Top
Search

 

Disclaimer 

In October 2012 our shortened URL (www.thewillandthewallet.org) expired and was purchased by spammers before we were able to reclaim it. Part of their misuse includes redirecting this URL to an imposter site that has advertisements posted in the comment boxes. Stimson is working to take down that site and reclaim the domain name. In the interim, please update your bookmarks accordingly to www.thewillandthewallet.squarespace.com. Thank you all for your patience as we work through this issue.

Picture This

(Gallup)

Wordwise

Anyone who has heard President Dwight Eisenhower's 1961 farewell address knows that there is a political nexus that links the Defense Department to its contractors. But Ike conveniently left out the middle player who makes the game possible: Congress.

Gordon Adams, Foreign Policy

Today's News
Subscription
« The necessary marriage of security assistance | Main | Walks like a duck, talks like a duck »
Friday
Oct212011

One-Third Rule Applies on the Hill

DateFriday, October 21, 2011 at 4:58AM | AuthorBFAD

Congressman Randy Forbes (R-VA) has submitted a resolution listing all the reasons why Congress should not make “further cuts to an already tattered force.”  Among other things, Forbes observes:

  • Whereas over 90 percent of global trade, worth over $14,000,000,000,000, travels by sea;
  • Whereas 75 percent of the world's maritime commerce travels through a small handful of international straits and canals, which function as strategic choke points;
  • Whereas global energy demand is on the rise and a significant portion of future growth is projected to come from maritime nations such as India and China;
  • Whereas the modernization of China's People's Liberation Army appears focused on shifting the military balance in the western Pacific Ocean in a direction unfavorable to United States and regional interests

No prize for guessing the theme – “Don’t cut the Navy” – or why Forbes chose it. 

Newport News and Hampton Roads abut the Virginia 4th and are home to major naval bases and shipbuilding industry.  Forbes’s district certainly has heard the rumors about decommissioning the USS George Washington in 2016.  And other options, like cutting ships from the Ford-class procurement, stretching out the Virginia-class building schedule, or delaying the SSBN(X) purchase are sure to cause far more worry.

But what Forbes omitted from the resolution was just as interesting as what he included – it made no reference to what this all means for the Army or the Air Force.  If he’s not going to defend all of the Services’ equities, why didn’t he sacrifice them to protect the Navy?  Make no mistake, Forbes’ resolution is about subsidy rather than strategy, but the Pentagon still could save money by playing favorites with the Navy. 

Seems that the 1/3 rule mindset applies on Capitol Hill too.

Comments Off

Reader Comments (1)

So I gather we need more U.S. Navy ships to guard all those container ships carrying Chinese products being exported, including Christmeas ornaments to the U.S., and to guard all those oil tankers carrying oil from Angola and the Persian Gulf to China so they can produce those products? Shouldn't we charge the Chinese for that protective service?

October 21, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterHank Gaffney
Comments for this entry have been disabled. Additional comments may not be added to this entry at this time.