Comments on: Get BRAC

By: anonymous troll

anonymous troll — Fri, 15 Jul 2005 14:23:50 +0000

> Doesn’t consolodation (from a tatical pov) help
> suicide bombers and the like?
I think you miss the typical terrorist point.
Attacks on pre-hardened (read conslidated) targets, goes against the grain of asymetrical warefare.
That said, there are a class of attacks (Langley gate shootings, chow hall bombings and going after proped up, carpet-bagging “Iraqis”… hey, don’t get pissed at me; I’m just thinking like an insurgent) that are aimed directly at the “infrastructure”.

By: Max

Max — Thu, 14 Jul 2005 22:33:43 +0000

I am not that up on the BRAC, but the terrorism angle does remind me that I have seen numerous articles (for example: yesterdays WSJ re: secure quasi gov office parks custered in Fort Mead, etc.) in which we seem to be moving in the direction of consolidation as opposed to dispertion of assets. Doesn’t consolodation (from a tatical pov) help suicide bombers and the like?

By: Marshall Astor

Marshall Astor — Thu, 14 Jul 2005 16:53:45 +0000

Politicians imagining that air defense will protect you from or allow you to react to terrorism on U.S. soil shows just how totally out of the loop on the type of conflicts our military needs to be prepared for at this time.

By: anonymous troll

anonymous troll — Thu, 14 Jul 2005 16:33:44 +0000

BRAC is, first and foremost, a political tool. The DoD openly states that every last penny “saved” through BRAC will be turned around and used to open new bases and enhance existing bases.
It is the Commander in Chief’s way of using the military to redistrict funds. Nothing less; Nothing more.

By: Larry

Larry — Thu, 14 Jul 2005 16:09:45 +0000

You got the “Brain Drain” arguement backwards.
Closing Base X (Ft. Monmouth) would sap the Army of some of its best and brightest. Those civilian scientists and engineers with their Ph.Ds, security clearances and expertise, aren’t leaving NJ.