What's new

Pete Hegseth

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 365
  • Start date Start date
Would you say Hegseth's military background gives him what it takes, or are there specific things you'd want to see from him in that role?
What I want from Hegseth is the ability to adapt quickly and weed out those who cannot adapt quickly. The battlefield in Ukraine looks nothing like the wars of Iraq or Afghanistan. The command structure in place before Hegseth got there demonstrated a lack of adaptability. The posterchild for their backwards looking fixation is the M10 Booker.


This is what I want to see changed. The M10 Booker is far from the only example. The program that is now called the XM30 was started in 2003 as the FCS (Future Combat System). It was renamed to the GCV in 2009 (Ground Combat Vehicle) in 2009. In 2017 it became the NGCV (Next Generation Combat Vehicle) and in 2020 became the XM30 MICV. It is delay after delay after delay.


If there are no more delays, which is a ridiculous assumption given the past 20 years, they'll have a vehicle ready to go by 2029. That is four years from now. As stated earlier, the battlefield of today is radically different from the battlefield of four years ago. With the pace that war is evolving, we cannot have 20-30 year development cycles. Our weapons makers have to innovate faster and our procurement has to move faster. We are capable of it. In WWII we had aircraft mostly inferior to everyone, and four years later we had jets. It is not a coincidence that rate of evolution happened alongside the US Military purging a significant portion of its leadership.


What I want is for the American military to not get left behind. I want those who have pushed forward the M10 Booker and delayed, delayed, delayed the XM30 to be replaced by go-getters who can move faster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PJF
Back
Top