[Infowarrior] - more on (2 - comment): Defense Industry Shill: Give Lockheed Credit for Bin Laden Kill

[Richard Forno]

Comments from a reader, prefaced with my reaction and expanded/slightly edited.  -- rick

I agree w/some of your points ... I also think this guy's just trying to develop some marketing fluff for the DIC going into sequestration later this year.

That said, I disagree w/his primary message, implied as it might be.   If Obama (or any POTUS) said to a contractor, "in six months I need X device that will let us do Y, now go build it for me" and the company delivered, that might be grounds for special recognition or public praise.  I am no Obama supporter, but this putz saying that the defense complex deserves recognition for work they do on a regular, planned, basis under QDR/JOPES/DPG/etc with lucrative ongoing terms is not special in my view.    There was nothing singularly unique, dedicated or timely about what Lockheed or the DIC did in regard to the bin Laden raid that deserves extra recognition.

Using the original blog poster's analysis, we should thank Boeing for inventing air-to-air refueling that allows us to bomb targets deeply inland from aircraft carriers, we should thank Northrop for developing superstrong and lightweight ship hulls that can save fuel during periods of increased operational tempos in the fight against piracy or conducting freedom of navigation exercises, thank COMPANY$ whose products allow real-time viewing of Predator-pr0n or CallofDuty-esque ground video from the Situation Room, and thank Fruit of the Loom for making ACUs that are more comfortable for our operators to wear going into battle.  Sorry, it's not the same thing.  All of these are evolutionary and contributatory enablers, not revolutionary just-in-time developments that led directly to mission success.   Now if the SEALS say we need X to do Y, and you come through in a pinch to give me X, and the operation succeeds, then yeah, okay, I'm all about the praise for your efforts in helping acheive the objective.

< -- >


On Jun 26, 2012, at 07:04 , XXXXX wrote:

>  This article is full of looter and moocher drivel!
> 
>  First, the Defense Industrial Complex (DIC) deserves some credit, small tho' it may be.  But that is not the issue here.  
> Man's mind is the issue.
> 
>  Most of the materials today use some kind of plastic, fibre or sheet.  Then they have to be joined, in a certain aspect.  
> This process is similar to welding, but far more exacting.  Then there is the math and analysis behind the software and 
> electronics.  The thanks deserved by the DIC is that they gave someone with a dream time to perfect these devices and methods.  
> Few could have thought of them, and fewer still can carve out the time to develop them.
> 
>  All of these tools enhance the human capabilities, which the SEALs train hard to maximize.  To equate the SEALs with muscle 
> labor is an insult.  Less than one in five sailors who show up for SEAL training complete the course.  Once they pass, their 
> job entails getting shot at.  The edge SEALs receive from Lockhead and Grumman is hardly so mundane as better traction and 
> sweat wicking.  The edge is one that can expand the number of minds applied to the SEALs job, without exposing those extra 
> minds to life threatening situations.  The edge is also expanding human capabilities beyond that of their enemy.
> 
>  The SEALs are the bleeding edge of a team of amazing capability.  Every part of that team is needed to meet tasks that the 
> author is unaware of, and none of us like to speak of at parties.  The miners and welders are part of the DIC that deserves 
> credit, but the contributions of others are so much more.  America decided some time ago, that overwhelming force was 
> necessary.  That is why we have a DIC.
> 
>  It is this overwhelming force that gives the author the freedom to blather his idiocy.  The constitution empowers the 
> federal government to the provide for the defense, and promote the general welfare, not the other way around.  The boondogle is 
> the redistribution of wealth to those who will never contribute to anyone.  The author is engaging in a budget argument, and 
> arguing that entitlements are more important than both DIC spending, and letting the American people keep what they have 
> earned.  The authors argument can only be won with such oblique vectors to confuse the issue.
> 
>  Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.  The vector that allowed the SEALS to perform their 
> task so safely was initiated by the DIC.  We have a picture of the administration watching the event in real time.  That is the 
> credit deserved by the DIC.
> 
>