Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Wuli

TRUE and PURELY military priority takes a back seat to all that.

True.

But HOPEFULLY better than the old five-year plan?


3 posted on 08/16/2019 7:48:30 AM PDT by DUMBGRUNT ("The enemy has overrun us. We are blowing up everything. Vive la France!"Dien Bien Phu last message.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: DUMBGRUNT

Yes, still likely better than “the old five year plan”.

But, if I were a dictator (LOL), “jobs” and every form of “economic impact” would have zero to do with where and why military expenditures were allocated. The military priorities would be 100% based on the best priorities for the military alone, within a given budget. And “military need” would not come from the defense industry offering cushy jobs in retirement to the officers who will push the buying of their stuff when they are still in uniform. The military need needs to be the needs of the military, not the needs of the defense armaments industry. Lastly, even the military has to be held responsible to NOT treat military choices of hardware as time for Christmas presents. They would not get the fanciest just ‘cause they wanted it, if the mission is very well achieved without it.


9 posted on 08/16/2019 9:56:12 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson