|
SecDef Targets USN, USMC
First, what kind of new platform is needed to get large numbers of troops from ship to shore under fire in other words, the capability provided by the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle. No doubt, it was a real strategic asset during the first Gulf War to have a flotilla of Marines waiting off Kuwait City forcing Saddam's army to keep one eye on the Saudi border, and one eye on the coast. But we have to take a hard look at where it would be necessary or sensible to launch another major amphibious landing again especially as advances in anti-ship systems keep pushing the potential launch point further from shore. On a more basic level, in the 21st century, what kind of amphibious capability do we really need to deal with the most likely scenarios, and then how much?Second aircraft carriers. Our current plan is to have eleven carrier strike groups through 2040 and it's in the budget. And to be sure, the need to project power across the oceans will never go away. But, consider the massive over-match the U.S. already enjoys. Consider, too, the growing anti-ship capabilities of adversaries. Do we really need eleven carrier strike groups for another 30 years when no other country has more than one? Any future plans must address these realities. And that bring me to the third and final issue: the budget. I have in the past warned about our nation's tendency to disarm in the wake of major wars. That remains a concern. But, as has always been the case, defense budget expectations over time, not to mention any country's strategic strength, are intrinsically linked to the overall financial and fiscal health of the nation. And in that respect, we have to accept some hard realities. American taxpayers and the Congress are rightfully worried about the deficit. At the same time, the Department of Defense's track record as a steward of taxpayer dollars leaves much to be desired. Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2010-05-04 |
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=296005 |