I haven't done this, ever, on this site. (or elsewhere) Why direct this at me?

* * *

“let's dump billions on completion of the FCS”

Yeah, if you thought Osprey was fit for the ax…I'm more familiar with FCS than you realize, Rudi.

I'm critical of much of FCS — from what I suspect was an original all-wheeled set of vehicles (the manned vehicles now wisely have band tracks instead); going too light weight (even giving up the hope of surviving a direct hit; so much for crew survivability), and going too light (good for deployment and larger numbers of guns on the ground, but what about that crew survivability?) as well as the silly as well as expensive techno-futurism (even Al Gore could not be accused of having conceived this) and expecting to detect the enemy first with our New Lite Nifty Wizard Forces and destroy him at stand-off, _never_ close-in, range with our weapons and hi-tech coordination and communications. It's techno-conceit! Right now the most common buzz term in Iraq and Afghanistan is “up-armoring” and “up-armored” and Mine Resistant, Ambush Protected vehicles are selling in huge numbers. We need tougher, heavier vehicles mainly, not techno-whiz stuff.

http://www.cdi.org/pdfs/FCS.pdf

http://web.mit.edu/ssp/Publications/working_pap…

[strident but good reading nevertheless]

http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/pdf/orielly_preventabl…

[wheels versus tracks, new and expensive versus old and cheap]

http://www.west-point.org/publications/Stryker.pdf

I believe the eventual “FCS” may not even be anything by that name and will give us a common set of lighter-weight vehicles (and other tools) where they are shown to make sense. Already some smart things are being done such as not going to all wheels but using band tracks on the ground vehicles. [whew] The MCS is going to use an improved version of the 120 mm gun on the Abrams but it will double the moving engagement range and include beyond-line-of-sight targeting out another 50% beyond that newer, longer range. That's probably something the Army would eventually like even though there's no way on earth I consider it the replacement of the Abrams.

And, of course, FCS is ripe for more cuts or termination by the next President or his Sec Def.

I'm a track guy, not a wheel guy, and I doubt the light weight vehicles (which already are heavier than what was originally desired, under 20 tons) will ever give the crews the confidence that those in the Abrams and Bradley have. Some smaller vehicles are a good idea, but not complete conversion to these, and the high-tech sustitution for survivability and being able to slug it out at diistances where we _normally_ and _typically_ encounter the enemy is just, well, conceit.

At least they're still not wheeled ground vehicles, intended for UN-style peacekeeping primarily if not exclusively. [rolling eyes]

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/…

Chief of Staff of the Army (CSA) General Eric Shinseki introduced the FCS program in October 1999. The program originally entailed the transformation of the Army’s Legacy Forces that is comprised of divisions into a lighter, modular organization called the Objective Force. Initial plans were to field the first of such modular-equipped forces in 2011 and complete the entire Objective Force by 2032. In order to bridge the gap between the Legacy Force and the Objective Force, and fill near-term warfighting requirements, the program called for an Interim Force consisting of active Army and Army National Guard units. These brigade-sized units are known as Interim Brigade Combat Teams (IBCTs) or Stryker Brigade Combat Teams (SBCTs). The first of such units have seen combat in Iraq. The last IBCT is scheduled for fielding in 2010.

It's no longer criticism when it's a factually false statement. It's a smear.
Veering off into 'Clinton did it too' land is not a valid rebuttal to what is ahppening NOW. That's an effort to alibi the unacceptable.
=================

'Osama bin Laden' usage is ugly and politics at its worst. There should be some hoops no one would jump through for political advatnage, not if they want to lay claim to any principles whatsoever.
Besides, what does it say about a candidate if he has to rely on this level of muck to win?
——————————

SIl-
Friendly tip: give it a rest. You've worn out your mantra to where it's no more than the annoying buzzing of a fly.
Try googling 'hoaxes'.

“The” [main] point is what I wrote: he had the guts to fly on the Osprey. While no doubt it isn't as bad as the hypesters say it is, it has been a problem-ridden aircraft and program (was selected for termination in the past), with a notorious record of crashes. (These were other points that may have cluttered what I was saying in your view.) I say he had guts to ride in it (even if he may kill it someday!).

If you know something we don't, pray tell us.

Yes, with the Obama campaign — when something is criticized, it “was a mistake.”

As to this thread's issue, it isn't commonly in the news and this is the first time I heard of it, and even though the media are active Obama campaigners, I doubt they would suppress it (because it could be used to make McCain look bad, as postings already made on this thread imply).

The one trivia item I was aware of about Obama in the Middle East was that he had the guts to fly on the Osprey (the program Cheney tried to kill years ago, for the tilt-rotor aircraft that has experienced several crashes, and the commercial version of which has yet to be offered and probably never will).

http://www.defensetech.org/archives/004308.html…

http://www.defensetech.org/archives/004309.html…

Make no mistake. And so is McCain's “flimsy” campaign right now.

I'm telling you that democrats are walking directly into a trap set by the GOP. And that trap is the charismatic, stubborn, non-unifying and patently unelectable Barack Obama.

Larry Sinclair. Google it.

How do you defeat your enemy? Get them to send the weaker of two candidates to do hand to hand combat with you just after the gate closes behind their back.

It's all about the Denver Convention. When that event is over, look for the McCain campaign to suddenly get new and very sharp teeth.

The Obama Trap. It is my suggestion that people begin to take a very close look at it as a possibility..