service academy, ROTC or plain ole’ college then get a commission as an officer. Or they can do the “high school to flight school” and become a warrant officer and fly for the Army. There are officers, warrant officers and enlisted who have 25+ years of service, some with over 40. The point is that high school age Americans had a place in the military of the past.

Flash forward to the 21st century, those over 17, hell those up to 40 can join. Yes, a career in the military is hard on the body. That said, those fresh out of high school have a place. Instead of drinking and parting their way through teen years mark II, they could get a job defending their country. But being 20, 23, or 33 doesn’t make them unfit. If anything older service members bring skills and experience into the mix.

The myth that junior enlisted are “children” dates back to conflicts of old. Yes, even up to Vietnam, the military and civilian leaders kept tossing bodies at the problem. Now we live in the era that makes Vietnam’s tech level look like the Napoleonic Wars. More young soldiers have families, more junior enlisted are older than 20. The draft should go the way of segregation, “don’t ask, don’t tell” and vacuum tubes.

Her blog is the usual leftist screeching that war is too easy, somehow. I applaud her for saying that soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines ARE NOT children. It’s time everyone realizes that. All Americans over 17 should get calls from recruiters.

About that Pacific Re-alignment…

As seen on DEW Line: Chinese and Russian aircraft.

Via Dewline: http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/

So the DoD wants to shift to the Pacific. Here’s the reason why they should be worried. The Russian plane has a radar that poses a deadly threat to fourth generation aircraft. The Chinese are putting a real fighter on board the carrier most lefties think is just for show. So a real fighter with their new navy.

And this is why the Pacific is becoming a dangerous place.

BTW: lost in the disappointment in the “Arab Spring” and it’s failure in Egypt:

“CAIRO – Egypt’s Islamist president ordered his defense minister and chief of staff to retire on Sunday and canceled the military-declared constitutional amendments that gave top generals wide powers”

Egypt’s president cancels amendments that gave military power, names vice president: Associated Press.

Patriot Missile Operators:

Egyptian Air Defense Command:
MIM-104(PAC-3) missile: 4 Batteries (4 Stationary (towed) units per Battery, 16 missiles per unit plus 2 reloads each)

Israeli Air Force (GEM+)

This won’t end well….

And the draft talk continues

I suspect that talk of a draft is from people who don’t have “skin in the game”. Armchair Generals who’ve never served on the front lines. Some believe that a draft is cheaper for some reason.

Cue my wall of text:

“So, in the New York Times, Tom Ricks echoes Stan McCrystal’s call to bring back the draft. Ricks is two days younger than me, but our life experiences are quite different, apparently, because his vision of a draft is decidedly not to support our warfighting capability, and contrary to McCrystal’s plan to have every American community have “skin in the game” in the next war, Rick’s sees it as a jobs program and to provide cheap labor – an Army of janitors;”
–Ricks: Draft our kids: This Ain’t Hell.

“McChrystal admits that it would lead to a loss of professionalism in the ranks, but I guess because he’s a liberal deep inside (he voted for Obama, he says) the loss of a successful military is secondary to everyone’s feelings about war. Americans were largely against the surge in Iraq, and their opinions didn’t matter, because it happened anyway. Americans wanted the wars to end and they voted for Obama…the casualties since the “peace President” took office are 2/3s of the total US casualties in the nearly 11-year war. So what good would everyone having “skin in the game” do for our policies?”
–McChrystal calls for a draft: This Ain’t Hell.

“The U.S. Army by the end of the Vietnam War suffered from a bad case of this; as mentioned above, many films set during the War show military units that are barely wearing uniforms, with half of the soldiers high most of the time. While this often seems jarring to viewers, any soldier who was there will tell you that it was absolutely Truth in Television: the army was falling apart, discipline had gone completely to hell, the percentage of heroin-addicted soldiers had reached the double digits, and killing your own commander was so common as to get its own Deadly Euphemism: fragging. “
– “Mildly Military“: TVTropes.org

ordered to de-ice them before flying operations in wintertime. It is recalled that, since no jet fuel was available for jet heaters, these soldiers used brooms to remove the ice, a process which resulted in the MiGs’ honeycomb structures such as elevators, flaps, rudders and ailerons being seriously damaged.

Several of the MiGs never flew again. Not coincidentally, Hungary ended the draft in 2005.
by DAVID AXE, warisboring.com

From a General who can’t keep his mouth shut, a lefty mouthpiece journalist and many, many corners of the ‘net.

The draft has its origins in Medieval warfare. When kings would go to war, they would call upon the nobles (princes, lords, barons, other minor nobles). In exchange for their loyalty to the king, they promised their fighting men. In exchange for living on a noble’s land, the peasants would have to fight for their lord and their king.

Castles and kings became towns and democracy. However conscription remains. The west fought countless wars with conscripts. The left is still just angry about Bush. McCrystal just wants to vindicate himself and possibly run for office.

Wars are not fought so much as processed. Information, high tech weapons, cultural sensitivity are more important than just stuffing bodies into uniforms. WWI was the last time armies just lined up and shot at each other. WWII, Korea, Vietnam, were wars of maneuver, Korea and Vietnam brought politics to the mix. Desert Storm, the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the war in Afghanistan would have chewed up and spit out Forrest Gump.

A draft army is a slave army, forced to fight.

The mission of the military is to fight and win the nation’s wars. This crap about “making men out of boys” or “building citizenship” is utter bullshit. The draft-era military was all about sending men to die. That was one of the way the North won the civil war. We don’t fight that way in the 21st century. Those who are too spoiled, too fat, to criminal or too leftist don’t need to be in uniform. The reporter asking for a draft won’t send his kids to fight. He undermines his point by asking draftees to do the easy jobs that the DoD as long ago given to civilians.

“Civilians are like beans; you buy ‘em as needed for any job which merely requires skill and savvy.
But you can’t buy fighting spirit.”
–Starship Troopers

Before WWII, most jobs in the military were simple. Technology marched on between the wars. The airplane, tanks, radio, as the war ground on we got rockets, jets and the bomb. The Cold War saw computers go from filling a room to being able to fit in the palm of your hand. We don’t need ersatz “soldiers”. Even the smallest amount of carelessness can kill. Draftees will make this worse.

“I also think there are prices too high to pay to save the United States. Conscription is one of them. Conscription is slavery, and I don’t think that any people or nation has a right to save itself at the price of slavery for anyone, no matter what name it is called. We have had the draft for twenty years now; I think this is shameful. If a country can’t save itself through the volunteer service of its own free people, then I say : Let the damned thing go down the drain!“
– Robert A. Heinlien: 29th World Science Fiction Convention, Seattle, Washington (1961)

Well said.

Link: Brad takes down the jobs Rick’s “army” would do.

Why why should use technology: part 2

“Thanks for saving me with your technology. By the way, I hate technology!”
–The Nostalgia Critic, On Star Trek: Insurrection.

Drones will no doubt raise novel issues under the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable search and seizure. They will require rules. The same is true of any technology, of course. The Supreme Court held unanimously earlier this year that police can’t attach a GPS tracker on someone’s vehicle without a warrant. This isn’t reason to ban all use of GPS trackers by law enforcement. The fear of drones is, in part, the fear of the new — it is Luddism masquerading as civil libertarianism.
–”The Great Drone Panic“: By Rich Lowry, National Review.com

The left and the fringe always hate technology. Give it time and drones will be as common as the Iphone. And some new tech will be the focus of their ire.

It’s still stealing

“If you steal, you’re gonna lie, if you lie, you’re gonna steal.“
1SG at Fort Jackson, 2004

“WASHINGTON—The Supreme Court cited First Amendment free-speech rights in striking down a law that made it a federal crime to falsely claim to have been awarded military medals.

The 6-3 majority opinion upheld a Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision that had declared unconstitutional the Stolen Valor Act, a 2006 statute Congress passed “to protect the reputation and meaning” of military honors.”
“Court: You Can Tell Lies About Being a War Hero “, By EVAN PEREZ, WSJ.com

So the law was poorly written. It doesn’t matter. People will lie about being war heroes, phoney soldiers and facebook commandos seeking things they didn’t earn. Like jobs. A democrat claims to be a “Green Beret”, when called out he throws a tantrum. Another wanted music stardom, so he faked being a hero. One woman duped a college into a free ride before she was caught. Another was a comic book author and “anti-war” activist. None of them have seen combat.

They got what was coming to them, the morons were exposed. Good riddance.

It’s not a game. People assume that a soldier, marine, sailor or airman has skills. That someone who has been in “combat” is brave enough for a job as a police officer, firefighter or news correspondent. They lie to get a job that they have no right to have, they are stealing. The left loves phonies, so they were the loudest ones to scream about the Stolen Valor act. It would expose all those “veterans” that march in their protests.

The law will get re-written. In the meantime we have teh interwebs. Keep blogging and writing. Thieves are like cockroaches, they hate sunlight.

Reforming Defense: Lockheed makes a “jeep”

“Lockheed Martin would like you to know that just because it’s an aerospace titan that moonlights as a shipbuilder, that doesn’t mean it can’t also build a new fleet of ground vehicles for the Army and Marine Corps.”
High stakes in the JLTV competition: By Philip Ewing, DoD Buzz.com
–

There are companies building the replacement for the HMMWv, the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV). It’s a new jeep for the military.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, the Humvee was too light. It was a soft skinned taxi for soldiers and a whip for commanders. There were “up armored” versions, but they are rollover queens. I used to drive a command post variant. After upgrades, our M1113 was 500 lbs away from both axles snapping and was top heavy. The JLTV is designed from the ground up to be an armored anything: taxi, truck, command post, ambulance or gun truck.

Now Lockheed has some issues with building things for the military. There was the scandals over foreign military sales. Yet this same company built the SR-71 and F-117.

JLTV three variants during the Technology Development phase

Judging from the comments in the DOD Buzz article, some just don’t have faith that Lock-Mart won’t screw the truck up:

tee June 22nd, 2012 at 7:35 pm

“With LM’s current recorder as a benchmark if they get it, it will be way over budget and years behind schedule.“

And that’s the tamest one.

I for one welcome out of the box thinking. I do have doubts however. Boeing decided to get into the lucrative jetfoil business, the Future Combat Systems and the KC-767 lease. They ended well, in that jetfoils are forgotten, the FCS was canceled and the KC-767 lease sent an Air Force official to prison.

What’s needed is out of the box thinking, but not so out of the box people lose their minds. I hope Lockheed Martin delivers the goods. If they are making junk, they deserve to lose. It’s not the 80′s anymore, political connections, pork barrel politics or lobbying shouldn’t decide who builds what. Make stuff that works.

Why We Should Use Technology

In National Review, Clifford D. May writes:

Wars of the future will be very different from wars of the past. Everyone gets that. What many do not grasp: The present war also is very different from wars of the past.

Among the ways: Those defending the West try hard to abide by the laws of war. Those attacking the West say clearly that they will not be bound by any “infidel” rules. They are committed to what they call a “Koranic concept of war.”

It’s not just uniforms and ID tags/cards. It’s not shooting civilians. Not flying jets into buildings. Europe frets over kill lists but that’s because they want to appease the evil hordes at the door.

The French used to find terrorist camps and level them. They’d send their commandos in, they’d kill the terrorists and take as much as they could carry. This put an end to a lot of terrorist groups. The SAS hit the Irish Republican Army hard. Between bad publicity and bullets to the head, the IRA has committed to disarming it’s stockpile.

But special forces raids are risky. Bunkers full of equipment need to be hit somehow.

Cyber warfare was discussed, too. Indira Lakshmanan, a generally sensible Bloomberg reporter, argued that if Americans use cyber weapons, “let’s not think that the Iranians themselves won’t learn from what we’ve done to them and couldn’t release similar bugs on us with potentially devastating consequences. So that’s something we really need to think about.” Yes, and let’s start by considering whether it is remotely plausible that Iran’s rulers, the world’s leading sponsors of terrorism, would conclude that it’s not quite cricket to use such weapons — if only Americans would refrain from using them first.

Lakshmanan’s thinking was befuddled on another score as well: “If we’re sitting at the table with [Iranians] in Moscow next week, how are they going to believe that we’re actually trying to negotiate a nuclear deal with them if at the same time we’re admitting openly that we’re engaged in outright cyber warfare with them?”

Fighting fairly went out with kings and princes. Chivalry is dead. We have laws of warfare, but it’s assumed that all sides will agree to the rules. Terrorists, communists (yes there are still commies), drug lords and other “non-state” actors. China and North Korea don’t take prisoners. African and Middle Eastern regimes are famous for using missiles and artillery to settle disputes.

We don’t fight wars by lining up men, stacking numbers against numbers.

We have stealth jets and stand-off weapons to overcome the numbers of anti-aircraft missiles. We use tanks, APC’s and IFV’s that are part of a network. A Marine Corporal or Army Sergeant can call on the radio and bring the rain. He or she has access to firepower that Patton or MacArthur could only dream about. Sensors, firepower, communications, the “strategic corporal” is the tip of the spear. And a diplomat, and an aid worker.

Forrest Gump is roadkill on the modern battlefield.

So what if we use “cyberwarfare”? Do those lefites with a case of the vapors want US troops to go and dig out nuclear bunkers? Every Predator drone means less pilots and troops at risk. If a computer virus can disable a WMD lab, that means no shooting, no dead Americans paraded through downtown Durka-Durkastan.

JLENS is a radar and optical combo that looks down. It can see cruise missiles and aircraft trying to hide. It can also see enemy troops on the ground many miles away. That means no scout aircraft getting shot at. It means US and Allies have early warning.

The left loves the myth of the underdog. That somehow the Vietcong, Iraqi insurgents and the Taliban are some ragtag “army”. Bull.

Most “non-state” actors are scum. The Lybian and Egyptain revolution have devolved into Islamist takeovers, as the Arab Spring turns into a Fascist Winter. Syria is a hell of advanced weapons and a mad regime desperate to hold on to power.

We use out technology to decimate the enemy. There is no fair in warfare. We respect the enemy, but we’re gonna rain fire down on him. Non-combatants are protected. Those who fight are gonna get set on fire, in uniform or not. From standoff weapons, drones and cyber “weapons”, the bad guys are in for a world of hurt.

Terrorists are only victims in the twisted logic of the left. To us in uniform, they’re targets.

Mission Creep

Mission creep is the expansion of a project or mission beyond its original goals, often after initial successes.[1] Mission creep is usually considered undesirable due to the dangerous path of each success breeding more ambitious attempts, only stopping when a final, often catastrophic, failure occurs.
– Wikipeida

“The U.S. Army doesn’t want it, but the Department of Defense is saying: Yes, you do. The Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) would be scuttled if Army commanders had their way, saying the missile defense program is too costly to develop, with a price tag of $19 billion. However, Pentagon officials and others in the Obama administration want MEADS, which is being developed in partnership with Germany and Italy, because killing the program could upset relations with the two European allies.”
–Army vs. Lockheed Martin in Battle to Cancel Missile Defense System

“Future Combat Systems (FCS) was the United States Army’s principal modernization program from 2003 to early 2009.[1] Formally launched in 2003, FCS was envisioned to create new brigades equipped with new manned and unmanned vehicles linked by an unprecedented fast and flexible battlefield network. In April and May 2009, Pentagon and Army officials announced that the FCS vehicle-development effort would be cancelled. The rest of the FCS effort would be swept into a new, pan-Army program called the Army Brigade Combat Team Modernization Program.[2]“
– Wikipeida

“January 11, 2011: The U.S. Army has finally, after over a decade of development, and no orders, cancelled its SLAMRAAM antiaircraft missile system. The U.S. defense budget is being cut, and those items lower on the “must have” list are being eliminated. Some $3 billion has been spent on SLAMRAAM so far, and it would cost another $12 billion to put it into production.”
–SLAMRAAM Dies From Loneliness

---

“But the replacement program for the OH-58 was supposed to be the ARH-70, and it should have been generally a low risk program. Take the existing Bell 407 airframe, itself an evolution of the Bell 206 that gave us the Kiowa, and add sensors and weapons. Easy peasy. How that program fell to pieces is beyond me. I’m not an engineer or an aviator. I know there are always challenges, but the collapse of that program was a big surprise to me.”

Brad On why the Army is still flying Vietnam War-era choppers.

“found it surprising as well. From what I could determine the downfall of the program was the bane of so many programs in the military these days, refusing to freeze the specs. They allow a continuing larding of the program and change orders are expensive. Successful acquisition programs freeze the design and build more capability into the follow on models. The Army didn’t force a freeze, so costs ran away from them, and instead of getting a good first effort, they got nothing instead. Great, huh?”

Quartermaster nails it.

When defense contracts go beyond paper specs and RFP’s we’re talking about real money. And jobs. And promotions for those involved in the program. THAAD and the F-22 have parts made in almost all the 50 states. Military bases employ thousands all around the country. Of course Big Army and Congress also think about the men and women who’ll be fighting and fixing these systems. Of course.

The problem is that, like the Navy, Big Army wants cool and shiny. New computers? Sure why not. New radios and a new network? Okay. MEADS had three radars as opposed to the Patriot systems one. A maintenance headache that became a nightmare since the new radars have new parts. Add to the fact that our Warrant Officers and Soldiers under them would all have to be retrained. Adding to the costs of trying to field a new system.

The FCS tried too much at once. New network, new computers and sensors, new weapons AND new vehicles all under one roof. Almost all were canceled. After Iraq, the 50 ton FCS vehicles were dumped for the 70+ ton monsters. IED’s are a threat, but the infantry would ride in a vehicle with a weight approaching Hitler’s Maus. The only Ground the “Ground Combat Vehicle” may end up fighting on is a reinforced concrete runway.

SLAMRAAM died because the Army has to pay for the the FCS GCV and other shooty projects. Short range air defense? Who needs it with the Air Force and it’s F-22′s and F-35′s running the skies. Um..wait a minute…

We need reform, but most of the “reform” the pundits have in mind is to cancel everything. The left wants to stick it’s fingers in it’s ears and pretend that our ships and air craft don’t age. That our enemies are getting smarter and more deadly. The deficit hawks on the right only care about defense cuts when they threaten jobs in their districts. Otherwise they’ll cut and cut in the name of “savings.”

When contracts are fixed, cutting the number of widgets built skyrockets the price. In the 80′s the Dod let the contracts write in the costs of items. Nowadays we have “single source”, “no bid” and fixed price contracts coupled with design specs that waste more money than they save.

We can do better. We need to do better.