My Personal Take

So after watching all 2hrs and 45min. of the Senate Armed Services Committee Q&A with Secretary of Defense Gates I come away knowing that every single one of them was thrilled with President Obama's decision to keep him on and they're all extremely excited that one of his main focuses will be on getting involved in and fixing the procurement side of the military. I was impressed to see that almost all of them were there to actually get facts not just worry about their own district or to just reconfirm talking points.
The only two that stood out to me as focusing on their district more than the big picture were Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri) and Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colorado). Now Sen. McCaskill who did then go on to ask about substance abuse –well actually substance abuse came up because of the local base in her district to be fair- that has become an increasing problem for the military and offering her full support in his fight to fix procurement issues, at one point saying (paraphrasing here) "that'll be a tough knife fight but I'd like to join you in that alley with my own knife". Sen. Mark Udall offered to also join him "in the knife fight" but essentially asked three questions about the local base in his district.
The one that grated me the most was Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina). He was there for yes or no answers to his talking points. I don't know that I've ever heard Sen. Graham talk without using a TP. He is the epitome of a walking talking point. All I can see when I look at him the past few months is bullets as in the kind you have when making an outline in Microsoft Word or to show key points in a Power Point presentation.
Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-Georgia) was comical. Sec. Gates was asked by Sen. Levin (D-Michigan) right off the bat if there was anything that could be added into the new stimulus bill in order to help the military. Sec. Gates said that he had already been asked by President Obama and had already submitted everything the military felt was needed and doable based on the criteria he was given and that he didn't feel anything had been left off that he thought shouldn't have been. So what does Sen. Chambliss do? He wastes three to four questions on wanting to get more stimulus money for the military and is he sure there aren't more projects they could add because there is no better way to stimulate the economy then military spending. Now, for one, with our manufacturing capacity about half of what it was since the last three major wars (WW I, WW II, Vietnam) and the fact that the economy may have been moving during those times while our national debt went further and further down the toilet but more to the point, Gates already said President Obama had promised the money for everything Sec. Gates had asked for. Why waste the time?
Now for the content of what Sec. Gates had to say…
I find it ironic that as Republican's grand stand over oil drilling, our military is going straight to getting off oil (as much as they can) on their own with the US Air Force having a bold goal of 2011 and 2016 respectively, to be on synthetic and alternative blend fuel. While Republican's scream it's the Kremlin all over again and Russia is back to being a big bully, Gates doesn't even blink or care. He was cracking jokes consistently when talking about Russia and made it quite clear we shouldn't be worried about them in any fashion. I wasn't aware our Navy felt so small and that we wanted nuclear capable air craft carriers -had heard of nuclear submarines forever though. I had heard about us building a second nuclear naval base, this time in Florida, so that we can have two on the east coast -Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Florida) made sure to thank Mr.Gates for it and did want a nuclear air craft carrier in Florida disagreeing with Sen. Jim Webb's (D-Virginia) contention that we don't need it and haven't had one, specifcally off of Florida, since 1961.
It isn't surprising that Sec. Gates is still having to push back and fight for institutionalizing counter terrorism as so many Generals refuse to admit and give in to the fact a big massive invasion of one country verse another just isn't the only thing our military needs to train for. His way of winning this of course has been to move all of the top Generals who had been on the ground in Iraq (the ones who had a clue and did a good job, Gen. Petraeus for example) and got them into the top positions so that it couldn't be ignored. I was very happy to hear that despite Sen. McCain's objections to the Veteran's (GI) bill pushed by Sen. Webb (D-Virginia), the military loves it. The National Solidarity Program is a fantastic program and I do hope everyone looks into it.
Not surprising that Mr. Gates roasted former Sec. of Def. Rumsfeld for the handling of private contractors (not that he mentioned Mr. Rumsfeld by name of course). Sec. of Def. Rumsfeld was so incompetent one hardly knew whether to cry or laugh. Mr. Gates doesn't seemed worried in the least by President Obama and how he is going about figuring out the best way to draw down troops in Iraq which tells me that, as expected, President Obama is listening to the commanders on the ground just like he said he would. That and he long ago gave up his call for 100% of US Troops to be out of Iraq within 16-months, even if 90% of the media still reports his plan as if it's still that way.
So those obsessed with wanting more troops in Afghanistan, know there is a limit to just how many more would be productive and useful. In Iraq we forced a new government and are re-building a nation. In Afghanistan we have to build a nation from scratch as it has never had a functioning infrastructure, energy/energy grid, education, etc. So NOW we get to the point where we're forcing an Afghanistan face on this war? Mr. Gates answers amazed me in just how badly we ignored Afghanistan. Well all knew that former President Bush and Sec. of Def. Rumsfeld hadn't focused on Afghanistan, comparative to Iraq, in any fashion but the kind of things we're behind in and playing catch up on…it's as if we've just been sitting over there going from fire fight to fire fight. I don't mean to diminish what our troops have done but rather what the leadership has failed to achieve in seven years. I for one hope Sec. Gates will be able to be kept on for at least the next four years. If NATO and the UN all agree Afghanistan is important and necessary, why in the world hold a big enough grudge against President Bush by holding back new capabilities and/or more troops just to wait and give them to our new president? How childish. So we need a civil military ready as of years ago. We need an Afghan face to hide us. We need more help with everything but combat troops –more so than combat troops.