Per Defense Secretary Ashton Carter ,he wanted to reduce an order from 52 to 40 ships. Per the Operational Test & Evaluation Director at the Pentagon as well. They want to REDUCE and congress seems to be on the verge of INSISTING they INCREASE the orders. By what right does Congress have the authority to TELL the Pentagon what it needs and demands it buy?
This is new ??? . "By what right does Congress have the authority to tell the Pentagon what it needs" ...LMAO. It's called the Constitution !!!
BTW..... The Sec. of Defense wants the number of LCS cut back. The US Navy does NOT want the number cut back. The Navy is lobbying Congress not to cut back the number of LCS...!
Congress is RIGHT and WHITE. Remember? Think on all the hideous atrocities that should not even be allowed into polite society. If they exist? Congress is in bed with it. Congress is not only a whore? It is a dirty whore. Not all whores are women. In this case? More like pimps, but whores as well.
@EC36 -- Of COURSE the Navy wants more ships. That's more people/money/officers for the Navy. It's supposed to be the oversight job of the civilian government to hold the Navy accountable and say, "OK, show us why you NEED 52 ships instead of 40."
Just because the military says it wants something does not necessarily make it a national defense necessity (in fact, the vast majority of the time it's not).
Capron,
Oh enlighten us. That proved what point? That YOU think this? What is it based on? That you do not like to ANSWER this question because you don't (once again) know HOW?
Welcome to the Military-Industrial Complex.
One of the seminal moments in my political education was when a staffer for California Senator Alan Cranston called me up to see if I was going to vote for Cranston. Cranston found some notoriety during the 1980 presidential campaign when he ran for President with a central theme of a "nuclear freeze" to stop the insane arms race with the Soviet Union.
I asked Cranston's staffer to explain how Cranston's avowed opposition to continued nuclear proliferation squared with his support for the B-1 bomber program, which President Carter had cancelled because the B-2 stealth bomber was already under development and the existing fleet of B-52s and other bombers were sufficient until the B-2 was ready (but which President Reagan restarted once elected).
The staffer explained, "Well, the B-1 program provides lots of jobs out in Palmdale, and we don't want to lose those."
Military pork barrel spending is like any other kind of pork barrel spending. Some localities get Bridges to Nowhere. Some localities get factories making weapons the Department of Defense does not need.
AARRGGHH! Again. Mahalo for your thoughtful and helpful reply OS and the specific example which is always most helpful. :) ((hugs))
I was simply pointing out the details that were omitted from the question...Also it was not about the Congress vs the Pentagon as the questioner stated....As far as " ok, show us why you NEED 52 ships instead of 40" is exactly what is happening with this subject.... Thanks.
