Search: Site   Web
The Ball Gunner ~ Snarky commentary on global military affairs

Archive for the 'defense spending' Category

Technical difficulties, good news and Herman Göring

December 11th, 2008, 11:13 am by jhogg

1) The Ball Gunner, presumably under attack by shadowy forces intent on silencing dissent, liberty and the god honest awesome served piping-hot from this blog, has been suffering some technical anomalies. Keep checking back, we’re still around.

2) Hints of god news:
U.S. to raise irregular war capabilities (via the Wa Po)

Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, December 4, 2008; Page A04

The Pentagon this week approved a major policy directive that elevates the military’s mission of “irregular warfare” — the increasingly prevalent campaigns to battle insurgents and terrorists, often with foreign partners and sometimes clandestinely — to an equal footing with traditional combat.

The directive, signed by Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England on Monday, requires the Pentagon to step up its capabilities across the board to fight unconventionally, such as by working with foreign security forces, surrogates and indigenous resistance movements to shore up fragile states, extend the reach of U.S. forces into denied areas or battle hostile regimes.

The policy, a result of more than a year of debate in the defense establishment, is part of a broader overhaul of the U.S. military’s role as the threat of large-scale combat against other nations’ armies has waned and new dangers have arisen from shadowy non-state actors, such as terrorists that target civilian populations.

ad_icon

<!–
if ( show_doubleclick_ad && ( adTemplate & INLINE_ARTICLE_AD ) == INLINE_ARTICLE_AD && inlineAdGraf )
{
document.write(’

‘) ;
}
// –>

“The U.S. has considerable overmatch in traditional capabilities . . . and more and more adversaries have realized it’s better to take us on in an asymmetric fashion,” said Michael G. Vickers, assistant secretary of defense for special operations/low-intensity conflict and interdependent capabilities, and a chief architect of the policy.

This, if it bears fruit, and that is a big IF, is good news.

Directing the Pentagon to do something and the Pentagon doing it are, quite obviously, very different things. And as any defense contractor lobbyist will tell you, there simply is not much money to be made in counter-insurgency (I can’t remember now, but I read somewhere that the U.S. is not engaged in true counter-insurgency, but in counter-counter-occupation.)

Ultimately, a thorough effort in counter-insurgency means putting your fabulous military toys: jets and tanks and fancy weapons, long-range missiles, aircraft carriers, attack helicopters and the like — on the shelf to gather dust and mildew. Undoubtedly Lockheed Martin could develop a fabulous new system for distributing rice while Northrup Grumman devoted effort to a more efficient way to build roads and lay power lines. Boeing could then partner with Wal Mart to make consumer commodities affordable and accessible. The downside (for them) being that rice distribution, road graters, trenchers and retail are not multi-million if not billion dollar items. When war becomes highly profitable (which it always does for those not fighting it) those seeking high profits will want war. I have high hopes for Gordon England’s plan, and high skepticism that it will supplant the footing for traditional warfare so unshakably embedded in the Pentagon.

3) Now that the pathetic and corrupt Pakistani army is being split to botch the Indian border mission in addition to the Afghan border mission, supply lines have become a source of concern. Unless you’re this guy:

BRUSSELS, Belgium — NATO operations in Afghanistan will not be affected by escalating attacks on the alliance’s supply lines through Pakistan, Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said Tuesday.

The militants “should not be under any illusion that they can disrupt the lines of communication, since we have alternatives,” de Hoop Scheffer said.

Alternatives being, of course, air power. Like any trendy war writer, I remain highly-skeptical about the ability of air-power to project anywhere but the air. Al Qaeda’s air force is certainly no threat, but everything from fuel shortages (which must be supplied conventionally) to bad weather can turn a world-class airlift into a ground force within minutes.

Air forces routinely overestimate what they are capable of, as is best illustrated by one of the world’s most notorious air force commander. I doubt there are many men left from the horror days of the Kessel, but I’d like to speak with some of them about their opinion of air power.

Hermann Göring

A quick news run down and a happy Turkey Day

November 26th, 2008, 8:33 am by jhogg

It appears that Robert Gates will continue on as Secretary of Defense. For our locay fly boys (and girls) this has one major implication (which will be revealed after the fold - HA!)

From the LA Times:

By Julian E. Barnes, Paul Richter and Christi Parsons
November 26, 2008
Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has agreed to serve in President-elect Barack Obama’s Cabinet, advisors said Tuesday, setting up the unusual situation in which a wartime Pentagon chief remains to work under a president who has condemned the previous administration’s policies.

An official close to the Obama transition team said it was likely that Gates would be named Defense secretary when the president-elect begins to unveil his national security team in announcements expected next week.


A former government official who has advised the Obama transition said it was “99% certain” that Gates would remain as Defense secretary for about a year in the Obama administration.

“Nothing is definitive,” said the former official, who like others spoke on condition of anonymity when discussing transition plans. “But Gates did agree to stay on.”

Gates continuation is the likely final nail in the F-22 Raptor’s procurement coffin. Gates, who famously said, “We’re fighting two wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the F-22 has not performed a single mission in either theater,” is not going to give the Air Force the funding it wants for the program, nor is he likely to bow down to a Congress hoping to score political points by requiring their purchase. The chances for a procurement boom, already slim under a democratic presidency, are all but evaporated.

Part 2:

The Ball Gunner is pleased to hear that Al Qaeda has abandoned an area it never had:

From the Wall Street Journal:

WASHINGTON — Pakistan has replaced Iraq as al Qaeda’s main focus, and the terror group has stepped up its efforts to destabilize the nuclear-armed South Asian nation, according to a senior U.S. military commander.

“Iraq is now a rear-guard action on the part of al Qaeda,” said Gen. James Conway, the head of the Marine Corps and a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in an interview. “They’ve changed their strategic focus not to Afghanistan but to Pakistan, because Pakistan is the closest place where you have the nexus of terrorism and nuclear weapons.”

Gen. Conway also offered a stark assessment of the Afghan situation, saying the Taliban has built a rudimentary command-and-control network that enables the group’s leadership to direct attacks across the country.

“They move troops around. They resupply. They provide money,” he said. “It’s effective and it’s real. It’s not just happenstance that these guys know where to go and what to do.”

It’s an uphill battle to beat these fires out. But as has been noted time and again, Al Qaeda in Iraq is hardly the enemy we so desperately want it to be.

The monger sect likes to claim these arguments are mere semantics, which demonstrates only that they wield a keen judo grip on ignorance. Iraq’s long history of secular government has made the majority of Iraqis particularly poorly suited for the Salafist Islam espoused by the Osama Bin Ladin (may demons eat his flesh) and the structure of Al Qaeda (may demons eat their flesh, too). We need to get this through our head; if we can’t identify who we are fighting we surely won’t be able to beat them.

Finally:

Happy Thanksgiving!

The pattern is clear- “Counterinsurgency” is the new budget gimmie

September 16th, 2008, 9:36 am by jhogg

It seems like the term “conterinsurgency” has been flying around fast and loose lately. I thought this was just the beginning mindless buzzword use or just sheer stupidity, but it appears this is a much more concentrated effort to label something as counterinsurgency and immediately place it beyond scrutiny in the budget requests.

From the Army Times -
(Side note: Don’t let the name fool you, the Army Times Publishing Co. is owned by Gannett newspapers and has no official affiliation with the military.)

Army to buy thousands more Mk19s, M2s

By Kris Osborn - Staff writer
Posted : Tuesday Sep 16, 2008 6:46:22 EDT

The Army is buying 4,600 Mk19 grenade launchers and 29,900 .50-caliber crew-served M2 machine guns, whose heavy-caliber rounds and high rate of fire have proven valuable in infantry counterinsurgency efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, service officials said. (Service officials? Was it Colonels Larry, Curly and Moe?)

Such weapons help target small groups of insurgents on the run or blended in with the local populations.

“Normally with a 7.62mm, you have a lot more difficulty when you have an enemy going behind a cinder block wall,” said Richard Audette, Army deputy project manager for soldier weapons at Picatinny Arsenal, N.J. “With a .50-caliber, you can take the wall out.”

I pretty much expect most journalists to not have a grasp of these things. But, really? We’ve obviously broached a new level of absurdity.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ab/Rifle_cartridge_comparison.jpg

“Blended in with local populations?” The MK-19 shoots 40 milimeter grenades in either high explosive  and high-explosive dual purpose (when you want to either blow up or shred everything)  and the venerable M-2 (ma deuce for those who love her) was designed as a primarily anti-armor weapon. So as Gen. Petraeus departs our new counterinsurgency tactics will involve launching vollies of grenades into crowds or firing indiscriminately with a weapon created to take out light vehicles.

You see that hoss on the far left - that’s our darling. The one second from the right is 5.56 NATO, the bang-bang that comes out the end of the M-16s and M-4s. The round third from the left is 7.62 NATO used in the M-60, M-240 and the old timey M-14. Short of that cute little .22 (far right) and the bulldogish 7.62×39 of AK-47 fame (third from the right) none of these round would have any difficulty with a “cinderblock wall. ” If you need any further proof here’s some Bubba on YouTube popping a cinderblock with a dinky little 9mm highpower.

So what we’ve got here is some prime, grade A horse manure. Using a .50 machine gun or a 40mm automatic grenade launcher for counterinsurgency is not only stupid it’s sheer lunacy. Hosing down the joint when someone goes “behind a cinder block wall” is a good recipe for losing a counterinsurgency, because either of those weapon systems will surely “take the wall out” in addition to taking out the wall behind that one, and the one behind that and the one behind that. If it’s a 40mm grenade it will probably go through a few walls and then blow up. If this sounds like a good way to win hearts in minds in a crowded urban area then… well you probably belong in Army logistics.

Surely no one in the Army actually believes this. But they will merily feed it to the clueless wonks in the media who will regurgitate it for the rubes and most notably the rubes in Congress. Likely these systems are in dire need of replacement. The M-2 entered service in 1921 — no, that is not a typo — and during my days in green I was assigned a few that I would be willing to swear came from the original factory order. The MK-19 is an atrocious beast to clean and maintain under the best of conditions. Having lugged a weapon through the middle East sand let me assure you that is about as far removed from the best of conditions you are likely to find.

What the order comes down to is simply stuff wearing out and breaking and the request is being couched as needed for “counterinsurgency.” From one end, it is an innocuous justification for things they need. From the other end, and this is the slippery part, it is the manifestation of a trend to label anything and everything as counterinsurgency as a way to AVOID justification. The F-22? Need it for counterinsurgency! Future Combat Systems? Gotta have that for counterinsurgency! The USS Ronald Reagan? We’ve got all those insurgent carrier groups out there. You don’t want them winning, do you?

The entire selling point of the new counterinsurgency strategy was that it existed outside of the bureaucratic brontosaurus of the Pentagon. If it has been munched up already then the future is exceedingly doubtful.

Don’t second guess the Special Forces guys!

March 11th, 2008, 8:51 am by jhogg

Seriously. These guys are the best at what they do. This isn’t some vague term, as in “they are one of the best,” or “they are pretty good,” or “gee, golly, these guys are neat.” The army Special Forces and Delta operators are the best at what they do.
That being said, why someone with a Meritorious Freeway Driving medal, carpal tunnel and fallen arches is allowed to jerk the tools out of these guys’ hands is just a freaking mystery.

Via the Army Times

The Army has stripped the Asymmetric Warfare Group of its weapon of choice - the Heckler & Koch 416 - saying that its mission requires the unique outfit to carry the standard issue M4 carbine.

And what a beauty the Heckler and Koch 416 is!

The decision reverses a policy that allowed the AWG to buy 416s instead of carrying M4s when it was established three years ago to help senior Army leaders find new tactics and technologies to make soldiers more lethal in combat.

Hi! I don't work because my gas system is crappy!

Members of the AWG have declined to comment on the issue, but sources in the

416s, arguing that they outperform the Army’s

community told Army Times that the unit fought to keep its several hundred M4 and require far less maintenance.

I don’t know who finds themselves qualified to argue with these guys about what weapons work best. I’m more than willing to have a discussion about what I do. But if you try to criticize my writing style while being illiterate, yourself, I’m not likely to take you seriously. The guys of Army Special Operations don’t use their weapons in some vague laboratory setting with such and yon variable to determine functionality in this and that environmental condition, they take their boom sticks to far and nasty places and use them to complete their missions and come home.

Having hauled the M-16 (which, internally is the exact same as the M-4) through Kuwaiti dust storms, I can attest to the fact that the damn thing didn’t work as intended. It jammed, it fouled, it would fire, at most, two shots before remedial action was required to get it to go BANG again. The crappy direct impingement gas system, as opposed to piston-driven, simply lacks the reliability to perform in the field. This has been proven and tested time and time again.

More from the Army Times:

This is the latest round of controversy surrounding the M4 since late November, when the weapon finished last in an Army reliability test against several other carbines.

The M4 suffered more stoppages than the combined number of jams by the three other competitors - the Heckler & Koch XM8, FNH USA’s Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle (SCAR) and the H&K 416.

Army weapons officials agreed to perform the dust test at the request of Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., in July. Coburn took up the issue following a Feb. 26 Army Times report on moves by elite Army Special Forces units to ditch the M4 in favor of carbines they consider more reliable. Since then, Coburn has questioned the Army’s plans to spend more than $300 million to purchase M4s through fiscal 2009 rather than considering newer and possibly better weapons available on the commercial market.

This is the same Army full of fire and brimstone for Rumsfeldian “transformation.” How about we worry less about a go-go gadget army and more about the basics, like functioning rifles.

Future Combat System - unfunding dead weight

February 11th, 2008, 10:20 am by jhogg

Congress is looking at the Army’s Future Combat System with an increasingly jaundiced eye. Recently, they threatened to strip $900 million from the program, prompting the Army to send some suits down to the Hill to threaten dread results.

Last year, lawmakers cut funding for FCS as they faced mounting pressure to protect troops in combat. They initially tried to “reallocate” as much as $900 million that was earmarked for the program to help pay for body armor for soldiers, up-armored Humvees, Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) trucks, and other war needs.

Army officials balked, sounding what one staffer on Capitol Hill called a “general alarm,” and dispatched several senior Army officers to the Hill to repair the damage. They feared that the cuts were the first of attempts to entirely kill off the program. Their efforts led to much of the funding being restored and ultimately only about $200 million was cut from the program.

Cut it now or cut it later, it really doesn’t matter. At current funding levels, the U.S. Army will field Future Combat Systems right about the time the sun supernovas. The bottom line, is that this program represents the “legacy” of a wide swath of military officials, just as it represents billions of dollars in government contracts.

As for needing the tools to win in the “next-generation of warfare;” I would recommend the history section at the Library of Congress. The tools are all there and have been polished by thousands of years of human history. Certainly, Army officials salivate over Robocop warriors marauding, casualty-less, through the bad guys, and it sure sounds like a good time. Reality, however, has a way of injecting itself into these fantasies.

More reefs

February 8th, 2008, 10:20 am by jhogg

The Navy is now looking at buying more Nuke boats.  Eat your heart out, War Nerd.

What can you do with a speed boat?

February 7th, 2008, 11:04 am by jhogg

Sink an aircraft carrier, if you’re smart about it.

Back in 2002, the U.S. Navy ran the “Millennium Challenge” to simulate war in the Persian Gulf. As anyone who has been involved in these things can tell you, the ultimate conclusion is that BLUEFOR (the good guys) will emerge grandly victorious, decimate the OPFOR (the bad guys) and prove once again that nothing can stand in the way of the U.S. military, least of all, the U.S. military.

But to play the role of Bad Guy in Charge (BGIC) for the Millennium Challenge, the Navy hauled up a crusty, retired leatherneck by the name of Paul Van Riper. Van Riper wasn’t even given the benefit of a proper military for the simulation — No real navy, no real air force, just some old boats, propeller planes and archaic surface-to-surface missiles. The general plan was that Van Riper would put up a token resistance before Johnny came marchin’ right on through, haroo, haroo.

At what should have been the end of the exercise, 2/3 of the big, fancy U.S. Navy fleet was nestled cozily along the bottom of the Persian Gulf.

Since defeat deviated from the script - the Navy simply refloated the fleet and continued along the simulation as if nothing ever happened. Van Riper, refusing to play the sucker, stumped out of the exercise. Gary Brecher, was the first to point out what a huge freaking deal (warning this site is a goldmine of information mixed in with big boy language and occasional human anatomy) this is for U.S. operations. The War Nerd reprises his assessment of the whole thing (and takes a sharp jab at the big media (which caught on about six years too late) here.

Naval theorist who are not posed to make money on ship construction have been claiming the days of the surface navies are well-past. William Lind recount’s Admiral Hyman Rickover’s forecast in his column, “Davy Jones’ Locker.” (This Web site is safe for all audiences.)

About thirty years ago, my first boss, Senator Robert Taft Jr. of Ohio, asked Admiral Hyman Rickover how long he thought the U.S. aircraft carriers would last in the war with the Soviet navy, which was largely a submarine navy. Rickover’s answer, on the record in a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee, was, “About two days.” The Committee, needless to say, went on to approve buying more carriers.

Barring modern U-Boat warfare, bad guys the world over are learning that the best way to beat high-technology, is to go for technology so low as to be almost primitive. In Sri Lanka, the Tamil Tigers found out that the government’s high-performance jet fighters are great against other jet fighters but lousy against dinky propeller planes that can fly slow enough to make tracking a pain and low enough that shooting them out of the sky might pose more of a threat than letting them toss homemade bombs and Molotov cocktails out of the window. (This too, courtesy of Brecher.)

When we’re staring at one of the largest defense budgets since world war 2, it’s sobering to to realize that our enemies are very capable of doing more with less. The U.S. public has a very strong opinion about the invulnerability of its military. It’s hard to tell what effect the USS Coral Reef might have.

Another F-15 gone in a splash

February 4th, 2008, 12:09 pm by jhogg

Another F-15 has gone down, this time near Hawaii.

Via the Air Force Times

By Sudhin Thanawala - The Associated Press
Posted : Monday Feb 4, 2008 6:39:04 EST

HONOLULU - A fighter jet among a troubled fleet of F-15s that recently returned to the skies plunged into the ocean Friday, but the pilot ejected in time and was rescued shortly afterward.

A Coast Guard helicopter plucked the Hawaii National Guard pilot from the ocean. He was taken to a hospital and was listed in good condition.

The pilot, whose identity was not released, had extensive flight experience, said Maj. Gen. Robert G.F. Lee, the Hawaii National Guard commander.

By far the most important thing, is that that pilot was alright. This is easily forgotten when we start talking about million dollar losses.

A distant second, is that American lawmakers have some tough issues to face. We can pretend that the F-15 is going to last until the slated retirement of 2025, but pretend may be all that we can do. These birds are getting old and the Air Force maintainers are working like dogs to keep these machines in the air.

The recent defense budget clocks in at a sobering $515.4 billion. The last time our defense spending looked like this the country was in full mobilization for total war. This procurement blitz, which I am very proud to announce I have dubbed the “Splurge,” will fetch the Air Force four additional F-22 Raptors for the year. But the Defense Department is not budging on the F-22 target number of 183, and while no one is disputing that the Raptor is awesome, like angry Ninja awesome, replacing almost 700 F-15s with 183 F-22s does not jibe. At the risk of summoning the angry spirits of communists past, “Quantity has a quality all its own.”

We are going to have to find out what’s important to us and let our lawmakers know. It is senseless to say that we shouldn’t “play politics” with our military, sense deciding funding of what and how much is inherently political. We’ve got a while to wait before the F-35 enters the stage, and relying on 30 year old fighter for our air defense is looking increasingly shaky.

ADVERTISEMENT 
ADVERTISEMENT 
powered by
google
Search
        Search: Web    Site