On Sun, 19 Mar 2017 11:32:42 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 3/19/17 10:54 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 19 Mar 2017 08:30:46 -0400, Poco Deplorevole
wrote:

Now they've got a 'former Marine Corps Captain' as their defense expert. Unreal.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/18/forme...ore-bucks.html

I think this is a good description of the DoD budget and has been for
60 years. Harry Truman's last good deed was as a senator going after
waste at the war department in WWII.


For at least two and a half decades, at least half the Military
Establishment's budget has been nothing but endless billions of dollars
poured down the toilet. For the money wasted on the military, we could
have rebuilt our infrastructure, rebuilt our factories, provided
universal healthcare, retired our national debt, provided quality
retraining for real jobs for "excessed" workers, and more.

This is one of those rare things where we agree. If we would improve
efficiency at DoD, we could still have the worlds most powerful
military and do it for a whole lot less money. Unfortunately
"military" and "government" processes do not lend themselves to
"efficiency". It is more about congress bringing pork home to 435
congressional districts. Personally I think they would rather have a
new bridge than a plant making some widget in an overly complex
weapons system that we design, develop, build, deploy and then declare
obsolete without ever firing a shot in anger and then start over.
A bloated DoD just seems to make war more palatable and we get in more
of them in places where we really have no national interest.