> Charles et.al.Thank you for posting this article. Eisenhower warned about this +40 years ago but...A Happy Christ-Mass to all in our CyberFellowship.GDVW+ > Brothers: > > I have snipped the bottom 2/3's of this article from the Sunday New York > Times which examines company by company, the unnecessary pork barrel > spending of the current congress and the Pentagon in regard to weapons > systems. Only the lead paragraphs remain, which summarize how the > administration's efforts of restraining wasteful military spending has > been thwarted. > > Money that could have been used to provide aid for seniors in regard to > prescription drugs is being wasted on weapons systems that are > obsolescent, won't be used, and in some cases, won't be built. > > The only system, out of dozens, that was cut out was the Crusader > Cannon, too heavy to move to a battlefield. Even that company will > receive $475 million for future development of a system that will > (hopefully), not be built. > > In this era of one-party government, the only restraint on the raid on > the treasury is the Executive Branch of Government. > > The real test of President Bush in the next two years will be the > management of the economy. HOw frugal will the adminstration be? How > often will the veto be used to stop the waste of resources? The > president has done some reshuffling of people who deal with the > economy. Lets hope that more will be done in this regard than the > symbolic "turning out the White house lights" that occured in a > previous administration. These folks need to be burning the midnight > oil in search of a way out of the economic quagmire. Our President will > ultimatly have to face down his friends in Congress as he has Sadam. > > > Charles+ > > ---------------------------------------- > December 22, 2002 > So Much for the Plan to Scrap Old Weapons > By LESLIE WAYNE > > > OVER the past year, even as he hunted down terrorists, oversaw lingering > operations in Afghanistan and made plans for a possible invasion of > Iraq, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld was also waging a battle > much closer to home. On that front, pitted against American military > contractors, he has more than met his match. > > This week, Mr. Rumsfeld will deliver to President Bush a $378 billion > military budget that had been trumpeted as a new strategic vision — one > that was to have shaken the relics of cold-war weapons systems > from the national arsenal and replaced them with new, lighter and more > lethal fighting forces. > > Yet it now appears that the military contractors, united with allies in > the Pentagon and Congress in a group known around Washington as the > Iron Triangle, stood up to Mr. Rumsfeld — and won. Weapons systems > that had been on the chopping block have been saved, and others that > many critics say should be consigned to the dustbin of history are > about to receive millions, and in some cases billions, of taxpayers' > dollars. > > "As far as the sweeping, let's-turn-the-place-inside-out changes that > were being proposed, that's just not going to happen," said Byron K. > Callan, a military industry analyst at Merrill Lynch. "The most > interesting thing about this administration and Pentagon is that there > has been a lot of talk, but action only at the margin." > > For two years now, the administration has wanted to make good on Mr. > Bush's campaign promise to modernize the military, even if it meant > skipping a generation of weapons in the works. Despite the attention > the military receives for its high-technology weaponry, billions of > dollars still flow into weapons systems designed to fight the battles > of yesterday — fighter jets built for aerial battles with the Soviets, > warships designed for battles in the open seas. > > For companies like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, General > Dynamics and dozens of others, hundreds of millions of dollars were on > the line every time Mr. Bush talked about modernization. He gave > two major speeches on the subject at the Citadel, one as a candidate and > one last year. His pronouncements were repeated even more forcefully by > Mr. Rumsfeld, who, known for tough decisions, looked as if he could > turn the tough talk into action. > > But it hasn't turned out that way. After canceling one weapons system > last year and saying that six other major ones were on the block, Mr. > Rumsfeld is expected to put forward a budget that is said, by those who > have seen it, to keep the funds flowing to nearly every weapons system > that was up for review. > > The Pentagon will not comment on the budget until its official release. > But barring a last-minute change of heart in the White House, the scope > of military spending appears to be set for the next several years. > > <SNIP> > > _________________________________________________________________ > MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 3 months FREE*. > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus&xAPID=42&PS=47575&PI=7324&DI=7474&SU= > > http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg&HL=1216hotmailtaglines_virusprotection_3mf > > > -- > To unsubscribe, send ANY message to > <faithandlife-unsubscribe@...> ----------------------------------------- This Advent Season our sponsors are selling goods and services you don't want to miss! Support our sponsors with your purchase by clicking here. http://www.catholic.org/clife/advent/specials.php This email was sent using FREE Catholic Online Webmail. Please tell your family, friends and children about COL Webmail! http://webmail.catholic.org/