[iwar] [fc:Remaking.The.Military]

From: Fred Cohen (fc@all.net)
Date: 2001-10-02 05:31:59


Return-Path: <sentto-279987-2591-1002025956-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com>
Delivered-To: fc@all.net
Received: from 204.181.12.215 by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.1.0) for fc@localhost (single-drop); Tue, 02 Oct 2001 05:33:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 11794 invoked by uid 510); 2 Oct 2001 12:32:45 -0000
Received: from n33.groups.yahoo.com (216.115.96.83) by 204.181.12.215 with SMTP; 2 Oct 2001 12:32:45 -0000
X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-2591-1002025956-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com
Received: from [10.1.4.55] by n33.groups.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Oct 2001 12:32:36 -0000
X-Sender: fc@big.all.net
X-Apparently-To: iwar@onelist.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_4_1); 2 Oct 2001 12:32:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 11284 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2001 12:32:35 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Oct 2001 12:32:35 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO big.all.net) (65.0.156.78) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 Oct 2001 12:32:32 -0000
Received: (from fc@localhost) by big.all.net (8.9.3/8.7.3) id FAA02707 for iwar@onelist.com; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 05:31:59 -0700
Message-Id: <200110021231.FAA02707@big.all.net>
To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List)
Organization: I'm not allowed to say
X-Mailer: don't even ask
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1]
From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net>
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:iwar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 05:31:59 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [iwar] [fc:Remaking.The.Military]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

New York Times
September 30, 2001
Remaking The Military

Tomorrow, the Defense Department will formally unveil the long-range
planning report Congress requires every four years.  Advance accounts
suggest that it will reflect some of the new attention directed to
homeland defense, fighting terrorism and growing instability in Central
Asia.  Yet it is already evident that bolder changes will be needed. 
Military responses to terrorism will bear little resemblance to the
cold-war-era conflicts American forces are still being trained and
equipped to fight.  The Bush administration has already acted in
response to the Sept.  11 terrorist attacks by improving airline safety,
demanding more timely intelligence warnings of terrorist plots and
dispatching military forces toward Afghanistan.  But the Pentagon also
needs to be planning for the longer term.  For years, far-sighted
military analysts have been prodding the Pentagon to reorganize and
re-equip American forces to make them more mobile and flexible and to
let battlefield commanders make fuller use of electronically gathered
information.  That advice is now particularly timely. 

The main threat to American security no longer comes from a superpower
rival with state-of-the- art fighter jets, submarine fleets and tanks. 
Increasingly, it comes from a range of smaller, militarily weaker
countries and international terrorists.  These new foes may try to
offset America's advantages in high-tech weaponry with low-tech
improvisations like those used on Sept.  11. 

To fight these enemies, America will call more frequently on its special
operations units, like the Green Berets, Army Rangers and Navy Seals,
along with 82nd Airborne paratroopers, who are trained to seize
airfields that can be used as staging areas for military operations. 
These units, some of which may have already run reconnaissance in
Afghanistan, need enhanced training and equipment. 

There is also a need for additional C-17 transport planes to deliver
troops abroad quickly, as well as unmanned reconnaissance craft for
24-hour surveillance of remote regions like Afghanistan. 

In the longer term, all three services need to adjust their equipment
purchases to the needs of mobile, long-distance 21st-century warfare. 
Their budgets are badly distorted by commitments to expensive weapons
designed for the cold war. 

The Army: Kosovo should have taught the Army that its highest priority
needs to be lightweight, fast-moving armor that can be airlifted into
battle zones far from existing American military bases.  That is just
what may be needed if the administration decides to use ground forces
against a government sheltering terrorists.  The Army's planned
lightweight combat vehicle will fill this need, but production is not
due to begin until 2012.  The Army needs to speed up this schedule and
should cut back or eliminate the heavy and gadget- laden Crusader
artillery system to help pay for it. 

The Air Force: The Air Force needs to increase its ability to operate in
the absence of local bases near conflict zones.  Yet it is devoting most
of its procurement budget to two relatively short-range tactical
fighters to replace the F-15.  At most one is needed.  The F-22 should
be phased out in favor of the more versatile Joint Strike Fighter and
the savings should be used to buy more long-range bombers and unmanned
craft that can be used for striking enemy targets as well as
reconnaissance. 

The Navy: One of the Navy's main missions in fighting terrorism will be
delivering aircraft and cruise missiles to the vicinity of combat areas. 
It also needs to maintain its long-term capacity to engage other naval
powers.  Traditional aircraft carrier groups are still useful for both
purposes, although for strikes deep into landlocked Afghanistan,
carrier-based jets would need in-flight refueling.  Instead of investing
its purchasing dollars in the expensive new DD-21, a large and
potentially vulnerable surface ship, the Navy should buy smaller,
cheaper arsenal ships, which are essentially floating platforms for
launching missiles.  It should also accelerate conversion of its
unneeded nuclear missile submarines into stealthy platforms for
launching cruise missiles.  Each such submarine can fire 154 cruises,
more than two-thirds the firing capacity of a seven-ship carrier battle
group. 

Americans are ready to rebuild the nation's security.  The Pentagon must
see to it that military spending goes to the right places. 


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get your FREE VeriSign guide to security solutions for your web site: encrypting transactions, securing intranets, and more!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/UnN2wB/m5_CAA/yigFAA/kgFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

------------------
http://all.net/ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2001-12-31 20:59:53 PST