<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>gdp's Comments</title>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<link>https://www.intensedebate.com/users/5054069</link>
		<description>Comments by donbacon</description>
<item>
<title>DoD Buzz : Defense Hawks Slam Obama for Vetoing Defense Bill</title>
<link>http://50.87.248.111/~militbe2/dodbuzz.com/2015/10/22/defense-hawks-slam-obama-for-vetoing-defense-bill/#IDComment1000799440</link>
<description>McCain/Thornberry:  &amp;ldquo;Never before has an American president used the bill that provides pay and support to our troops and their families as political leverage for his domestic agenda.&amp;rdquo; But this was NOT an appropriations bill, providing pay and support. It was an authorization bill. Authorizing legislation sets policies and funding limits for agencies/programs. Appropriations legislation is what a department or agency needs before it can cut a check or sign a contract.  Presumably the Congress authorized enough funds to pay the troops but also authorized over-budget war funds, so the president has said he would  veto the whole authorization.  The solution is simple -- take out the OCO war funds. We&amp;#039;ve had enough war for awhile.  Americans agree on that, Congressmen. You can whine (Thornberry) and scowl (McCain) all you want , then do your duty. </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2015 14:15:44 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://50.87.248.111/~militbe2/dodbuzz.com/2015/10/22/defense-hawks-slam-obama-for-vetoing-defense-bill/#IDComment1000799440</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Defense Tech : Report: Russian-made Buk Missile Downed MH17</title>
<link>http://50.87.248.111/~militbe2/defensetech.org/2015/10/14/report-buk-missile-downed-mh17-flight/#IDComment999632300</link>
<description>The Dutch Safety Board report concludes that an older model Buk missile apparently shot down Malaysia Airline Flight 17 on July 17, 2014, but doesn&amp;rsquo;t say who possessed the missile and who fired it.  </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2015 02:56:00 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://50.87.248.111/~militbe2/defensetech.org/2015/10/14/report-buk-missile-downed-mh17-flight/#IDComment999632300</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Defense Tech : Report: Russian-made Buk Missile Downed MH17</title>
<link>http://50.87.248.111/~militbe2/defensetech.org/2015/10/14/report-buk-missile-downed-mh17-flight/#IDComment999632284</link>
<description>The Dutch Safety Board report concludes that an older model Buk missile apparently shot down Malaysia Airline Flight 17 on July 17, 2014, but doesn&amp;rsquo;t say who possessed the missile and who fired it.   </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2015 02:55:52 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://50.87.248.111/~militbe2/defensetech.org/2015/10/14/report-buk-missile-downed-mh17-flight/#IDComment999632284</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Defense Tech : Report: Russian-made Buk Missile Downed MH17</title>
<link>http://50.87.248.111/~militbe2/defensetech.org/2015/10/14/report-buk-missile-downed-mh17-flight/#IDComment999631790</link>
<description>No determination has been done on launch site. </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2015 02:51:39 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://50.87.248.111/~militbe2/defensetech.org/2015/10/14/report-buk-missile-downed-mh17-flight/#IDComment999631790</guid>
</item><item>
<title>DoD Buzz : Kendall Touts Acquisition Gains, But Warns of Troubled Programs</title>
<link>http://50.87.248.111/~militbe2/dodbuzz.com/2015/10/06/kendall-touts-acquisition-gains-but-warns-of-troubled-programs/#IDComment999308035</link>
<description>What is the basis for your $10B claim? </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2015 13:27:57 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://50.87.248.111/~militbe2/dodbuzz.com/2015/10/06/kendall-touts-acquisition-gains-but-warns-of-troubled-programs/#IDComment999308035</guid>
</item><item>
<title>DoD Buzz : Kendall Touts Acquisition Gains, But Warns of Troubled Programs</title>
<link>http://50.87.248.111/~militbe2/dodbuzz.com/2015/10/06/kendall-touts-acquisition-gains-but-warns-of-troubled-programs/#IDComment998300037</link>
<description>We can&amp;#039;t actually see Kendall&amp;#039;s  document so we have to rely on &amp;quot;Kendall said&amp;quot; such as &amp;quot;Cost growth on our major programs is generally at or better than historical levels, but outliers remain a problem.&amp;rdquo; --Sure. </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 7 Oct 2015 19:57:03 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://50.87.248.111/~militbe2/dodbuzz.com/2015/10/06/kendall-touts-acquisition-gains-but-warns-of-troubled-programs/#IDComment998300037</guid>
</item><item>
<title>DoD Buzz : Petraeus Suggests U.S. Commandos Operating in Syria</title>
<link>http://50.87.248.111/~militbe2/dodbuzz.com/2015/09/22/petraeus-suggests-u-s-commandos-operating-in-syria/#IDComment996399103</link>
<description>Another thing &amp;quot;special commandos&amp;quot; did was to issue totally corrupt no-bid sole-source non-competitive contracts for $57 million to a six-person freight forwarding firm in Virginia, Purple Shovel LLC, for training and arms, all of which was faulty. Is that what makes &amp;quot;special commandos&amp;quot; special? </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2015 22:11:44 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://50.87.248.111/~militbe2/dodbuzz.com/2015/09/22/petraeus-suggests-u-s-commandos-operating-in-syria/#IDComment996399103</guid>
</item><item>
<title>DoD Buzz : Russia Deploys Fighter Jets to War-Torn Syria</title>
<link>http://50.87.248.111/~militbe2/dodbuzz.com/2015/09/18/russia-deploys-fighter-jets-to-war-torn-syria/#IDComment995727637</link>
<description>&amp;quot;Russia reportedly deployed fighter jets to war-torn Syria to help support the regime of President Bashar al-Assad.&amp;quot; Oh, it&amp;#039;s a &amp;quot;regime&amp;quot; so it shouldn&amp;#039;t be supported? This multi-denominational Syria government ought to be replaced with Islamic radicals who would eliminate all other denominations, including Christians?  The four years of US support of Islamic radicals in Syria (as in other countries) has been a disaster, and Russia&amp;#039;s involvement is welcome to  regain some stability. The fact that Obama says it is a big mistake speaks well for it. </description>
<pubDate>Sat, 19 Sep 2015 02:51:41 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://50.87.248.111/~militbe2/dodbuzz.com/2015/09/18/russia-deploys-fighter-jets-to-war-torn-syria/#IDComment995727637</guid>
</item><item>
<title>DoD Buzz : General Warns Budget Woes May Limit F-35 Purchases in 2016</title>
<link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/15/general-warns-budget-woes-may-limit-f-35-purchases-in-2016/#IDComment995415149</link>
<description>It did not achieve IOC, it was awarded IOC by the Marines as a publicity stunt. The other two services and the chief tester did not agree to it. </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2015 02:50:54 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/15/general-warns-budget-woes-may-limit-f-35-purchases-in-2016/#IDComment995415149</guid>
</item><item>
<title>DoD Buzz : General Warns Budget Woes May Limit F-35 Purchases in 2016</title>
<link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/15/general-warns-budget-woes-may-limit-f-35-purchases-in-2016/#IDComment995414931</link>
<description>These faulty prototypes won&amp;#039;t replace anything, but I don&amp;#039;t think that cancellation is the answer. </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2015 02:48:48 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/15/general-warns-budget-woes-may-limit-f-35-purchases-in-2016/#IDComment995414931</guid>
</item><item>
<title>DoD Buzz : General Warns Budget Woes May Limit F-35 Purchases in 2016</title>
<link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/15/general-warns-budget-woes-may-limit-f-35-purchases-in-2016/#IDComment995379826</link>
<description>**General Warns Budget Woes May Limit F-35 Purchases in 2016** So what -- the F-35 won&amp;#039;t have full operational capability before 2021, according to Welsh.  Aug 24, 2015 GEN. WELSH: The F-35&amp;#039;s mission in the close air support arena will be to do high-threat close air support in a contested environment that the A-10 will not be able to survive in. That will be the role of the F-35, and it will not be able to do that until it&amp;#039;s fully mission capable in our full operational capability at age 2021 and beyond. . .: We have enough airmen identified and in training to make the IOC date. The IOC date has never been a concern for the maintenance side of the House. Its full operational capability that&amp;rsquo;s the problem.  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.defense.gov/News/News-Transcripts/Transcript-View/Article/614654/department-of-defense-press-briefing-by-secretary-james-and-gen-welsh-on-the-state-of-the-air-force&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;www.defense.gov/News/News-Transcripts/Transcript-...&lt;/a&gt;  Perhaps the Air Force could use F-35B, which is combat capable now? --just kidding </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2015 20:24:24 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/15/general-warns-budget-woes-may-limit-f-35-purchases-in-2016/#IDComment995379826</guid>
</item><item>
<title>DoD Buzz : General Warns Budget Woes May Limit F-35 Purchases in 2016</title>
<link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/15/general-warns-budget-woes-may-limit-f-35-purchases-in-2016/#IDComment995266902</link>
<description>&amp;quot;The Pentagon&amp;rsquo;s largest acquisition program is &amp;ldquo;rapidly growing and accelerating&amp;quot;   Oh really? No. Bogdan hasn&amp;#039;t yet issued a principal LRIP-9 (FY2015) contract and the fiscal year is about over. Plus, Bogdan said last October that &amp;quot;&amp;ldquo;By next summer we will put out a request for prop-osal on LRIP 11 jets. That RFP will ask Lockheed to do a block buy for our partners. At least, that is my intention.&amp;rdquo; That didn&amp;#039;t happen.      So what? All they have now is a pre-production prototype design, with development (engineering) testing only about two-thirds done, with unsatisfactory reliability results, and operational (service) testing not scheduled to start until 2018 with development ending in 2019. Any planes they build now would have to be modified up to Milestone C production decision design, April 2019 according to the SAR. </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2015 02:08:55 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/15/general-warns-budget-woes-may-limit-f-35-purchases-in-2016/#IDComment995266902</guid>
</item><item>
<title>DoD Buzz : Air Force Cites &#039;Alice&#039; Software as Top Challenge to F-35A IOC</title>
<link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/14/air-force-cites-alice-software-as-top-challenge-to-f-35a-ioc/#IDComment995103172</link>
<description>There will be a lot of peaches and cream coming out of this &amp;quot;conference&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;sym***ium&amp;quot; because the (primarily Air Force) procurement plan is not conforming to plan. Bogdan planned to receive pro***als on LRIPs 9&amp;amp;10 (FY2015-6) and the beginning of the year, negotiate them together, and issue a primary contract for at least LRIP-9 long before now. Contracts have been issued for long lead time components, but not more,  and the fiscal year is almost over.       Kendall and Bogdan also planned to issue an RFP for a multi-year procurement  this summer, and that didn&amp;#039;t happen either. There are budget problems in the US, and apparently foreign partners aren&amp;#039;t going for the block buy. So my prediction is they will put out some info on minor stuff that they know they can fix, but the larger issues such as the major software delays, the sensor problems,  the mission data load shortcomings and the aborted procurement plans will go uncovered.      The Air Force plans IOC next year with insufficient Block 2 software, which they are calling Block 3i because it is Block 2 running on an updated processor. Who&amp;#039;s fooled by that? The original plan was full combat capability with Block 3, but the MC and AF decided that half a cup is better than none.    NOTE: Apparently the computer screens out pee-oh-ess even inside a word and replaces it with ***. Smart computer! </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2015 23:03:09 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/14/air-force-cites-alice-software-as-top-challenge-to-f-35a-ioc/#IDComment995103172</guid>
</item><item>
<title>DoD Buzz : Air Force Cites &#039;Alice&#039; Software as Top Challenge to F-35A IOC</title>
<link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/14/air-force-cites-alice-software-as-top-challenge-to-f-35a-ioc/#IDComment995087352</link>
<description>Take what these guys say with a grain of salt and wait for the detailed annual unbiased DOT&amp;amp;E test and evaluation report. The service public relations departments rule now, what they call strategic communications -- Strategic communication is  focused United States Government efforts to understand and engage key audiences to create, strengthen, or preserve conditions favorable for the advancement of United States Government interests, policies, and objectives through the use of coordinated programs, plans, themes, messages, and products synchronized with the actions of all instruments of national power. </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:41:57 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/14/air-force-cites-alice-software-as-top-challenge-to-f-35a-ioc/#IDComment995087352</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Defense Tech : Air Force to Respond to Recent Criticism of F-35 and KC-46 Aircraft</title>
<link>http://defensetech.org/2015/09/11/air-force-to-respond-to-recent-criticism-of-f-35-and-kc-35-aircraft/#IDComment994827906</link>
<description>That&amp;#039;s very good, thank you, but...how do you know, how could anybody not in Boeing know, that &amp;quot;Boeing will actually take a loss on KC-46 production.&amp;quot; I have in mind that the Pentagon is quite adept at shoveling money to contractors using various subterfuge contracts, and there is no audit program in the Pentagon. </description>
<pubDate>Sat, 12 Sep 2015 22:23:21 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://defensetech.org/2015/09/11/air-force-to-respond-to-recent-criticism-of-f-35-and-kc-35-aircraft/#IDComment994827906</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Defense Tech : Photos Show RAF Typhoons Intercepting Russian Tu-160 Bombers</title>
<link>http://defensetech.org/2015/09/11/photos-show-raf-typhoons-intercepting-russian-tu-160-bombers/#IDComment994827221</link>
<description>On language --Some news reports call this type of event an &amp;quot;escort&amp;quot; and some call it an &amp;quot;intercept.&amp;quot; It&amp;#039;s really the former, an escort, because there is no forced change in the flight path of the escorted aircraft (in international airspace). --Here, the incident is &amp;quot;the latest example of Russia flexing its military might abroad.&amp;quot; When the US does it, it&amp;#039;s a &amp;quot;surveillance and reconnaissance&amp;quot; flight.   </description>
<pubDate>Sat, 12 Sep 2015 22:14:28 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://defensetech.org/2015/09/11/photos-show-raf-typhoons-intercepting-russian-tu-160-bombers/#IDComment994827221</guid>
</item><item>
<title>DoD Buzz : A-10 Panel Missing from Air Force Show Lineup</title>
<link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/11/a-10-panel-missing-from-air-force-show-lineup/#IDComment994677286</link>
<description>Of course  Richard Aboulafia shares the Air Force&amp;rsquo;s view that the A-10&amp;rsquo;s time has passed -- Lockheed-Martin is a major client of Aboulafia&amp;#039;s Teal Group and so he is bought-and-paid-for like many other journalists and analysts commenting upon the failed F-35 program.   &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.tealgroup.com/index.php/about-teal-group-corporation&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://www.tealgroup.com/index.php/about-teal-gro...&lt;/a&gt;    So thanks for quoting Tony Carr in this piece, Bryant Jordan. It&amp;#039;s a refreshing, more balanced departure from the normal F-35 rah-rah article. </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2015 19:28:23 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/11/a-10-panel-missing-from-air-force-show-lineup/#IDComment994677286</guid>
</item><item>
<title>DoD Buzz : Syrian Rebel Training Program Costs Millions and Counting</title>
<link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/09/syrian-rebel-training-program-costs-millions-and-counting/#IDComment994483096</link>
<description>Of course US efforts overseas are meant to advance US goals and objectives, not local ones. The people the US attempts to train know this, and so they are not motivated to the degree that their opponents are, people who are fighting for local interests not US ones. -- Nothing to do with courage. </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2015 15:00:01 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/09/syrian-rebel-training-program-costs-millions-and-counting/#IDComment994483096</guid>
</item><item>
<title>DoD Buzz : Syrian Rebel Training Program Costs Millions and Counting</title>
<link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/09/syrian-rebel-training-program-costs-millions-and-counting/#IDComment994413156</link>
<description>The Pentagon can&amp;#039;t do counter-insurgency and it can&amp;#039;t do insurgency.  What can it do?   </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2015 04:32:18 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/09/syrian-rebel-training-program-costs-millions-and-counting/#IDComment994413156</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Defense Tech : Video: First F-35 Assembled Overseas Takes Flight</title>
<link>http://defensetech.org/2015/09/08/first-f-35-assembled-overseas-takes-flight/#IDComment994221135</link>
<description>An airplane that flies. </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 8 Sep 2015 23:42:54 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://defensetech.org/2015/09/08/first-f-35-assembled-overseas-takes-flight/#IDComment994221135</guid>
</item>	</channel>
</rss>