F-35

The first two F-35 Joint Strike Fighter plane have been delivered to Israel.  The program has been lambasted by President-elect Trump for being too costly; billions of dollars that could be spent on other "military and other purchases".  The new planes are the latest in technology and will "allow pilots to evade detection and fly at supersonic speeds while conducting air defense...".  The delivery to Israel was delayed when the planes could not take off from Italy due to "poor weather".

Defense Spending

The Navy now has a new destroyer-the USS Zumwalt-a stealth vessel that was built with the idea of making it undetectable by enemy radar or surveillance.  The cost of the ship is reported as $ 3.8 BILLION.  It will not join the fleet until  2018.  Two sister ships-the USS Michael Monsoon and the USS Lyndon B. Johnson-are in the works at the Bath Shipyard in Maine.  Those ships with cost $ 2.8 BILLION  and $ 2.4 BILLION respectively. And this to fight a land-based terrorist organization far from the sea.

Pentagon Spending

The US spent $ 150 million on "unnecessary housing(villas)" and security for an ultimately doomed Pentagon (effort) to revitalize Afghanistan's "economy" according to a "congressional  watchdog".  This reported on huffingtonpost.com 12/3/15.  Those in the housing could have stayed in the US Embassy in Kabul for a fraction of the cost.  A Pentagon "task force" on business operations spent $ 800 million between 2009 and 2014.  "Billions in US spending on Afghanistan "may have been misspent due to "poor American and Afghan management".  Why don't we spend that money to "revitalize" Detroit?.

Some Thoughts for Today

The 2016 fiscal year military budget has been approved by the US Senate by a vote of 91 to 3.  The total amount is $ 607 billion and makes provisions for a pay raise of 1.3 %, a 401(k) style retirement plan and a ban on the closure of the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay Cuba (which come election time the GOP will blast Obama for not closing as he promised when elected).  There is $ 51 billion "for US combat operations abroad" and "$ 715 million to help Iraqi forces fight Islamic State and $ 406 million to boost Syrian opposition forces" (something we were told was a complete failure and going to be shut down).  Another $ 50 billion for active duty and retiree health care.  The issue that I have a problem with is that less than 10 % of this budget is for military activities in the field of combat.  So where does the rest of the money going?  Into someones pocket, I would guess.  (Info from "How they Voted" in The Virginian Pilot on 9/15/15).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Racism in America.  An article in The Virginian Pilot on 11/22/15 reports on a World War II military unit of African American women from Virginia.  They were the 6888th Central Postal Directory Battalion and were the "first and only all-black women's Army unit sent overseas".  Their job was to organize the mail delivery system to the troops in the field.  The article was about the families of two of the women who served in that unit and had died recently.  It was reported that in Virginia, educational opportunities for blacks was limited due to the fact that the state didn't offer high school classes for African Americans before 1934.  It is also noted that "Jim Crow" was present in Europe for these women.  When several of the women from the 6888th were selected for a WAC all-star basketball team went to London in 1945 to compete they were told "official policy forbade mixed race teams" so they could not compete.  At the same time the Red Cross wanted to but the black players in a segregated hotel; they refused to patronize.

(Source:  "Delivering Morale" by James F. Lee of the VP)

SNAFU

"Plan to reduce military prompts resistance from Democrats, GOP".  "Members of both parties say cuts will hurt the country".  This from The Virginian Pilot this am and it doesn't say much for the difference between the two major parties on the issue of defense spending.  

Obama's plan to "dramatically overhaul the nations military" will be resisted by both parties.  Sec't of Defense Chuck Hagel wants to reduce the Army to the size it was in 1941; 440,000 to 450,000 active duty personnel, down from 520,000.  Congress has agreed to keep military budget under $ 500 billion (BO wants $ 495 bill) for next week (ops) year.  Tea Party wants more cuts in defense.  In Dec. Congress approved a 1 % cut in Veterans benefits; this month they voted to cancel that cut-the vote was 99 to 0. Dems Kaine, Levin, and Blumenthal are all opposed to military cuts.  (Note: Hagel "announced the Army would be downsized". Can he do that w/o Congressional support?)

Obama wants a "security pact" with Afghanistan by the end of the year or he will withdraw all US troops (he told us in 2008 he would end the middle east wars, now he will only if Karzai refuses to sign an agreement to keep troops there.  I remember in 1968 Nixon said he would end the Vietnam War and after I got out of the service in 1970 the war continued two more years.  Obama told me he would end our present wars and here we are many, many years later the the wars go on.  When will I learn not to trust anyone running for high office?)

Its clear now that Obama wants to keep 10,000 US troops in Afghanistan beyond 2014 while Karzai wants them out.  Karzai, our ally and the one we put in office, has been making anti American speeches and taking anti American actions recently; We put him in office costing us thousands of US lives and God-knows how much money.  Something is rotten here.

US War mentality

Isn't it interesting that every recent President of this country has his own little war.  Reagan had Libya and Nicaragua.  Bush I had Iraq and Kuwait.  Clinton the Balkans and what was once Yugoslavia.  Bush II had Iraq again.  Now Obama is heading toward Syria.

When I was in high school it was the issue of Cuba, two islands of the coast of China-Quamo and Matsu.  It seems that during every presidency since there has been some international crisis to hold our attention and of course give reason to the massive amount of money we have poured in the military-industrial complex.

Can our society survive at peace?  It does not seen so.

Defense v Domestic spending.

Thinking about my last post about the military equipment we will destroy rather than ship home from Afghanistan, I considered the difference what our dollars could be spent on.  Defense spending like the 2000 fortified Humvee vehicles-at a cost of $ 1 million each-that will be destroyed.  That spending was done no more than 10 years ago and already the equipment is "in excess" with very little use left.  Compare that to spending of a billion dollars on public school classrooms and the fact that those classrooms would still be in use and could be for decades.  The two elementary schools I attended in Cresskill were there prior to 1948 and are still being used today.  The middle school I attended in Tenafly is now a housing complex.  It seems to be a much better use of our money to spend on domestic needs rather than defense needs to fight a war we should not be fighting.  Of course, if we are talking about a case of legitimate national defense then the cost of military equipment has to be borne but so many of the foreign conflicts on my lifetime have been needless.

Defense Spending

NPR reported recently that the US army in Afghanistan will be destroying 2000 "excess" MRAP's out of a fleet of 11,000.  It is deemed too expensive to ship them back to the states so they will be scrapped and broken down (a task that will take 12 hours per vehicle) in Afghanistan.  The cost of each vehicle is $ 1 million (could that be right?).  This all amounts to some $ 7 billion worth of war equipment that will be destroyed after being used for a few years.  I wonder how many classrooms can be built for $  7 billion and how long they will last.  I know the elementary schools in Cresskill where I went to school are still in use some 60 years later.  The decision to destroy the vehicles is based on the fact that the only way to get them out of Afghanistan is to fly them out.  Pakistan is directly to the east and with ocean access, they are an ally, so why can't they be driven across Pakistan and loaded on ships to transport home?  An interesting comment in the NPR report was that the "need for the used equipment (was) too low".  Again, this seems to me to be the folly of spending our money on war material; they have a short life span and provide no lasting benefit once their initial use is over.  The MRAP is a modern day jeep.  It stands for "mine-resistant, ambush protected" vehicle.  I am not saying the soldiers who use them should  not have the protection; I am saying that if we were not in Afghanistan there would be on need for such vehicles.