Posted on 10/30/2021 5:30:06 AM PDT by Kaslin
Congress is currently working on a bipartisan plan to boost defense spending for the next fiscal year. Good news indeed for The Pentagon, but it is more essential than ever that these funds are spent cautiously, on things that we actually need, will actually work, and yes, made in America would be nice as well.
Moderate Democrats are moving the opposite way from a progressive’s push to defund or greatly cut the Pentagon budget and in a rare glimpse of sanity from Capitol Hill, it appears they have the upper hand. The Military Times reported on October 18, “Senate appropriators (have) unveiled plans for about $24 billion in extra military spending this fiscal year above the president’s budget request, the latest blow for progressive lawmakers who hoped to significantly curb defense spending. The move amounts to a 5 percent increase in defense spending for fiscal 2022 over last year, and brings the appropriations bill in line with planned spending outlined in the House and Senate drafts of the annual defense authorization bill.” While the Biden Administration agreed with progressives and sought a cut to Pentagon spending, a bipartisan coalition in the House is supporting a return to levels of spending from 2020. Moderate Democrats in the House Appropriations and Armed Services Committees are working with Republicans to promote defense spending priorities that make good sense. Perhaps there is hope for The Republic.
With the Afghanistan withdrawal disaster in the rear-view mirror--sort of--the focus is moving quickly to Communist China in the wake of its increasingly belligerent behavior. Progressives wanted to use the “draw down” in Afghanistan as a reason to redirect Pentagon funds left over from war to resettling Afghan refugees. The problem with that use of resources is that threats to national security are on the rise—and with a bullet as we say in the music industry. The challenge of providing support to Taiwan, an increasingly aggressive Russia, and the flood of cyber-attacks coming from abroad speak to the urgent need to rebuild defense infrastructure. Apparently, we’re going to need about 45 new Blackhawks as well. *Cough*
One contracting issue being resolved by the Pentagon is a battle over the future of Air Force refueling tankers. Tankers perform the critical function of refueling U.S. and allied aircraft during long missions--many in the Pacific, where aircraft do not have the capacity to make it across on one tank of fuel. Loren Thompson reported in Forbes that “the existing tanker fleet has grown decrepit with age; the most common refueler in the fleet is the KC-135, a plane based on the same airframe as the old Boeing 707 jetliner that first joined the force in 1957.” This has--surprise!-- spurred a battle between two companies seeking the contract for modernized refueling tankers for the Air Force.
On one side is Boeing, an American company, that has the KC-46 Pegasus--an aircraft that has already received a $1.6 billion investment. On the other side is Airbus, a French company, that has a larger competing aircraft manufactured in Europe and proposed to be modified in Alabama to fit the Air Force’s needs. A decade ago, the Deputy Secretary of Defense declared Boeing’s aircraft, “the clear winner,” of future contracts according to Thompson. This was true right up until politics crept into the process (tale as old as time). Some Alabama Members of Congress are pushing the Airbus angle, because, per above, Airbus has promised a manufacturing plant in there to modify their European-built tankers to suit US military needs. In the name of keeping costs low and procuring a proven superior--and American made--aircraft, the final choice seems pretty obvious.
No disrespect to France or to Airbus, and apologies to the Alabama congressional delegation, but it makes little sense to squander precious funds on French designed and built tankers and even more to bring them here to be retrofit. The increased funding for defense should be invested in a broad new infrastructure which includes an modern and efficient tanker replacement for the Air Force. Thompson’s article identified four areas where Airbus fails to measure up to the American made Boeing product: Capabilities; Certification; Cost; and Size. One would think that would be a conversation-ender, but alas. Lobbyists.
Look. When moderate Democrats buck the extreme pressure—harassment, even—from the nutjob wing of their party that seems to currently be ruling the Democrat Conference and line up with Republicans to recognize the need keep America’s defenses strong, modern and effective, and act together to provide the means to get there, that’s really something these days. As such, it is more important than ever for the Pentagon to step up and make good decisions with those increased taxpayer dollars and deliver a strong national security infrastructure in the most careful and smart way possible. And again, American made to the greatest extent possible. For if they fail to do so, these fragile good faith partnerships on the Hill will likely crumble, and the 2023 Pentagon budget could look an awful lot different than 2022’s.
They plan to replace all uniform name tags with the appropriate “pronoun” for all the LXMFTRPQ brain-addled pretenders now in the military. Only then will they think about actual military hardware.
the Pentagram needs money to replace its
own buildings they bombed, and the weapons
they GAVE to the enemy.
the Pentagram deserves a JAG trial and many hangings.
Our military is the greatest, no doubt. But the Pentagon operation, as all bureaucracies, have become so large and cumbersome they are waddling. By cutting and trimming they would become a much more efficient operation. I believe a military that’s mean and lean gets the job done best. Get all those pencil pushers out.
I can’t expect them to face a budget cut but I’d be happy with just freezing their increases
Still no accountability for Afghan withdrawl disaster. I oppose any increase, in fact support cuts, until we start seeing some accountability. Putting more money into this will only make it worse, time to thin the forest, will re-grow healthier.
Will they spend it replacing all the neat stuff they left in Afghanistan?
Asking for a friend.
L
I don’t know what additional requirements the USAF have over and above the Australian air force (other than building them in the US), but we’ve been using the Airbus tanker for nearly 10 years and it’s working fine according to my air force friends.
I would be happy to see ALL FLAG OFFICERS in ALL SERVICES have 10-20% of their pay deducted as punishment for shooting the finger at the American Taxpayer by leaving 85 billion dollars of equipment in Afghanistan.
The US Military is highly proficient at deducting pay from service members pay. Back in 1969-70 they deducted $67.00 (about 25%) from my pay. I was over-seas and a creditor BACK home tracked me down.
Until our officer Corp feels some PAIN in their butt pocket in REAL dollars for their stupidity, nothing will EVER change. If enlisted personnel can endure/absorb pay cuts for stupidity so can Flag Officers!
The writer apparently has not visited planet Earth in decades.
The Pentagon is about the grift and the graft.
What they “should” do is stunningly irrelevant—grade school level word salad.
Blame that idiot in the White House for it. He ordered them to to leave the equipment there.
Lol, blaming Brandon would be like blaming a dog for barking in the night.
More money for transgender surgery and classes about white rage.
It really is criminal that the GOP is leading the charge to increase funding for the Biden/Austin DOD. Obviously, they couldn’t care less about the leftist politicization of DOD.
I’m the contrarian on this.
Trump spent some 6 trillion at the height of the Pandemic, on emergency or covid medical funding. Biden is spent at least 2 trillion already and has another 5 trillion planned, cut to 3.5 by Manchin.
I think it is absurd we are spending almost 12 trillion in 2 years over the normal budget and we are spending nothing on our military, while we are badly out-ranged in the South China Sea, by China.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.