Connect with us


Another Costly Military Spending Misfire



We believe the defense of our nation is a core function of government … always have. We believe there ought to be an Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps, and we believe each of these service branches ought to be accountable to its commander and chief (a.k.a. the President of the United States) via a U.S. Department of Defense.

And like other core functions of government, we believe this department ought to be funded adequately to achieve its mission.

Our beef? When this department engages in out-of-control, totally unaccountable spending – and when its resources are tragically misapplied toward conflicts which lack a compelling national interest. That’s why we’re so hard on neocon whores like U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (RINO-S.C.) – because for all their flag-waving and war-mongering you never hear them decrying the rampant unnecessary spending that occurs within the U.S. Armed Forces.

One prime example? The F-35 program – an effort to equip our military with next generation fighter jets. In 2001, the Pentagon announced plans to build 2,866 of these jets at a total cost of $233 billion. As of last summer, however, it was promising fewer than 2,500 jets at a total cost of $400 billion. In other words, the cost per aircraft has more than doubled.

Not only that, the F-35 program continues to be marred by technical problems.

Another example of catastrophic mismanagement? The Littoral Combat Ship – a small, shallow water vessel designed to provide support for mine-clearing, sub-hunting and rescue operations. Oh … and starring roles in government’s “War on Drugs” as well as the dispensing of “foreign aid,” two things taxpayers shouldn’t be subsidizing at all.

Anyway, the Littoral Combat Ship – known in the U.S. Navy as the “Little Crappy Ship” – has been another case study in mismanagement. Since the $37 billion program’s inception in 2005, the cost per ship has more than doubled to $440 million according to Bloomberg. Not only that, both the steel- and aluminum-hulled versions of the ship are experiencing serious structural problems due to design flaws.

Ready for more bad news?

According to a new U.S. Navy report, the “Little Crappy Ship” lacks the firepower it needs to successfully complete the missions it has been tasked with. In other words this incredibly costly program has labored to produce … a dud.

“(The ship) is not expected to be survivable in that it is not expected to maintain mission capability after taking a significant hit in a hostile combat environment,” a weapons tester said.

Wait … what?

“Not expected to be survivable?” 

“Not expected to maintain mission capability?”

Then with all due respect, what in the fuck did taxpayers just spend $37 billion for????

Making matters worse, the “Little Crappy Ship” cannot be easily redesigned to add sufficient defensive weaponry – meaning it will likely have to be replaced by a new vessel.

Astounding, huh? But hey, God forbid anybody suggest a responsible approach to military spending (or for that matter a responsible approach to the application of force). Because opposing the use of weapons that don’t work (at twice their budgeted cost) in combat zones were we have no business engaged would be unpatriotic.

Hell, even “conservative” think tanks will tell you that.