The all-too-smooth transition from general to arms salesman

And they say Obama isn’t creating enough jobs…this fellow just got two!

• Link
• Report this comment

Posted this below, but I want to make sure everybody can see it and be “proud”…

Normal

December 29th, 2010
7:01 am
Today, in 1890, was not one of our finest days in history…

On this day in 1890, in the final chapter of America’s long Indian wars, the U.S. Cavalry kills 146 Sioux at Wounded Knee on the Pine Ridge reservation in South Dakota.

Throughout 1890, the U.S. government worried about the increasing influence at Pine Ridge of the Ghost Dance spiritual movement, which taught that Indians had been defeated and confined to reservations because they had angered the gods by abandoning their traditional customs. Many Sioux believed that if they practiced the Ghost Dance and rejected the ways of the white man, the gods would create the world anew and destroy all non-believers, including non-Indians. On December 15, 1890, reservation police tried to arrest Sitting Bull, the famous Sioux chief, who they mistakenly believed was a Ghost Dancer, and killed him in the process, increasing the tensions at Pine Ridge.

On December 29, the U.S. Army’s 7th cavalry surrounded a band of Ghost Dancers under the Sioux Chief Big Foot near Wounded Knee Creek and demanded they surrender their weapons. As that was happening, a fight broke out between an Indian and a U.S. soldier and a shot was fired, although it’s unclear from which side. A brutal massacre followed, in which it’s estimated almost 150 Indians were killed (some historians put this number at twice as high), nearly half of them women and children. The cavalry lost 25 men.

The conflict at Wounded Knee was originally referred to as a battle, but in reality it was a tragic and avoidable massacre. Surrounded by heavily armed troops, it’s unlikely that Big Foot’s band would have intentionally started a fight. Some historians speculate that the soldiers of the 7th Cavalry were deliberately taking revenge for the regiment’s defeat at Little Bighorn in 1876. Whatever the motives, the massacre ended the Ghost Dance movement and was the last major confrontation in America’s deadly war against the Plains Indians.

Conflict came to Wounded Knee again in February 1973 when it was the site of a 71-day occupation by the activist group AIM (American Indian Movement) and its supporters, who were protesting the U.S. government’s mistreatment of Native Americans. During the standoff, two Indians were killed, one federal marshal was seriously wounded and numerous people were arrested.

• Link
• Report this comment

Hello McFly:

They want to kill us! We need to have every resource at our disposal to defeat the enemy. And this is much different than what we faced in Vietnam which was another war where we waved the white flag of surrender.

Today, the enemy is in every crevice of the world ready to attack us through low tech means (9/11, shoe bomber etc.) and high tech means (nuke suitcases, messing with satellites, banks, the Internets etc.)

Why not have decorated fighting men who know weapons and the world’s terrain become our defense experts? Who better to buy the equipment that we need to fight the enemy? This seems like a no-brainer to me and hardly “damning” as you suggest.

Amen,
Bill

• Link
• Report this comment

Tangentially on topic….

Sen. Shelby’s Pork Lust Forces NASA To Spend $500 Million On Canceled Rocket Program

The money quote:

Nearly all of the money for the program will go to two defense contractors building the Ares rocket, Alliant Techsystems (ATK) and Lockheed Martin, with ATK receiving the bulk. Defense contractors have been a consistent source of financial support for Shelby’s campaigns, contributing to him at higher rates than to other politicians in his state. In particular, Shelby’s 2010 reelection campaign was the top recipient of funds from ATK’s PAC, receiving the maximum $10,000. And the company’s employees appear to have given more to Shelby than to any other politician in the 2010 election cycle.

Shelby certainly has a flair for the dramatic when it comes to extracting pork money for defense contractors in his state. In a “nearly unprecedented” move in February, Shelby placed a blanket hold on every single presidential nominees being considered by the Senate — more than 70 in total, including “top Intelligence officers at the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security as well as the number three civilian at the Pentagon” — in order to pressure to Obama administration to do the bidding of Northrop Grumman on a $40 billion contract for which they were being considered.

earmarks, lettermarks and phonemarks….oh my.

• Link
• Report this comment

Joel

Does that include the Yahont, I understand China has aquired them.

• Link
• Report this comment

Ignoring for a moment the trollish,revisionist history/FNC talking point regurgitation posted in Bill Orvis’ first two grafs @ 7.39, he does ask one reasonable question, to wit:

“Why not have decorated fighting men who know weapons and the world’s terrain become our defense experts? Who better to buy the equipment that we need to fight the enemy?”

Well, if you read the Globe piece, you’ll see the answer, here:

[...] a number of retired generals contacted by the Globe said they are uncomfortable with the laxity of the system and refuse to use their Pentagon contacts to win private clients.

“I didn’t like people doing it to me when I was a four-star, a three-star, even a two-star — using a previous relationship as an entree to selling me something,’’ he said. “The perception from the outside of a previous superior now dealing with a previous subordinate can cause all kinds of questions.’’

That’s why.

Reading. It’s fun-da-mental. Try it, won’t you?

• Link
• Report this comment

Granny Godzilla@7:49
“Does that include the Yahont, I understand China has aquired them.”
Did we develop that? I suspect there’s probably some of our technology on it. Seeing how we tend to give away the shop at every opportunity. Ain’t free trade great.

• Link
• Report this comment

Joel

I am not your personal homework hotline.

• Link
• Report this comment

“M-I-L”? oy. You know what I meant…

• Link
• Report this comment

Granny Godzilla@8:02
“I am not your personal homework hotline.”
Then why bring it into the conversation. Don’t try to make a useless comment and think you’ve gained something. Relating foreign armament to American weapons development is apples to oranges.

• Link
• Report this comment

Keep up the good fight!: LBB — wow that was great that Obama, elected in 2008, helped a general get 2 jobs in 2005.
————–

Heh heh, missed that, thanks for pointing out my error.

Well, I tried to give the Idiot Messiah a little credit. Never mind!

• Link
• Report this comment

Let’s try and be a little more balanced here. First, Jay’s article is dead on. Every part of government where contracts are involved, usually equates to former powerful government officials ‘consulting’, basically giving someone out there an advantage. Or former congressmen become lobbist. It is a real problem. And as the writer states, the stakes are even higher here, since lives are at risk and the security of our country is at risk.

Referencing ‘wounded knee’ has nothing to do with today. No doubt that it was tragic; but has nothing to do with today. Making statements where a person is surprised that Defense Contractors are not in the coffin business is vicious.

Lobbyist, hiring from straight from government to private sector industry calling on government should have at least a 3 year period where this cannot be done. The problem you have is getting enough support on both sides of the aisle to support something like this.

This is not just a military problem. It is a government problem.

• Link
• Report this comment

Atlanta1, it would be less of the problem if the government did not involve itself in spending so much of the people’s money.

• Link
• Report this comment

Well, this is one case where a tax cut is truly what the doctor should order. That way, they’ll get increased tax revenues to help fund their blunders.

• Link
• Report this comment

Experience counts, jay. So tell us….does Obama know about the revolving door?

It’s amusing to see left-wingers outraged when Wesley Clark is both a lobbyist AND investment banker. He’s one of their darlings.

Ultimately as Clark himself put it, however, he decided he was a Democrat because “I was pro-affirmative action, I was pro-choice, I was pro-education… I’m pro-health care… I realized I was either going to be the loneliest Republican in America or I was going to be a happy Democrat.” Clark said he liked the Democratic party, which he saw as standing for “internationalism”, “ordinary men and women”, and “fair play.”

Why? Because he was opposed to the war in Iraq. Other than that, left-wingers are behind the multifaceted general.

• Link
• Report this comment

Joel,
You’re a trip. Your “answer to Granny G. at 0800, you say “ain’t free trade great” sarcastically, so I must ask, would you rather have a socialistic system. I bet that would keep secrets, you betcha.

And to me you come back with a toy not mentioned in your earlier tirade…good move, but busted.

and, for the record, I too think the Apache is a good, but limited terrorist deterrent. Like the Hind the Soviets used in Afghanistan….

• Link
• Report this comment

Joel

Wow you really shot me down there didn’t ya!

Why bring it up? Because you seemed at the time to maybe possibly know what you were talking about so (I admit I was giving you the benefit of the doubt) I asked a question. You couldn’t/didn’t answer it and asked me to do your homework.

All you had to say way that you didn’t know.

dougmo2

bitchin’ cool stealth attack there dude….

Barry

“mau-mauing”? wow, that’s really disgusting.

Bob

So you favor defense budget cuts?

• Link
• Report this comment

Good morning all.

Ike was the last competent and decent GOP president.

Now all we get is more blustering and chest-pounding from those never-served, never-will heroes in the Party of Parasites and Permanent Republican War.

They use idiotic slogans like War on Terror and the ever popular “national security”.

Thus they can justify their quasi-fascistic actions, BIG BIG BIG goivernment and being slaves to their corporate handlers.

The whiners complain ENDLESSLY about paying too much in taxes to Uncle Sam, but educate them to the fact that the DoD budget is a HUGE part of those taxes and that we spend as much as the rest of the planet *combined* on our war machine, and all you get are vacuous stares.

Tell them how the DoD budget is over-flowing with fraud, waste, abuse, turf wars and counter-productive pork that makes no one safer and all you will get in response are their idiotic, faketriotic slogans, such as those spewed by the once King’s puppet master and Chief Coward, Dick Cheney.

Anybody with even a high school ability (sorry, neo-cons) could easily and quickly list pages and pages of many of those DoD contractors and their crimes, including payoffs, extortion, bribes, known faulty equipment, deadly malfeasance, etc. who are constantly ripping off you and me. Year after year after year. (Wink, wink, nudge, nudge)

And because Uncle Sam is SO emasculated by these criminals, he KEEPS ON DOING BUSINESS WITH THEM ANYWAY.

Given the track record of George of the Bungle, the corporate wh0res and the neo-cons, these incompetent and cowardly “crusading” chickenhawks must never again be allowed to make any more decisions regarding the United States military…

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay

The Globe understated General Martin’s last position with “Martin was understandably in demand, having been the general in charge of all Air Force weapons programs, including the B-2, for the previous four years.”

General Martin was Commander, Air Force Material Command, the largest command in the Air Force.

http://www.af.mil/information/bios/bio.asp?bioID=6314

AFMC does the research, testing and development of weapons systems. It buys the systems. It maintains the systems once they’ve been sent to the users. General Martin was in charge of all that.

The article noted “With few exceptions, all the Pentagon requires now is for retired officers to wait one year before directly advocating for a contract before the specific military branch they served in.”

and “The fundamental question,” (retired General Robert “Doc’’ Foglesong, who retired as the second-ranking Air Force officer in 2006} “is whether this is shaping the acquisition system and influencing what the Pentagon buys. I think the answer is yes.’’

It’s all about money and power. General Martin receives $160,000 a year in retired pay, plus benefits. Retired generals can earn several times that working for defense contractors.

Congress needs to remind these guys what “service before self” is all about by strengthening disclosure rules, prohibiting any form of employment for a certain number of years with companies doing business with DoD and attach draconian penalties for violations.

• Link
• Report this comment

@@

“It’s amusing to see left-wingers outraged when Wesley Clark is both a lobbyist AND investment banker.”

I believe the overriding theme here is retired general officers who trade upon their rank to influence the procurement process within the Pentagon.

Are you aware of any lobbying General Clark does for defense contractors, or are his lobbying/board/employment activities with civilian-sector companies?

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul:

He lobbies for ethanol.

One of the most prominent General’s in defense spending is General Electric.

• Link
• Report this comment

Yesterday’s New York Times carried an interesting article about North Korea that in some ways reminds one of the United States. The country is suffering severe economic depression but the government is promising that prosperity is just around the corner. Meanwhile, everyone must sacrifice for the sake of the military, which protects the country from the ever-present threat of foreign attack (by the U.S. military).

Like so many Americans, North Koreans believe that it is government’s job to take care of them, even while recognizing that sometimes people must sacrifice for the sake of the military.

How is that different from the mindset of the average liberal and conservative in America?

The following statement by a North Korean university student in response to 2,000 new desktop computers installed in the university would easily express the sentiments of American liberals: “This is a very good present from Chairman Kim Jong-il.” And don’t liberals always justify cuts in military spending by showing how the government could use the money to better take care of the American people, with schools, food, housing, and the like?

On the other hand, don’t conservatives constantly remind us that we must continue making sacrifices for the sake of the military, the military-industrial complex, and the CIA, so that they can keep us safe from the terrorists, the communists, the Muslims, the illegal aliens, and the drug dealers? The following statement by a North Korean maid would easily serve as a model for American conservatives: “Even if we don’t eat, we give the military everything we can.”

Sound familiar?

We should join hands in Brotherhood with North Korea.

• Link
• Report this comment

Normal@8:30
You did notice the “etc” at the end right? If you don’t think an Apache overhead isn’t a deterrent, you might want to suit up and join up.
If you support free trade, fine. Don’t care. We’ve sold our technology overseas for years. What hasn’t been sold has been stolen. Barking about the evil of the military industrial complex is merely a smoke screen. Complaining about US weapons systems by pointing out a Chinese anti-carrier missile is pointless. What’s the option? Scrap the carriers? If you don’t want development on weapons, just say so. We’ve been the worlds police force for decades. that was all well and good for you liberals. This can’t continue, people. You have to make a choice. If you a world class military to intervene in all of this third world countries, it’s gonna cost. If not, then it’s time for the withdrawal to begin.

• Link
• Report this comment

granny godzilla@8:32
“Wow you really shot me down there didn’t ya!”
Yes, I did. The comment was pointless. If you don’t know anything the subject, and you obviously don’t, don’t bring it up.

• Link
• Report this comment

Joel

When your kids ask you a question to you self righteously tell them to STFU?

That’s not very nice.

Got class?

• Link
• Report this comment

Normal@7:54- Modern weapons CAN defeat terrorists- They’re call NUKES!!

• Link
• Report this comment

Far from confident that we have heeded President Eisenhower’s warning…I am confident what he feared has come to pass.

Just for fun think about Eisenhower, a staunch Republican, for a moment. I don’t think he would recognize today’s Party of No much less have a snowballs chance of actually getting elected.

• Link
• Report this comment

Since you’re so into Eisenhower, do you think he’d be proposing trillion-dollar budget deficits?

• Link
• Report this comment

Good morning all. The thesis today reflects the twin core-deficiencies of leftist thought, that (1) experience has no value in making important decisions, and (2) competence should be disposed of at retirement.

Whereas most bureaucrats serve no real purpose, our noble military certainly does, “killing bad guys.” I am pleased to see that our culture has evolved to allow us to continue to use the skills of the woefully underpaid military servants At least until the leftists work their usual magic, the same one that fatally infects every well-functioning system it touches.

• Link
• Report this comment

Barry

Nope.

He believed in paying taxes.

From politifact:

“during the eight years of the Eisenhower presidency, the top rate averaged roughly 90 percent, typically hitting individuals making $200,000 a year or couples making $400,000 a year.”

If y’all want all the expensive toys – fine.

Just open your wallet!

• Link
• Report this comment

granny godzilla@8:59
“tell them to STFU?”
Kindly point out where I told you that. I merely pointed out your comment was meaningless. Resorting to making up your own comments an attributing them to me is also pointless.

• Link
• Report this comment

Your Idiot Messiah likes expensive toys–health care systems for example. And he just lowered taxes on the rich.

• Link
• Report this comment

Ragnar…puesdo-intellectual dishonest hogwash.

The question is NOT disposing of experience or competence. The question is conflict of interest and its interrelationship with costs and program viability.

• Link
• Report this comment

Thanks for pointing out that your revered Ike wouldn’t be so reckless as to propose trillion dollar deficits, as the Idiot Messiah has done.

I wonder what Ike would say about the Government-Labor Union complex?

• Link
• Report this comment

Today is December 29.

WEEPER OF THE HOUSE, WHERE ARE THE JOBS CREATED FROM THE BUSH TAX CUTS FOR THE WEALTHY?

• Link
• Report this comment

jt @ 8:51

Just to simplify somewhat. We will either be taxed to support military pursuits, or human pursuits.
Pursuits of war or of peace. (Very simplified because both will be necessary; it is the degree to which each is given merit that is really the concern.)

Or, a third choice, as Chuck said yesterday, is that we could simply pay for our own individual interests ourselves (which would eliminate the need for being taxed altogether, of course.)

The benefit of social programs is that others are lifted – possibly into the middle classes – and the nation itself prospers when the lower classes are lifted. Of greater value is that we learn that by working together with other citizens, in how we use our collective money, we are a better nation spiritually, which manifests in peace.

The alternative is a nation whose values are essentially that every man or woman must look after only himself or herself, which – spiritually – can foster greed, the same greed to which today’s article refers when generals sell their souls for monetary gain in becoming “consultants” with the defense industry.

• Link
• Report this comment

AmVet: “Anybody with even a high school ability (sorry, neo-cons) could easily and quickly list pages …”

Good post, but remember this is Georgia! I think you may have overestimated their reading and comprehensive skills, let alone their memories!

• Link
• Report this comment

“Your Idiot Messiah likes …” Then I quit reading. Nothing intellegent here either…Oh well.

• Link
• Report this comment

For all you anti-military libs out there, take note. Those F-16s out there flying up and down the East coast keeping you safe are a bargain at 18 million per aircraft. Just let the first dirty bomb go off in some Indianapolis shopping center and listen to all of the libs rant about our lack of bomb detecting technology, which, BTW, costs money. Libs want protection from the bad guys but don’t want to pay for it.

• Link
• Report this comment

I think Wounded Knee has relevance today in a number of ways. Most importantly, the Bigfoot band was disarmed before being shot down. And, a number of Congressional Medals of Honor were awarded for action that day. Makes me sick.

In today’s U.S. military, to make O-5, O-6, and O-7, not to mention higher rank, war fighting capability means nothing. Many if not most of today’s generals and admirals have very little time in command. What matters is the candidate’s ability to further the Military Industrial Congressional Complex. Oh, and don’t forget the fulfillment of quotas for minority status and gender, and brownnosing talent.

• Link
• Report this comment

Adam

“This is another illustration of how we spend money on the military, believing we fund different projects, but once the Pentagon gets the money they use it for whatever they feel like using it for. (emphasis added) Congress says make 6 B-2s and scrap some old planes, and don’t you dare fund that top secret project we hate… and they make 4 B-2s, keep the old planes, and they overfund the top secret project. It’s just how it works in there.”

That is fundamentally incorrect. The system you describe would be a violation of public law.

Appropriation law states funds are available to be spent only for those projects specifically appropriated by Congress. “New starts” such as the ‘black’ program you describe require funding action. By law.

• Link
• Report this comment

The Obama administration is allergic to “real-world application” of knowledge.

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul:

True, true. But the salient point is, General Clark is not lobbying for a major Defense contractor to sell ethanol.

Well ’scuse me for derailing from the topic at hand. I’ll wait until jay puts up a thread on recipes, at which time, I will opt out.

schnirt

• Link
• Report this comment

normal@9:11
“4. Todays enemy’s have changed and the MIC has to change with it…super weapons aren’t it.”

This is the only part I’ll disagree with. Air support being critical in all aspects. This super weapon allows for (how do you squids put it) “4 1/2 acres of sovereign American real estate” to be put where we need it. Handy in times of small wars and at flash points. The Yahont makes you Navy types job a lot harder. The rest I generally agree with. We’re going to have to spend MORE money to counteract this little issue. Or we can scrap and withdraw, pick one.

• Link
• Report this comment

Ragnar…again hogwash. The oversimplistic mentality of claiming that “Libs want X” is trite and tired. Not one single “left” poster on this blog has suggested that any experience or intelligence be thrown away.

• Link
• Report this comment

Joel

yes the yahont is a carrier killer…a stealth carrier killer…
intended to fly at very low altitude to defeat radar detection, and strike its target at supersonic speed and the big plus they can tip them off with depleted uranium…..(see how much fun that has been in the middle east)

oh how i miss those depleted uranium tipped cannolis we used to have at the O of O meetings…..

• Link
• Report this comment

We should just let the corporations fight the wars since they do everything so much better than government. Let the people that want the protection that these corporations have to offer pay for it, in true capitalist form. Bring back the Pinkertons.

• Link
• Report this comment

granny godzilla@9:22
“when your kids come to you and ask you a question about something you have led them to believe you know about, do you tell them their question is meaningless?”
Again, did I lead you to believe anything? NO. You made a statement. I pointed out that it was a useless comment. Explain to me how stealth applies in relation to a carrier killing weapon.
You stated (rather rudely I might add) “I am not your personal homework hotline.”
Well I’m not yours either, honey.

• Link
• Report this comment

Normal@9:30
Amen, brother.

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul:

I’ve never been a fan of General Clark, but he wasn’t my target…just a means to an end.

My shot (as you call it) was aimed at left-wingers. They’ll support lobbyists, with whom they share a common agenda. Any other time, lobbyists are bad…Bad…BAD!!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

Joel

“We are ahead of everyone on stealth”

You were either leading us to believe you knew what you were talking about or you just telling a lie.

Which is it?

Admit you overreacted.

• Link
• Report this comment

Joel

“Explain to me how stealth applies in relation to a carrier killing weapon.”

see 9:27

i did my own homework

• Link
• Report this comment

Mr. Bookman, you forgot to include how Republicans are to blame for this. Please fix the article and re-post it. Thanks!

• Link
• Report this comment

Taxpayer; But how would our stealth planes find the stealth carriers to be able to land on them? (Tee Hee!)

Lil’ Barry: Who put a burr in your saddle this morning?

• Link
• Report this comment

[...] The all-too-smooth transition from general to arms salesman | Jay Bookman. This entry was posted in Corruption, Military, Opinion and tagged Air Force, ajc, army, B-2, B-2 stealth bomber, Boston Globe, Eisenhower, federal government, General, huge industrial and military machinery, Jay Bookman, Korea, Military, National Defense University, National Defense University’s campus, Northrop Grumman, opinion, Pentagon, Potomac River, President, stealth aircraft technology, United States, USD, weapons systems. Bookmark the permalink. ← Caracas Country Club Is Counting Down Its Days – NYTimes.com [...]

• Link
• Report this comment

Putting a stealth carrier in the ocean would be like the time I put my cammo jacket in the closet and was never able to find it anymore….

Well, I think it opens up all sorts of interesting technological challenges. For one thing, how do you assemble all those invisible parts, much less make them to begin with. And just imagine the looks from people that see you carrying one of these parts around.

• Link
• Report this comment

Dear jay @ 9:42, thanks. Why do leftists hate salesmen?

• Link
• Report this comment

Dear Jay, apologies for my lack of manners. Hope you had a nice Christmas, and good to see you back from a well-earned vacation.

• Link
• Report this comment

ranks right up there with Al Gore’s 100 million $ transistion to chief of the global warming hoax-

fascism at its finest

• Link
• Report this comment

” they are being hired as salesmen, pitchmen and lobbyists”
So Jay, do you want them to put a screwdriver in their hands and start tightening bolts?

The majority of these men & women have served their country courageously and honorably for over Twenty years and many have sacrificed everything, they are all very educated also, what have you and your liberal friends sacrificed Jay???????????????

• Link
• Report this comment

Taxpayer; But how would our stealth planes find the stealth carriers to be able to land on them?

That could open up the need for stealth radar. I am starting to gain an appreciation for hiring all those generals and such because they have the experience and expertise to think through all these issues and develop a good strategy where upon an appropriately sized budget can be established and I’m seeing a big, really big budget. We’re gonna need more of everything. This calls for some serious tax cuts in order to reach the required level of funding.

• Link
• Report this comment

This is not a left – right or Democrat – Republican issue. This is an American issue which everyone should give careful consideration.

The U.S. military budget offers so much opportunity for profit that the procurement and contract process wouldn’t be acceptable to any other area of the federal or any state or local government and not by two civilian parties.

The weapons suppliers have enormous amounts of money at stake. Members of Congress have jobs and money to bring home to their constituents.

Short of a constitutional amendment that more precisely describes the role of the military and mandates open, fair and competitive contracting along with a prohibition on military to civilian lobbying, I don’t see this ending.

We spend more on our military than the rest of the world combined. At some point we need to narrowly focus our military policy objectives, force our allies to “man up” and bear their proportional burden both in terms of manpower and money and substantially shrink our military footprint around the world and the size/scope of our military.

As long as we play policeman to the world we will continue to bear the burden of defense while our allies enjoy higher overall standards of living, greater longevity, etc.

It is only when we redefine the role of the military will the money faucet be shut off and the opportunity for blatant corruption be terminated.

• Link
• Report this comment

“many have sacrificed everything”

home, health, happiness…all sacrificed for their country? Yeah, right.

• Link
• Report this comment

Ragnar Danneskjöld

December 29th, 2010
9:41 am
“Dear Paul @ 9:25, so may double negatives. Let’s turn it into something all can understand: military contractors perform better if they know what they are doing (a concept generally-foreign to leftists.) To elevate the quality of their offerings, military contractors like to hire the people who have actually had to apply such weaponry, to ensure the quality of the real-world performance. Such skilled practitioners are also ideal creatures to advocate for such products.

Why do leftists hate salesmen?”

Ragnar, I have been in sales all my life. Managed sales forces up to 1000 people so to say I hate sales would be laughable. That said in all my experience I have never seen a situation where the salesperson responsible for an account also served as a consultant on the project for said account…seems like a clear conflict to me how about you?

• Link
• Report this comment

“They have sacrificed a lot for their country”

So now they have sacrificed “a lot” and not “everything” – keep at it, you’ll have it down to no sacrifice at all in a few minutes.

• Link
• Report this comment

Ragnar 9:41

I’ll submit the guys with the real ‘in the trenches’ experience are not the general officers. Let the major contractors hire the midlevel NCOs or officers for that. The whole point of a general officer is prestige and influence (there’s an old saying that there’s no such thing as a “retired” general).

Another point in the Boston Globe article is, this is a relatively recent phenomena. Not too long ago generals concluded their public service, took their pensions and moved to the sunbelt. Not the objective is to score big bucks. Which leads to the question: if retired generals as lobbyists provide such a vital service, critical to our defense, and if this is a recent development….

how on earth did we build up the best military in the world before we had retired generals as lobbyists?

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone, I ask again, what have you sacrificed????????????????????

• Link
• Report this comment

“I ask again, what have you sacrificed”

Everything

• Link
• Report this comment

There has in fact been tremendous waste in defense contracting; however, pointing fingers at former senior command officers who accept defense industry consulting positions is disingenuous. Civilian government defense department officials have certainly played a major role. One of the biggest travesties was the rushed procurement of M-16 rifles during the Vietnam War. This involved Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara in Lyndon Johnson’s administration. In the midst of the Hill Wars during the spring of 1967, Marines turned in M-14’s for the M-16. They were issued M-16X’s. The “X” stood for experimental. During the balance of the Hill wars M-16’s repeatedly jammed Marine Corps infantryman were found dead with cleaning rods stuck in their rifles trying to clear 5.56 rounds from rifle chambers. None the less even after the defects were documented and reported Marines were still sent into the Que Son Valley campaigns of operations Union One and Union Two armed with defective M-16 rifles. Those operations May 67-November 67 resulted in the destruction of the 2nd. NVA Division but at the cost of 9000 Marines. Field commanders estimated that half of those casualties were a result of malfunctioning M-16 rifles.

• Link
• Report this comment

“anything that flies low is a stealth aircraft.”
Should have been stealth weapon.

• Link
• Report this comment

G. AMERICAN!!!

December 29th, 2010
9:51 am

OH GAWD, I thought my father was dead….

• Link
• Report this comment

Joel

Yep, I know about B52’s – Pop was a pilot

I didn’t define stealth you big goose!

Admit you overreacted.

Love shack ba-a-bee…..

• Link
• Report this comment

The typical leftist….

And I stop reading.

Do you guys have a macro for that phrase? You type it so much. Just think of the hours that you could save.

• Link
• Report this comment

What are a red-neck’s last words? “Hay, watch ‘is shyte!”

A man has been hospitalized after police in South Carolina say he was hit by an SUV while playing a real-life version of the video game “Frogger.”

REALLY! You just can’t make this shyte up!

• Link
• Report this comment

Dear JDW @ 9:56, “That said in all my experience I have never seen a situation where the salesperson responsible for an account also served as a consultant on the project for said account…seems like a clear conflict to me how about you?” No, no conflict. A conflict arises when the seller compensates the purchaser. Not the case in military procurement, at least not in the sense of the essay today. Today’s essay argues that people with real military expertise ought not be allowed, by law, to use that expertise for sales. No conflict, merely normal leftist envy.

Dear Paul @ 10:00, we would agree that you think your boss does not know what you do, nor whether you do it well, nor whether you run into any problems while doing it.

• Link
• Report this comment

I just hope that the Republicans came cut taxes far enough to fund all these things that are so desperately needed in order to protect us.

• Link
• Report this comment

OK, don’t want to get picky, but “stealth” is both a tactic AND technology. an aircraft flying below radar is a stealth maneuver or tactic; a space-age composit material used to ‘absorb’ radar, or designing an aircraft a certain way (angles) in order to “deflect” radar is stealth technology.

• Link
• Report this comment

Ragnar 10:07

Did you read the Boston Globe article? These generals go to the planning meetings hosted by DoD to get their input on future weapons systems. The DoD is relying on their experience. However…. many of these same generals are being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars by defense contractors to lobby for specific products. And the generals DO NOT notify DoD of their other employment.

Do you really think the staffers at DoD would view the generals’ advice any differently if they knew the general was being compensated by a contractor?

Your point directed to me at 10:07 – I generally interpret such silly remarks as “well, I don’t have a good answer, so I’ll go personal.”

• Link
• Report this comment

Amvet

Once again, great blog. “Faketriotic”, “never-served heros”
You just nailed several on this blog ‘right between the eyes’.
How ’bout that @@. You feel anything…

• Link
• Report this comment

norm
St Elsewhere per Wounded Knee

• Link
• Report this comment

Well, in 2010 into 2011, it’s good to be a general, admiral about to retire. Great opportunities and a possible growth industry. As for the rest of us? Good luck….

• Link
• Report this comment

Mary Elizabeth @ 9:15 am: Your posts are always intelligent and often uplifting, like this one. I enjoy them and wish more people like you would speak up.

kayaker: I don’t mind paying for some military, but what’s wrong with getting the spending back down to Reagan era levels?

Paul @ 9:18: Anonymous inside sources say otherwise. But it is cute that you believe the military would actually take seriously an order to only build 2 1/2 of a particular ship this year. I’m not saying they don’t sort of follow along with where the money is supposed to go for appearance sake, but they damn well don’t follow it to the letter of the law like you’re describing, and they sure do continue to fund black projects even after congress wants them shut down.

LBB: I do. It makes them more self-reliant, rather than learning to be a spoon-fed, dependent loser libbtard.

If you consistently tell a child their question is meaningless they will STOP ASKING QUESTIONS ENTIRELY. And that will turn them into a sheep conservative follower. I thought you wanted leaders and entrepreneurs?

Swede Atlanta, well said

• Link
• Report this comment

Dear Paul @ 10:14, you wrote, “I’ll submit the guys with the real ‘in the trenches’ experience are not the general officers. Let the major contractors hire the midlevel NCOs or officers for that. The whole point of a general officer is prestige and influence (there’s an old saying that there’s no such thing as a “retired” general).” I then wrote, “we would agree that you think your boss does not know what you do, nor whether you do it well, nor whether you run into any problems while doing it.” Merely a personal application of your silly argument, to ensure you really understood what you argued.

As to your other argument, whether the DOD should solicit input from experienced practitioners, we would agree that leftists avoid seeking expertise when making critical decisions. We realize that leftists think they can drag in expertise without compensation, and that leftists think industry experts are not really experts at all but are mere shills. That is a stronger indictment of the quality of bureaucrats at DOD than it is of the character of the salesmen.

• Link
• Report this comment

It’s really a far out stretch to suggest that retired former senior military commanders would knowingly advocate weapon systems they new were suspect or seriously flawed.

• Link
• Report this comment

This thread is going much to fast for me this morning. I’m taking a break.

• Link
• Report this comment

“I’ll consider it your apology for overreacting.”

It wasn’t. Whatever makes you feel better.

• Link
• Report this comment

Joel

It sure seems like it…then again it might just be capitulation.

Whatever makes you feel better.

• Link
• Report this comment

granny godzilla@10:25
“It sure seems like it…then again it might just be capitulation.”
You lost. Get over it.

• Link
• Report this comment

You lost. Get over it.

Now that’s cute. That one deserves at least an honorable mention for “Quip of the Day” award.

• Link
• Report this comment

Joel

The Yahont is a stealth weapon not delivered by a B-52….

That makes me correct and the winner.

TA DA!

• Link
• Report this comment

again, folks. the business model is the same for the war on terrorism (or Cold War for us old timers) and the war on poverty or the war on global warming. you identify the “threat” and nuture (baseless) “fears” – then you “sell” the solution. well, you never really want to “resolve” the issue, because as I noted with AfPak and Iraq, ‘waging’ war is far more profitable than ‘winning’ a war. any of you folks remember H. Ross Perot? remember how in ‘92 he took America by storm because he was a ’successful businessman’ and he knew a thing or two about the bottom line. well, I am sure you are all aware the Perot’s company EDS made it bones on medicare/medicaid and social security data processing contracts. in essence, his company (along with IBM, his original employer) was an ‘arms merchant’ for the war on poverty. yep, the “Great Society” was pretty great to EDS, IBM and Perot, and I am sure we all agree, poverty has gone the way of polion. and for all you flag waving, chest thumping, “kill the bad guys” folks, ever hear of something called ROI (return on investment)? I don’t know how much of the $14 trillion national debt lies with the MIC, including the classified CIA/DIA and NSA budgets, but my guess is, it is at least 1/2. and yet, since 1980, Hammas blew up the USMC barracks in Lebanon, killing over 300 Marines, al Qeada attacked the WTC in 1993, Tim McVeigh blew up the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City, al Qeada attacked the USS Cole, and embassies in Africa, and of course 9/11. since 9/11 we have poured at least $3 trillion into two wars, with the expressed purpose of “finding/killing Ossama bin Laden” and wiping out al Qeada, and yet, we are no more “secure” (and some would argue, more “insecure” than we were when the Cold War ended in 1989). I am all for hunting and killing “bad guys” but let’s be honest; there’s no money in it. those who truly and objectively study history need to study Ike’s farewell address and study Ike’s relationship with JFK, and study JFK’s prescient realization that late 20th and early 21st century wars would be “low intensity” conflicts and “wars of national (or religious) liberation”. why do you think JFK authorized and championed the Army Special Forces (green berets) and Navy SEALs?

• Link
• Report this comment

Ragnar 10:22

I’d say your assertion that General Martin (USAF-ret), as head of Air Force Systems Command, responsible for EVERY research, test, development, acquisition and major-level maintenance of EVERY weapons system in the Air Force has as much indepth knowledge of a particular weapons system as the NCO who maintained it or the midlevel officer who wrote the flight manual is what is silly.

Retired general officers are hired primarily for their rank, which causes a reflexive deference by active military at the Pentagon (don’t believe me? Ask what happens when, in a meeting, a Lt Col calls the retired general “Steve”) and access to those at the highest levels with whom the retired general has formed personal associations. In other words, influence.

“As to your other argument, whether the DOD should solicit input from experienced practitioners, we would agree that leftists avoid seeking expertise when making critical decisions.”

No, we wouldn’t.

• Link
• Report this comment

See what I mean people. I never said that the Yahont was delivered by the B52. If you’re going to be intentionally ignorant….I’m not going to waste my time.

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul @ 9:14 “@@ True, true. But the salient point is, General Clark is not lobbying for a major Defense contractor to sell ethanol.”

Do you really think it matters to people like @@ and the rest that blindly follow the talking points on both sides of the isle. As long as they can get in a shot …..

Paul, you seem to have a lot of patience in trying to reach people …. may I ask your occupation?

• Link
• Report this comment

Joel

Still mussing my hair…please stop.

• Link
• Report this comment

December 29th, 2010
10:07 am
“Dear JDW @ 9:56, “That said in all my experience I have never seen a situation where the salesperson responsible for an account also served as a consultant on the project for said account…seems like a clear conflict to me how about you?” No, no conflict. A conflict arises when the seller compensates the purchaser. Not the case in military procurement, at least not in the sense of the essay today. Today’s essay argues that people with real military expertise ought not be allowed, by law, to use that expertise for sales. No conflict, merely normal leftist envy.”

So let me get this straight. I employ a salesperson. I pay them salary, plus commission on what they sell and for good measure toss in a spiff based on company performance.

This salesperson is responsible for selling Stealth planes to the Military.

On the side my salesperson works a second job for the Military defining the requirements and need for Stealth bombers.

You don’t think that salesperson just might see the opportunity to further the cause of selling those planes to the Military in that second job?

Are you that obtuse…or just that committed to Partisan nonsense? I see no issue with this guy having one job or the other…doing both is a clear conflict of interest that anyone with eyes can see.

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone/GA@10:32
“So in your lexicon “done” DOESN’T mean DONE. Do you have a whole dictionary of words that only mean what YOU say they mean?”
Do I have to explain everything now? I should have said: “I’m done trying to explain this to you”. That should be obvious. If someone is going to intentionally ignorant, I’m wasting my time. Twisting my words is just is just another trick.

• Link
• Report this comment

I’m not going to waste my time.

I’m wasting my time.

Then why are you here?

• Link
• Report this comment

“Do I have to explain everything now? ”

When you aren’t clear? Yes. If that applies to everything you say, then yes, you need to explain everything.

• Link
• Report this comment

I guess from now on, we’ll just need to ask a couple folks here who we support and then have them “splain” things to us — wow, that’ll make things so much easier than reading and interpreting things for ourselves!

• Link
• Report this comment

Observer

Sure, you can ask, but I’d rather not answer.

I’m an advocate of blogs as the forums for ideas, where ideas are based on their merit, not on the credentials of those putting forth the idea.

And sure, I respect that experience in a field can provide insight or a level of expertise not held by others. That said, there is a difference between “I worked in this field and this is what the law states” and “I worked in this field and my opinion is….”

The patience thing? I just like to think people can be persuaded by reason and logic. Plus, if I engage on that level, the other person may get to a point I hadn’t considered, which doesn’t happen when things go personal. Naive, maybe, but I try -

• Link
• Report this comment

“so it’ll be harder for most of you than me.”

Stick around long enough and maybe you’ll be surprised at how easy it is for most of us.

• Link
• Report this comment

GG @ 1030 ; The Russian P-800 (Yakhont is the export name) does not contain low-observable technology, therefore it is not a “stealth” system as the term is used today. It is a surface skimming system, which makes it hard to pick up on radar, particularly the AEGIS system used by the Navy. That tactic is no different than an airplane flying below ridgelines in order to be “lost” in ground scatter.

• Link
• Report this comment

God Bless America… and no one else@10:50
Thank you.

• Link
• Report this comment

all this reminded me of something….

The Pentagon military analyst program was launched in early 2002 by then-Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs Victoria Clarke. The idea was to recruit “key influentials” to help sell a wary public on “a possible Iraq invasion.” Former NBC military analyst Kenneth Allard called the effort “psyops on steroids.”

• Link
• Report this comment

God Bless America… and no one else

“God bless us, every one!”
Tiny Tim

• Link
• Report this comment

Our manufacturing base has been dismantled. Speculators and swindlers have looted the U.S. Treasury and stolen billions from small shareholders who had set aside money for retirement or college. Civil liberties, including habeas corpus and protection from warrantless wiretapping, have been taken away. Basic services, including public education and health care, have been handed over to the corporations to exploit for profit. The few who raise voices of dissent, who refuse to engage in the corporate happy talk, are derided by the corporate establishment as freaks.

“I don’t know what you mean. I am free, free to have the most wonderful time. Everybody’s happy nowadays.”

• Link
• Report this comment

“I do have to say that only the government would even consider sanctioning such a conflict”

I wouldn’t argue with that, but in this case we don’t even know that they would. If they haven’t even been told – they’ve been denied the opportunity to make that decision.

The question now is: now that the information is public, what – if anything – will they do about it? Here’s where I suspect we would agree: probably nothing

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone/GA@10:56
“Tiny Tim”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skU-jBFzXl0
Not the one you were referring to…..but.

• Link
• Report this comment

The generals should just offer up their help to their country at no additional charge. It would be the patriotic conservative charitable thing to do and it would save us from implementing yet another tax cut to pay for it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone/GA

December 29th, 2010
10:59 am
“The question now is: now that the information is public, what – if anything – will they do about it? Here’s where I suspect we would agree: probably nothing”

That is my bet:)

• Link
• Report this comment

Joel – sorry, I can’t view youtube from my work PC…it’s blocked.

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul @10:44, Thank you and I can respect that.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Never again will you be capable of ordinary human feeling,” Winston Smith’s torturer tells him in “1984.” “Everything will be dead inside you. Never again will you be capable of love, or friendship, or joy of living, or laughter, or curiosity, or courage, or integrity. You will be hollow. We shall squeeze you empty and then we shall fill you with ourselves.”

The noose is tightening. The era of amusement is being replaced by the era of repression. Tens of millions of citizens have had their e-mails and phone records turned over to the government. We are the most monitored and spied-on citizenry in human history. Many of us have our daily routine caught on dozens of security cameras. Our proclivities and habits are recorded on the Internet. Our profiles are electronically generated. Our bodies are patted down at airports and filmed by scanners. And public service announcements, car inspection stickers, and public transportation posters constantly urge us to report suspicious activity. The enemy is everywhere.

• Link
• Report this comment

Soothsayer@11:03
“Sorry to rain on your “happy-talk.”
Not a problem. Most of the argument that goes on here is useless. I have posted before that all of these problems are self correcting. Glad I’m not the only one. Gonna be a h#@l of a correction.

• Link
• Report this comment

@@ 10:54

Too Funny!! How ironic.

• Link
• Report this comment

Joel

Thanks for Tiny Tim… we really needed that….

• Link
• Report this comment

I feel so safe and secure. I feel a need to go shopping.

• Link
• Report this comment

If retired Generals and Admirals are using questionable influence to enrich arms contractors and themselves, I wonder how many of you are actually supprised? Money is the bottom line in our society and corporations will do anything, legal or otherwise, to make as much profit as they possibly can. As long as America is a capitalist country, this will never change.

• Link
• Report this comment

Keeping Committees Clear of Ethical Problems:

An Ethics Guide for
Designated Federal Officials
Of DoD
Advisory Committees

Preventing Conflicts of Interest

To prevent conflicts of interest, we take several precautions:

Consultants and committee members are appointed as Special Government Employees (SGEs), whether or not they are compensated.

All SGEs file a financial disclosure report that discloses their financial interests.

All SGEs sign a written statement disqualifying them from participation in particular matters that may affect any financial interest disclosed on their report.

DFOs and a DoD ethics official review financial disclosure reports to screen SGEs from matters in which they may have conflicts of interest.

All SGEs complete a foreign activities questionnaire to prevent violation of the U.S. Constitution.

Written ethics training material is provided to SGEs prior to appointment to inform them about conflicts of interest and other Government standards of conduct.

We orally brief committee members at meetings to remind them of these requirements.
DoD Ethics officials are readily available to SGEs and DFOs to answer questions or otherwise assist.

Obama’s got this.

• Link
• Report this comment

TaxPayer

December 29th, 2010
11:13 am

I feel so safe and secure. I feel a need to go shopping.
—————————————————————————–
You have described the cure to our present economic
situation along with the major objective of any sitting
President.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bookman, Instead of writing blogs about topics that have almost nothing to do with harm to our country, why don’t you focus on things that do harm to us…say, the lack of government action to stabilize our current gas prices by not drilling into shale and the Alaskan reserves, thereby keeping us dependent on OPEC and nations who provide to terrorists. Or how about the entitlement and union crowds who are killing out country from the inside by taking and/or demanding unrealistic salaries, benefits and pensions that taxpayers have to pick up…or locally, how about the thugs that live here like Ms. Loranza Love, a gang member who shot and killed a rival in her apartment complex yesterday…or 19 times arrested Gregory Favors who shot and killed a GHP officer in cold blood the other day. How in the world does someone arrested that many times, with 3 felony convictions, have free reign to walk the city streets? My topic suggestions are ones that have a direct impact on our lives, not the ones of liberal leaning socialists that you often regurgitate so get with the program already…

• Link
• Report this comment

Chuck Norris is a stealth weapon. Remember, if you can’t see Chuck Norris, you could be seconds away from death.

• Link
• Report this comment

Joel

I think it’s neat you’d think of Tiny Tim while reading a blog about retired generals….

• Link
• Report this comment

[...] and for all you flag waving, chest thumping, “kill the bad guys” folks, ever hear of something called ROI (return on investment)? I don’t know how much of the $14 trillion national debt lies with the MIC, including the classified CIA/DIA and NSA budgets, but my guess is, it is at least 1/2. and yet, since 1980 [...]

Carlin, dude, I love you man, but I gotta admit, I started hearing Howard Beale at around this point.

• Link
• Report this comment

Joel

Yeah! That’s the answer!

Doggone/GA!!! It’s all your fault!!!

Our new way to solve every problem!

• Link
• Report this comment

How do you left wingers feel about that?

• Link
• Report this comment

Lovely game of tag here this morning; just as Bookman desires.

True, conflict of interest is a losing game. But…I do not call an experienced expert in a field a handicap. Why call a novice to do expert work? Ragnar wins on that point.

I would doubt that there is any secret about whom it is that employs a retired general. Even knowing that does not remove the experience of that general. Nor do I believe that a lower ranked military man has the overall experience of a general. (Paul’s suggestion).

Whatever your complaints are about our military, I believe they are still considered the best in the world. Now that was not guided by some one with no experience and no attachments. Inexperienced geniuses are a rare animal in most fields and I would guess nonexistent in the military. There are many heroes in action but not in military planning. But there is dedication and we should never forget that.

• Link
• Report this comment

John Birch, you’re like 50% right. what if the forces which “destroyed” the ethic originate within the DoD/pPentagon culture? Who was it that suggested the old guard (retired Generals, as well as those in the DoD Procurement department) could not be “bought” by shameless profiteers in the private sector? you ain’t kidding the moral fabric and work ethic is gone, but it was not the work of “liberals” alone.

• Link
• Report this comment

Dusty @ 12,

That is a major stretch…lobbying for defense contractors and complaints about our military.

• Link
• Report this comment

paleo-neo-Carlinist aka Joe the Plutocrat

December 29th, 2010
11:52 am
barking frog, I believe Ike’s VP Richard M. Nixon made the “I am not a crook” speech.
———————————————————-
this is where Nixon learned the procedure.

• Link
• Report this comment

Who would have thought after the horrors of WWII that war would be a growth industry in the US.

Funny how the countries where it was fought on their home turf don’t seem to see it that way.

• Link
• Report this comment

I saw LA down here at walgreens with his high power laptop searching for wifi and picking up some much needed clearasil..

• Link
• Report this comment

Sounds like the IMC has a clear case of wealth redistribution. My tax dollars to their balance sheets. Or, can the spending of tax dollars to private companies be considered socialism?

• Link
• Report this comment

Adam @ 10:22 a.m.

Thank you, Adam, for taking the time to compliment my thoughts on today’s blog. Your words were inspiring to me and were much appreciated by me.

Paulo977 from yesterday’s blog -

Thank you, also, Paulo, for your compliment of my analogy regarding “letter of the law” thinking of fundamentalist Christians with strict interpretation Constitutionalists. Interesting that both are found, in large part, within the Bible Belt. Your words were much appreciated by me.

Josef, from yesterday -

Cyber friend Josef, what I really think that you are missing that the forces that were driving toward the Civil War were powerful and unavoidable. And by forces, I mean, the collective consciousness of Americans over generations.

Jon Meacham, who wrote a biography of Andrew Jackson recently, speculated that had it not been for Jackson’s forcing the Native Americans to move West (which I find totally reprehensible) and the detoured attention given that, that the Civil War would have started in 1830, thirty years earlier. Of course, another president would have had to seen us through that earlier war, not Lincoln. I do not think Lincoln wanted to keep the nation one, just for the sake of unity. I think that he realized that the ideals espoused by America’s founders were unique in the world’s history and that if the world were to later see the fulfillment of those egalitarian ideas, then our nation must “live” and not fall apart,which would have given lie to the stated ideals that America’s founders had left their progeny.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mary Elizabeth…

in reality the American Civil War was a direct outgrowth of the English Civil War…only the Cromwellians went north, the Cavaliers, south. Now with in geographical (and the attendant socio-economic distinctions) the former class versus class battle could now take on a nation-versus nation character…We tend to overlook what went into the make-up of those who decided to sue for a divorce and, if we do go back and look at it, there are some surprises to be found there…

• Link
• Report this comment

Where is your blog Mary Elizabeth?

• Link
• Report this comment