Who's on deck?
We're not going to get sanity at CENTCOM. The rules are no different today than they were when Wes Clark wrote any of his OpEd pieces on what should be done ... the clock does not read 12:01 EST, January 20th, 2009.
We should be considering what we can make less insane.
The trajectory of Space Command needs a mid-course correction, back to observation. Look down good. Shoot down bad.
The Navy does not need to be transformed rom a blue water diplomatic and military asset to a grey water re-colonial coast guard.
The future of heavy mobile does not need to hang on the (still imaginary)19 ton main battle tank and a no-allies-needed C-130 heavy lift theory, resulting in a pointless orgy of iron triangle expense, all under the cover of the so-called "Revolution in Military Affairs".
The two largest fissile-fusion inventories on earth and their four delivery systems (US and Soviet strategic rocket, and bomber) do not need to be left intact, funded, and without mission. Drawn down sharply would make us all safer.
The pay and benefits for enlistees is at the food-stamps-required levels, that needs fixing.
SOCOM needs to be put down, or confined to traditional snake eater country and the surrounding fences repaired.
And Jointness is crap, just as Jointlessness is crap.
Third deck of E-ring. The SCIF that houses the office of the SecDef, the senior staffers of the OSD, and all the happy returning campers Donald Rumsfeld brought back with him.
An Iran-Contra player is so underwhelming as a choice. Bill Perry, Bill Cohen, Wes Clark, Eric Shinseki, these guys are all still breathing, still thinking, and still serious. Its a two year tour, a turn-around, and even that is too important to leave to yet another family retainer, now at Texas A&M University.
We know we're going to get a lying air-head. We should be looking on how greatly we can tax stupidity.
Comments
I was just doing the Bill Perry dance yesterday... Don't think that he would pick Clark because that gives him a boost for 2008, no?
Posted by: Michelle and Dave | November 9, 2006 06:48 AM
Hey, I was looking for numbers on how you did against Barton.
I would have been surprised out of my socks if Bush had reached for either (a) a prior SecDef, or (b) a Service critic of the implementation of the Regime's policy of decapitation, desocialization, and grade school play democracy in Iraq.
I think Bush even asking Wes if he'd take the job would put Wes out of the running in '08. Would you (for large values of "you") work for Wes if he said "No", and left the jobs of pulling what can be pulled out of a Texas-sized Dien Bien Phu, and running the rest of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and the procurements, to some random Bush flunky?
At what point in the next 24 months could he resign to run, leaving the job to someone in a shrinking pool of still loyal Bush flunkies, and still keep your support?
Seriously, the next SecDef should be good enough to work for Granny Pelosi if Bush chokes on a pretzel and Chenny's pacemaker stops on hearing the news, but if we're going to get Agency trash, we should work to limit the scope of the damage the next SecDef won't bother to assess, let alone repair.
You can tell Wes (if he asks) that he could be educating Democratic Senators on a very large, target rich environment, that really needs mission and process correction, not just an exit Iraq movement order and a bandaid. That would be competitive, on par with our guy's post-employment work.
Posted by: ebw | November 9, 2006 09:21 AM