Rumsfeld: It s Just Business

Defense News | July 1-7, 2002

[Stand Watch Listen]

In the wake of U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s decision to cancel the U.S. Army’s Crusader self-propelled howitzer program, it has become fashionable to paint America’s top defense official as somehow anti-Army. Why else would Rumsfeld try to kill such a critical program?

Similar thinking has infected other U.S. military services whose cherished programs — the V-22 tiltrotor, the Comanche armed reconnaissance helicopter, the F-22 fighter, the CVN(X) future aircraft carrier — are facing cuts or cancellation.

Some senior military officials now ask: Why doesn’t Rumsfeld like us?

They miss the point. Rumsfeld is not acting out of malice or caprice. He is executing President Bush’s vision of a more flexible U.S. military equipped with the right weapons for the future, and bringing the Pentagon’s voracious appetite for new systems within its financial means.

Killing programs is not a public manifestation of some deep-seated loathing of any particular service. It’s just business.

Says one source close to the defense secretary, instead of calling him "Rummy" — a term once reserved for friends and close associates — maybe he ought to be referred to as: The Don.

"What most people fail to understand is that to him, it’s nothing personal," the source said. "He might really like you and think you’re doing a good job. But if you don’t make your case, or you try to cross him, you’re finished."

Henry Kissinger — no power-politics lightweight — said nearly three decades ago that Rumsfeld was the most ruthless player in Washington.

Now Rumsfeld is plying his trade for Bush, who campaigned on the need to cut systems made obsolete by progress. Crusader topped his hit list.

At the time, many within the defense community dismissed the future president’s words as mere rhetoric. One senior Army official told his counterparts that Bush wasn’t a threat to Crusader because he didn’t know the difference between a "toilet seat and an artillery piece."

Bad call. Rumsfeld canceled Crusader.

Then the Army made an even bigger mistake, resorting to desperate measures to protect their cherished howitzer.

Given the opportunity to defend their program, service officials failed to make a convincing case in the face of technologically more advanced alternatives, especially the advent of truly precise air power.

Instead, they undermined their credibility by stooping to chicanery and trying to take their case to Congress in a futile effort to save Crusader.

They played against the wrong guys. Now, Crusader is dead, and Rumsfeld is suspicious of the Army leadership. In fact, Rumsfeld recently chided Army Secretary Thomas White and Gen. Eric Shinseki, chief of staff, for exuding "body language" that has been less than supportive of the Crusader cancellation.

When asked about lessons learned from the Army’s Crusader experience at Rumsfeld’s hand, one senior Air Force official said: "We learned what not to do. We learned we have to play it straight, make our case, and accept the outcome."

That is a lesson that anyone who has to deal with Rumsfeld should heed.

[liberallarry]

What interest group does your source represent? How powerful are they? How credible? Seems like good news if they got it right.

[SMEDLEYBUTLER]

Shinseki has been persona non grata since day one. Rumsfeld named the beret baron's replacement over a year in advance of his retirement. Eric can't leave soon enough.

[Psalm 73]

"We learned we have to play it straight, make our case, and accept the outcome"

This is what happens when the adults are in charge - how refreshing.

[ladyinred]

Another shining example of how wonderful it is to have leaders who lead, not follow. Thanks Rummy!

[katana]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't there still a lot of holdovers from the Clintoon era in senior Pentagon staff positions ? It will no doubt take a few years to root these REMF's out, but in the meantime they seem to have been shown that the rules have changed.

[Stand Watch Listen]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't there still a lot of holdovers from the Clintoon era in senior Pentagon staff positions ?

Rumsfeld has to deal with all the Clinton military appointees that have been politically correct in their social engineering/feminization/homosexual/self esteem 'experiments' of the last administration.

Clinton has laid out many 'timebombs' for the Bush Administration. The Clinton appointees in various judicial/military/legislative/executive positions will be the bane of this country for years to come. Other Clinton 'timebombs' in the form of recess appointments and executive orders have serious consequences for this nation.

[Restorer]

I don't claim to be any sort of expert on artillery, but from what I've read the Crusader violates what will probably be the first law of warfare in the future: Mobility.

As weapons get smarter and smarter, the only way that weapons systems will stay functioning is by being hard to hit. The best way to be hard to hit is by being hard to locate thru mobility.

BTW, it is likely that this does not bode well for aircraft carriers and all other large, expensive weapons systems in future decades.

[SCHROLL]

those Crusaders would have looked good guarding Oklahoma since we have no way to transport a 44 ton artilery system.

[First_Salute]

Friend of the family was the project man on this aircraft by Ling-Temco-[Chance]-Vought.

Hiller-Ryan C-142 c.1964 = VSTOL tilt-wing project, tri-service cargo and assault. ... four GE T64 turboshafts; span: 67'6" length: 58'2" ... Variable cruise system using two engines to turn all four props. Designed to carry 32 combat-ready troops or 8,000# cargo. POP: 5 prototypes as XC-142, -142A [62-5921/5925]. [62-5924=NASA522] donated to USAF Museum.

It was an idea which required much more material and manufacturing development to succeed. Someday it will, if we will dedicate the resources to that goal.

This idea went through the same kind of "teething;" an aircraft flown by another friend of the family:

Northrop YB-49

Here, you can see a short QuickTime video of an early flight (which I think, there, is made by the Northrop co. pilot). Later, Capt. Glen Edwards would unfortunately "buy the farm" with it. But the idea remained in development; and now we have this, which not many people think has been a waste:

 

 Northrop-Grumman B-2 Stealth Bomber

[MissAmericanPie]

This is exactly why I'm not on Bush's case about postponing the attack on Iraq. These touchy, feely, bums need to be drummed out of the Pentagon. Sit there and tell our President they are not ready for an attack on Iraq, he should have kicked their tails up over their berets.

[rangerX]

Figure more like 80 tons. The system includes the armored resupply vehicle.

[RightOnline]

"Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't there still a lot of holdovers from the Clintoon era in senior Pentagon staff positions ? It will no doubt take a few years to root these REMF's out, but in the meantime they seem to have been shown that the rules have changed."

Not only are you not wrong..............I'd call this a rather superb observation/summation.

[lds23]

And what was the impact on JC Watts? Was part of his resignation based on lack of support on Crusader?

[snopercod]

Cool. Of course a cynic would say that the guys who did all the original design work probably died in poverty...

[RebelDawg]

those Crusaders would have looked good guarding Oklahoma since we have no way to transport a 44 ton artilery system.

You should do a little research before blindly repeating every bit of drivvel that you hear.

The A1 Abrahams weighs in at 37 tons battle ready, how do you think we transport these?

Note to the unenlightened: We have transport aircraft capable of carrying over 200 metric tons.

I really wish you people would stop parroting this falsehood about how heavy the Crusader is... If you oppose the Crusader thats fine, but at least come up with a valid reason for opposing it...

[Poohbah]

The A1 Abrahams weighs in at 37 tons battle ready, how do you think we transport these?

Actually, almost 70 tons. We usually do it by ship, which is S-L-O-W.

Note to the unenlightened: We have transport aircraft capable of carrying over 200 metric tons.

Note to the still unenlightened: we don't have very many of them, and it would take most of the US air transport system most of a year to airmail a heavy division.

[swarthyguy]

Said it before and will say it again.

Nobody expects a protracted land campaign either in Araby or the Asian continent.

Expecting the unexpected and imagining the unimaginable seems to be the lesson of history and wars.

Let's hope the Crusader is never needed.

[RightWhale]

Are you referring to the M1A1/2 ABRAMS ?

Weight 69.54 tons

[RebelDawg]

Correction: I meant to say that there are heavy lift aircraft that can carry over 200 metric tons. I'm not sure what our heavy transport planes can carry but I know that the globmaster carries around 110-120 tons thats 2 or 3 crusaders or Abrahams.

BTW: here is a link to a plane capable of carrying between 250-275 thousand metric tons!

Heres a heavy lift plane!"

Now if we don't have anything like this then the question you all should be askign is why the @#$%! not!