Rhino
03-09-2001, 05:45 AM
BEST45CAL
Forum Host Beastie
posts: 329
(3/4/01 4:41:17 am)
| Del All
Bush Faces Tough Military Budget Calls
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saturday, March 3, 2001
By Robert Burns
WASHINGTON — President Bush is facing some tough choices on the future of big-ticket military weapons.
The Air Force's $62 billion F-22 stealth fighter program, the Navy's $25 billion DD-21 destroyer, the Marine Corps' troubled $41 billion V-22 Osprey program and the developing $200 billion Joint Strike Fighter fleet are all candidates for the budget ax.
Bush has made clear that his first priority for the military is to put more money in the pockets of American troops and their families. The politically tougher choices of where to invest in weapons modernization are yet to be made, with the exception of Bush's commitment to a national missile defense — which could cost $60 billion or more.
"In our broader transformation effort, we must put strategy first, then spending," Bush told Congress this week. On Wednesday the administration unveiled a $310 billion defense budget but included few spending specifics; details are expected to come in April.
During visits to military bases in mid-February, Bush said the advances he foresees in defense technologies will require "great effort and new spending."
To afford those increases — and to fit Pentagon priorities with the Pentagon strategy being built by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld — some weapons programs presumably will get cut, delayed or scaled back.
The question is which ones.
"They don't want to commit themselves to anything until this (Rumsfeld) review is finished," said Jack Spencer, a defense analyst at the Heritage Foundation, a think tank.
Rumsfeld has called on a range of expertise inside and outside the Pentagon to look at such central issues as a new strategic concept of what the military should be used for; ways of improving Pentagon financial management; prospects for reducing U.S. nuclear forces, and the most effective approach to building a defense against ballistic missiles for the United States and its allies.
Until preliminary results are in — perhaps as early as April — neither Rumsfeld nor the president is likely to answer the many questions that have been raised about the future of major weapons programs.
Among those thought to be in jeopardy:
— The V-22 Osprey, a centerpiece of the future of Marine Corps aviation. The hybrid aircraft, which takes off and lands like a helicopter and flies like an airplane, was in trouble even before Bush took office. After a December crash — the second fatal Osprey accident in nine months — the Pentagon created an outside panel to review the entire program. At stake: a decision on whether to begin full-scale production. The Marines are desperate to get a fleet of Ospreys to replace Vietnam-era CH-46E combat assault helicopters and CH-53D transport helicopters, which are breaking down at an alarming rate.
Vice President Dick Cheney tried to kill the V-22 program in 1989 when he was defense secretary, but Congress rescued it. So far $12 billion has been spent on it; another $29 billion is planned.
— The next-generation strike aircraft, known as the Joint Strike Fighter, with a price tag of $200 billion. The plan, still on the drawing boards, is to build versions for the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps. William Cohen, the defense secretary during President Clinton's second term, called the plane the "only affordable solution" to sustaining the military's fighter force through the year 2050.
Andrew Krepinevich, director of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, says Bush should cancel the Joint Strike Fighter and put more resources into developing "unmanned combat air vehicles," the kind of leap-ahead technology that the president has said he finds attractive.
— The Navy's DD-21, a next-generation destroyer tailored for land attack warfare. The Navy wants to build 32 of these, with construction to begin in 2005, at a total cost of $25 billion.
Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute think tank says the DD-21 is the most vulnerable of the Navy's ship construction projects, although he notes that politics could play an important role: the two shipyards involved are in Maine — home of Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee — and Mississippi, home of Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, also a Republican.
— The Air Force's F-22 Raptor stealth fighter, to replace the F-15E Strike Eagle. The price tag is $62 billion for 339 planes, and it is priority No. 1 for the Air Force. If push comes to shove, Thompson thinks the Air Force would advocate keeping the F-22 program at the expense of the Joint Strike Fighter.
"Wise men learn more from fools than fools learn from the wise."
Forum Host Beastie
posts: 329
(3/4/01 4:41:17 am)
| Del All
Bush Faces Tough Military Budget Calls
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saturday, March 3, 2001
By Robert Burns
WASHINGTON — President Bush is facing some tough choices on the future of big-ticket military weapons.
The Air Force's $62 billion F-22 stealth fighter program, the Navy's $25 billion DD-21 destroyer, the Marine Corps' troubled $41 billion V-22 Osprey program and the developing $200 billion Joint Strike Fighter fleet are all candidates for the budget ax.
Bush has made clear that his first priority for the military is to put more money in the pockets of American troops and their families. The politically tougher choices of where to invest in weapons modernization are yet to be made, with the exception of Bush's commitment to a national missile defense — which could cost $60 billion or more.
"In our broader transformation effort, we must put strategy first, then spending," Bush told Congress this week. On Wednesday the administration unveiled a $310 billion defense budget but included few spending specifics; details are expected to come in April.
During visits to military bases in mid-February, Bush said the advances he foresees in defense technologies will require "great effort and new spending."
To afford those increases — and to fit Pentagon priorities with the Pentagon strategy being built by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld — some weapons programs presumably will get cut, delayed or scaled back.
The question is which ones.
"They don't want to commit themselves to anything until this (Rumsfeld) review is finished," said Jack Spencer, a defense analyst at the Heritage Foundation, a think tank.
Rumsfeld has called on a range of expertise inside and outside the Pentagon to look at such central issues as a new strategic concept of what the military should be used for; ways of improving Pentagon financial management; prospects for reducing U.S. nuclear forces, and the most effective approach to building a defense against ballistic missiles for the United States and its allies.
Until preliminary results are in — perhaps as early as April — neither Rumsfeld nor the president is likely to answer the many questions that have been raised about the future of major weapons programs.
Among those thought to be in jeopardy:
— The V-22 Osprey, a centerpiece of the future of Marine Corps aviation. The hybrid aircraft, which takes off and lands like a helicopter and flies like an airplane, was in trouble even before Bush took office. After a December crash — the second fatal Osprey accident in nine months — the Pentagon created an outside panel to review the entire program. At stake: a decision on whether to begin full-scale production. The Marines are desperate to get a fleet of Ospreys to replace Vietnam-era CH-46E combat assault helicopters and CH-53D transport helicopters, which are breaking down at an alarming rate.
Vice President Dick Cheney tried to kill the V-22 program in 1989 when he was defense secretary, but Congress rescued it. So far $12 billion has been spent on it; another $29 billion is planned.
— The next-generation strike aircraft, known as the Joint Strike Fighter, with a price tag of $200 billion. The plan, still on the drawing boards, is to build versions for the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps. William Cohen, the defense secretary during President Clinton's second term, called the plane the "only affordable solution" to sustaining the military's fighter force through the year 2050.
Andrew Krepinevich, director of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, says Bush should cancel the Joint Strike Fighter and put more resources into developing "unmanned combat air vehicles," the kind of leap-ahead technology that the president has said he finds attractive.
— The Navy's DD-21, a next-generation destroyer tailored for land attack warfare. The Navy wants to build 32 of these, with construction to begin in 2005, at a total cost of $25 billion.
Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute think tank says the DD-21 is the most vulnerable of the Navy's ship construction projects, although he notes that politics could play an important role: the two shipyards involved are in Maine — home of Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee — and Mississippi, home of Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, also a Republican.
— The Air Force's F-22 Raptor stealth fighter, to replace the F-15E Strike Eagle. The price tag is $62 billion for 339 planes, and it is priority No. 1 for the Air Force. If push comes to shove, Thompson thinks the Air Force would advocate keeping the F-22 program at the expense of the Joint Strike Fighter.
"Wise men learn more from fools than fools learn from the wise."