20 Sep. 2011
By Jeff Huber
I’m not sure what made me think that taking time
off to work on Sandbox Generals, (the sequel to Bathtub Admirals)
would get me away from fixating on current headlines. Last Saturday the
thousands of days late and billions of dollars short New York Times
editorial board ran an editorial excoriating “Runaway Spending on War Contractors.”
I owe it all to Michael R. Gordon and Judith Miller of the New York Times. |
“Tales of waste, fraud and mayhem by private
contractors have been commonplace during 10 years of military operations in
Afghanistan and Iraq,” the editorial they tell us. “Now a Congressional
study commission has put a ‘conservative’ estimate on waste of between $31
billion and $60 billion in the $206 billion paid to contractors since the start
of the two wars.” The rag-of-record’s editors also note that according to
the study, “Excessive reliance on badly supervised private contractors
indulging ‘vast amounts of spending for no benefit’ is the heart of the
problem.”
Psst. New York Times. The heart
of the problem is that Saddam Hussein wasn't trying to get yellowcake from Niger like you said he was
back in 2002. Are we supposed to get all het up by your editorial about contractors
making big war bucks thanks to the propaganda you fed the country?
Lamentably, we’ve been in a wartime economy since
the Second World War on Evil, and even though that book-of-matches approach to
fiscal policy is finally turning our fingers into Chicken McNuggets, there’s no
alternative strategy that anyone is likely to implement. Redirect all of
that defense spending into domestic infrastructure project jobs that can’t be
sent offshore because the workers have to be here to work on the
infrastructure? What for? We’re still making money pig knuckle over
ham hock on war. Retooling an industry to make a new product when the old
product is still profitable is a bad business decision. Why do you think
we’re still consuming oil and tobacco fumes?
Here’s a sneak preview from this week’s labors on Generals, an Orwellian screed on how
things got the way they are. Be advised, this is a rough draft (!!!).
The WWEIII (The Third World War on Evil, aka the Cold War on Evil aka
the CWoE) everybody agreed to plan for but never have after everybody agreed
not to blow up the world with nukes first centered on a WWEI style trench war
with tanks in the middle of Europe. But the action in the center ring was
actually just a sideshow to justify the air and naval hootenannies that would
break out like herpes everywhere else in the world.
That was the war the Navy and the Air Force would fight, a peripheral
war that actually had little to do with the stated Evil Empire objective of
expanding its client state buffer to include Western Europe so as to ensure no
more Hitlers or Napoleons would come along and destroy their armies and
countries in a vain attempt to capture Moscow again. Jack supposed that
made the objective of us Americans and our little NATO (“Not A True
Organization,” according to Jack) buddies was to ensure that another Hitler or
Napoleon did come along and try to wreck the world in an
attempt to capture Moscow. That didn’t make any sense, Jack ceded, until
you considered that the objective of global thermo nuclear-war between the ESSR
(Empire of Semi-Socialist Republics) countries and the loose league of American
customer states was to destroy the world before the other guys did.
While the high-tech conventional war was peripheral to the opposing
physical objectives of expanding or limiting Russia’s European real estate
holdings, the war’s overall strategic objective quickly evolved into an
economic one, a contest to which of the two diametrically smoke-and-mirror
economic systems could outlast the other. So seeing which economic system
could develop and field and maintain the most outlandishly exorbitant air and
sea weapon systems that would never actually be used for their designed purpose
became the modus of combat in what Jack came to know of as “play war.”
Both sides of the CWoE justified lavishing precious national wealth on
extravagant weaponry by using it in the dirty little third world proxy wars
they suckered each other into from time to time, in Korea and Vietnam and
Bananastan and elsewhere, but pricey mayhem machines had little affect on the
outcomes of these teakettle conflicts. Third world wars were dumb soldier
intensive affairs that mainly required low-dollar carbon-based air-breathing
weapon systems largely procured from the lower and middle classes by means of
conscription or the lure of stable employment with benefits.
A key factor of top-drawer air and naval gizmology was not merely that
it was expensive to produce, although it most certainly was. The beauty
part, the piece of resistance of all this, was that however much any given
piece of this high-tech crap cost to make, it was boatloads more expensive to
maintain, and the older it got, the more it cost to keep in operation.
Better yet was that the more a given gizmo cost to make and maintain, the
longer it was expected to last, which made it even magnitudes more to make and
oodles more to keep operating. So if a flying submarine cost a butt-zillion
Houdinis to make, it cost ten butt-zillion Houdinis to keep flying and diving
for the thirty years it was supposed to last, at which time it would become
eligible for a life extension overhaul that would screw it up so bad it would
need two or three follow-on overhauls to fix the first one. By the time
the damn thing was finally turned into a museum in some coastal Podunk that
needed a tourist attraction, the flying sub will have cost an amount roughly
equivalent to what the Gross National Product was in the year it was built.
The Evil Empiricals followed the same general force strategy vector
but in a somewhat different manner. Their working class enlisted stiffs
who maintained their gear weren’t nearly as well educated as our working class
enlisted stiffs, so they built stuff three or four times as solid as it needed
to be, realizing that when it broke it was broke-dick and nobody was going to
fix it. Hence, rather than spend more Carnacs trying to fix broke-dick
stuff they just made new stuff.
A by-product of that practice was that our intelligence weenies could
say with a fair amount of accuracy (for a change) that they had a lot more
stuff than we had, and we could turn that information around to justify
building more expensive stuff to give ourselves the so called “technology edge”
to bridge the “numerical superiority gap,” two buzz phrases that Flip often
wished he’d been old enough to have originally stolen them from whoever their
real originator had stolen them from. It didn’t matter that their numerical
superiority gap was a de facto hoax since more than 99 percent of their gear
was rusting on the flight line, sinking at the pier, or burning in
Chechnya.
That’s not to say that our gear was all immaculate and purring like a
fat tomcat getting its dick scratched. Throughout our careers, when Jack
and I went on play war deployments overseas, we were lucky if half of the jets
in our air wing were fully mission capable (aka FMC)—i.e., they flew and all
their radars and weapons and so on worked like they were supposed to—at any
given time. Squadron skippers typically reported a 75 percent FMC rate
because reporting anything lower was like sinking the teeth of their careers
into the chewy end of a shotgun barrel. Maintenance supervisors knew this
and ensured that by the end of any given day the paperwork would reflect a 75
percent FMC rate, even if the spare parts that would make a given aircraft FMC
weren’t onboard the ship and wouldn’t arrive for weeks if ever.
It must have been some time around the VWoE (Vietnam War on Evil) that
air wing maintenance officers and ship supply corps gonifs cut the dope deal
where as long as a part was on order everyone would pretend like it was on hand
whether it was or not, thus making both the maintenance and supply pukes look
good without actually having to do their jobs. Squadron skippers looked
the other way because phantom parting made them look good, and air wing
commanders looked the other way because it made them look good too, and the
same thing held true all the way up the chain of command. And there was
little fear that anyone would ever blow the whistle because everybody was in on
the scam.
Postscript: Monday morning the PPPP
(Pentarchy’s Primary Propaganda Platform) trotted out the crown jewel of the
information campaign to preserve the defense budget. “Retiree Benefits for the Military Could Face Cuts”
reads the headline of a Times story that says if the Pentagon
has to face fiscal reductions, the burden will fall on retirees, whose benefits
the bull feather merchant marines are now calling a “social program.”
The military’s spin physicians’
main assumption is that we can keep our present and future wars going with
“support the troops” brainwash while we cut back on the support we promised the
troops of our past wars. That won’t hurt recruiting as long as the
economy makes joining the military our nation’s most attractive career
option. If irony were alive and with us it would smirk at the fact
that the head-sex fiends who cook up this scare tactic strategy will themselves
get screwed if retiree benefit cuts come to pass.
Mind you now, if we cut retiree
benefits we’ll still have flying submarines, and stealth airplanes that are too
expensive to actually use in wartime because they’ll shoot themselves down over
enemy territory due to design flaws, and multi-billion dollar bomber drones
that fly halfway across the world from mega-billion dollar aircraft carriers
that are already halfway across the world.
JLH
Commander Jeff Huber, U.S. Navy
(Retired) writes at Pen and Sword.
Jeff's novel Bathtub Admirals (Kunati
Books), a lampoon on America's rise to global dominance, is on sale now.
Nice to have you back from your vacation.
ReplyDeleteGood start to the new book.
As to the cutting of benefits to military retirees, all one can say is WHAT? As in WTF!!!!!????? Just how is that bullshit "supporting the troops"?
What is the new slogan then? Come fight our damn fool wars of choice so we can CUT your retirement pay? The only way they will get new recruits with that "strategy" is if the military is the only place that is hiring.
Well, they are all set to cut Social Security and Medicare so why not cut military benefits. What is next, a pay cut for active duty military? Now THAT would really show how much (little) these damn jack asses who populate our congress care about "supporting the troops".
America, what a country.
semper fi........yeah sure thing.
The infuriating part is that Uncle Bob and Moon Mullen have been actively participating in this black propaganda campaign from the get go, and nobody is calling them on it.
ReplyDeleteWell, shit, Huber. We fucked up. We didn't make 07. Thanks to some nifty legerdemain they pulled off with the criminal Congress, the boys with stars no longer even live in the same world as the rest of us. They can do 40 years, retire at 100% and then suck off the contractor teat. Why in the world would Moon Mullen care about the likes of us?
ReplyDeleteYou know, they changed that retirement stuff because everybody knew how much we were hurting for generals and admirals. Thank God they did it. I mean, we might have really been fucking wars up or something if our government hadn't stepped in to take care of the head office guys.
Next war, everybody's going to be a general or an admiral. New DOD directive coming out. Of course, that'll be the only ones left.
The cost estimation part you have there, would have been a hoot to pass around, back when I was an operations research analyst at the engineering cost estimation and analysis dept of the Navy. There was plenty of estimation but not so much calibration based on actuals. We never saw any actuals feedback that I can remember, as long as I was there.
ReplyDeletePublius: maybe then they'll have to give huge bonuses to privates to keep them in the service.
ReplyDeleteE&R:Yeah, a spread like 31-60 billion gives one pause to consider just how accurate the estimate can be. If your mechanic gave estimates like "somwheres about between $300 and $600" you wouldn't think much of him, would you?
Along with the "big" front page story on The Huffington Post this morning about all the billions of dollars worth of military equipment we are leaving in Iraq, because we don't want to ship it home....... I found this link....
ReplyDeleteI thought you might enjoy.
http://www.desmogblog.com/pentagon-back-tried-and-true-pr-tactic-greenwashing
Heh. Thank, EL.
ReplyDeleteJ