TW: This was ironic given this morning's post. The Info Dissemination blogger saw the same article and posted as well with the difference that he knows much more about the Navy than I do. Yet, the conclusion is the same. As you can tell the LCS (littoral combatant ship) is not one of the blogger's favorite ships.
The point is how pandering flows both ways in government leading to sub-optimal results, this is not a partisan issue. If folks wants improved government we need to improve the processes.
From Information Dissemination:
"...Anytime ADM Mullen is acting in his role as CJCS for the wars, I think Mullen is excellent. With that said, anytime Mullen is speaking for the Navy, he doesn't do the Navy any favors.
Shelby also coaxed Mullen to praise Alabama's very own littoral combat ships.
"Could you tell us here the advantages that the Navy will gain once the service begins to utilize the LCS?" he asked."Okay,"
Mullen obliged. "I need the LCS at sea, deployed today. . . . It offers unique characteristics in terms of speed and mobility and . . ."
"Also firepower," Shelby added.
"And firepower," Mullen agreed. Sigh.
ADM Mullen is a former Chief of Naval Operations who knows the Littoral Combat Ship so well, he signed off on the construction of 2 Littoral Combat Ships. He is currently serving as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the highest ranking military officer in the United States.
Maybe we should just pretend ADM Mullen is ignorant about the LCS, instead of acknowledging Mullen is being dishonest in front of a Senator, telling that Senator exactly what he wanted to hear.
Firepower on the LCS? When a 4 star Admiral is obviously dishonest about a controversial platform in a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing about the capabilities of a program more than 300% over budget, as LCS-2 is, for the purposes of telling a Senator representing his district exactly what he wants to hear, and what you want him to believe, so he will fund your program...
What are people supposed to think? What does this say about the Navy? What does this say about the LCS? What does this say about everyone in OSD, the Senate, the House, the Executive branch, and the Navy who stands quiet when they know this is clear dishonesty? It is impossible to assume that Mullen, the CNO who was so intimately involved in the development of this system, is either ignorant regarding the 'firepower' of the LCS, or actually believes the 57mm and RAM represents firepower.No amount of spin can fix the image of a controversial ship obviously discussed dishonesty in a widely read article in the Washington Post. The LCS earns every bit of skepticism and criticism it gets."
http://www.informationdissemination.net/2009/06/when-smile-and-nod-goes-bad.html
No comments:
Post a Comment