tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post6477104373822911261..comments2023-11-17T03:55:40.736-05:00Comments on Ink Spots: Defense politics: a lot of the time, what ought to matter most doesn't matter at allLilhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18373158801523577733noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-554466482451223522012-01-14T12:28:19.997-05:002012-01-14T12:28:19.997-05:00I spent 25 years in the RAF so have a little exper...I spent 25 years in the RAF so have a little experience of fast-jet ops. The quoted authors have one opinion of air combat and seemingly ignore all others. A WW1 Sopwith Pup would easily out turn a Spitfire or P-51 Mustang, now step forward all those who would want to fight in the Pup... thought so...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-87415250590968053542012-01-14T12:17:10.330-05:002012-01-14T12:17:10.330-05:00The paragraph you quoted regarding the F-35 is cla...The paragraph you quoted regarding the F-35 is classic Boyd acolyte (Spinney, Sprey, etc). Though they have many good points, they're often prone to hyperbole. Yes, the F-35 is a colossal boondoggle, but is it really "more vulnerable" than an old F-105? Is it really an easy target for a MiG-21? Maybe they have the data the rest of us don't, but I'm finding some of the criticism hard to swallow. <br /><br />I recall similar rhetoric from this crowd regarding the Bradley (remember "The Pentagon Wars"?), the F-15, F-111, you name it. Though none of those systems were flawless, they wound up doing all right in combat. <br /><br />They could make their points without hyperbole and alarmism.Starbuckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02013102906896853767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-14385225873051026092012-01-12T04:56:29.696-05:002012-01-12T04:56:29.696-05:00Nancy Roberts is probably the smartest woman that ...Nancy Roberts is probably the smartest woman that I know, and I am proud to call her my mentor. She wrote this in 2000 AFTER attempting to facilitate negotiations between the UN and the Taliban in the post-conflict phase (1998?).<br /><br />It should be noted that the International Community (IC) chose NOT to assist Afghanistan in the 1990s at the conclusion of the Civil War primarily because of the Taliban, the winner of the internal conflict, policy towards women.<br /><br />WICKED PROBLEMS AND NETWORK APPROACHES TO RESOLUTION<br />by Nancy Roberts<br /><br />Collaboration for Relief and Recovery in Afghanistan<br /><br />http://www.idt.unisg.ch/org/idt/ipmr.nsf/0/1f3bcad88f16e7c6c1256c76004be2c4/$FILE/IPMR_1_1_WICKED.pdf<br /><br />International Public Management Review · electronic Journal at http://www.ipmr.net<br />Volume 1 · Issue 1 · 2000 · © International Public Management NetworkMikeFnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-2633295785232134992012-01-11T18:11:14.195-05:002012-01-11T18:11:14.195-05:00Mike, I think it's all shouting in the wind wh...Mike, I think it's all shouting in the wind while the large vested bureaucracy is vested. In other words the puzzle palace has to go. Most of our problems begin and are rendered intractable because of the Pentagon/Beltway complex. Now's the perfect time for YOUR FIRED. No, not President Trump. Maybe SECDEF Trump. But I'm vindictive. <br /><br />Replace with: Buy off the shelf and fly the Hell out of them- practice. I'm not USAF, but there must be a modern equivalent of the F-5 around. I am [was] Army and was Signal, and I do it for my civilian career, and I recommend the same off the shelf purchases for communications. In the case of voice/data communications and networking the battlefield, no PM could possibly keep pace with the speed of technology and the market. The very concept of JTRS is mad.bdoranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15201085431663486535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-51016091440757069862012-01-11T17:28:54.098-05:002012-01-11T17:28:54.098-05:00Welcome to the Revolution Gulliver :)Welcome to the Revolution Gulliver :)MikeFnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-45245420479939769802012-01-11T17:27:41.024-05:002012-01-11T17:27:41.024-05:00Time to take the power back?
"The masses, en...Time to take the power back?<br /><br />"The masses, enlightened by propaganda yet left scattered, do not constitute a force and are not able to cope with the enemies. That is why, side by side with the masses propaganda, one should think of organizing the masses, gathering them into numerous and strong forces to oppose the enemies."- -Vietnamese Communist Party Vietnamese Communist Directive 75MikeFnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-40931639081202649802012-01-11T17:12:22.513-05:002012-01-11T17:12:22.513-05:00Mike — Henry Mintzberg's 3 agents of Real Chan...Mike — <em>Henry Mintzberg's 3 agents of Real Change in a Big Bureaucracy- transformational leaders, outside stakeholders, mid-level managers</em><br /><br />You've gotten right to the problem here: the "outside stakeholders" for the defense acquisition bureaucracy nearly all have a vested interest in perpetuating the current system and producing the same results: Congress, the defense industry, and the voters who are employed by those companies.<br /><br />Until the incentive structure is different, Congress will not hold either the Defense Department and the military services or the defense industry accountable for failures... for the simple reason that by their criteria – jobs, pork, campaign contributions, continued membership on preferred committees for Members; profits for industry; unimpeded flow of resources for the Services – these programs <em>are not failures</em>.Gulliverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12558335790019565924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-91792614610872913842012-01-11T17:03:22.928-05:002012-01-11T17:03:22.928-05:00Anti-Boyd not BoyAnti-Boyd not BoyMikeFnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-60673175481200084572012-01-11T17:02:44.827-05:002012-01-11T17:02:44.827-05:00Hi Gulliver,
"But really: how does this ever...Hi Gulliver,<br /><br />"But really: how does this ever change? How can the incentive structures of American politics be altered to ensure that parochial concerns entirely peripheral to military effectiveness aren't permitted to dominate entirely the weapon system development and acquisition process?"<br /><br />Henry Mintzberg's 3 agents of Real Change in a Big Bureaucracy- transformational leaders, outside stakeholders, mid-level managers<br /><br />Also, for the Anti-Boy, we published on what Billy Mitchell might say today<br /><br />http://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/air-mindedness-the-core-of-successful-air-enterprise-developmentMikeFnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-62895022010181925072012-01-11T16:30:36.620-05:002012-01-11T16:30:36.620-05:00Fantastic article. I have been saying this for ye...Fantastic article. I have been saying this for years (hopefully not engaging in groupthink here).<br /><br />-Deus ExAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-60275589208265262702012-01-11T16:03:37.256-05:002012-01-11T16:03:37.256-05:00Starbuck — Appreciate your point, but I don't ...Starbuck — Appreciate your point, but I don't think they're saying "the JSF program will make us lose wars" so much as they are "there's a better way to do this," and arguing that the systemic flaws and unconstrained bloat that have taken over defense acquisition threaten the future of the republic more than even poor battlefield performance. (Or at least that's MY spin on the whole thing.)Gulliverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12558335790019565924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-22580602800262972422012-01-11T15:53:38.812-05:002012-01-11T15:53:38.812-05:00Boyd's acolytes have a lot of good points abou...Boyd's acolytes have a lot of good points about the defense industry, but they're prone to "sky-is-falling" arguments. Despite all the controversy over the M2 Bradley, it still proved itself effective in Desert Storm, as did many of the so-called "gold plated" systems Boyd railed against. <br /><br />That's not to say that the F-35 isn't a massive boondoggle (A lot of "Tri-Service" planes don't always work out the way we'd like). But, sadly, it's one of those "too big to fail" projects. We can't seem to bring another aircraft on line in the foreseeable future.Starbuckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02013102906896853767noreply@blogger.com