| The Pentagon is just a rat-hole down which we pour money. Lots of money. |
| The United States is spending more than the rest of the world combined on its military ($670 billion), its intelligence community ($75 billion) and its homeland security ($50 billion), leaving the State Department and AID extremely underfunded. Cost overruns on the largest weapons system last year exceeded $300 billion.
The United States is also responsible for 70 percent of all sales in the global arms market, including $30 billion in sales to nations with scarce resources in the developing world. Source: The Urgent Need to Demilitarize the National Security State" by: Melvin A. Goodman, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed - 10/20/09 [M]ilitary experts say [that there] are profound shortcomings in the Pentagon’s acquisitions system. Even as spending on new projects has risen to its highest point since the Reagan years, being over budget and behind schedule have become the norm: a recent Government Accountability Office audit found that 95 projects — warships, helicopters and satellites — were delayed 21 months on average and cost 26 percent more than initially projected, a bill of $295 billion. [I]n keeping with a Pentagon policy that called for letting big military contractors run complex projects with minimal government supervision, the Navy made the companies primarily responsible for all phases of development — from concept studies to detailed design and construction. In theory, the contractors’ business and technological acumen would save taxpayer dollars. But the Navy agreed to reimburse the companies for cost overruns rather than setting a fixed price, leaving little incentive to hold down costs. At the same time, a policy of letting contractors take the lead in managing weapons programs has coincided with an acute shortage of government engineers trained to oversee these increasingly complex enterprises. [Navy secretary, Donald C. Winter] lamented the Pentagon’s eroding expertise in systems engineering — managing complex new projects to ensure that goals are achievable and affordable — and faulted the notion that industry could best manage ambitious development projects. Source: "Lesson on How Not to Build a Navy Ship" By PHILIP TAUBMAN - NY Times - April 25, 2008 |
No one has submitted a comment on this statement yet.
Be the first and submit your feedback below.
Submit your comment below |